I guess, my long post just now did not pop-up all that well off internet "ether"...several split-off sentences, etc. (but readable,...now you all know why I sometimes cannot STAND these 'dumb' machines!! Will they ever just do what we want them to??). This posting to DISBROW-L did NOT correctly produce reference website for Whitfield House, Guilford, CT, where Samuel Disbrowe was married to Dorothy Whitfield, 1646 (BTW, Samuel, as first Magistrate of Guilford, is ALSO credited in local histories as PERFORMING the very first marriage ever in Guilford, CT,... conducted at this very same stone house which is now a CT state museum: http://www.hbgraphics.com/whitfieldmuseum/ ). FURTHER, I made a mistake in this last posting by signing the 1664 "Thomas Desborow" letter with his FULL first-name. Instead, he had simply fashioned a very elaborate "Tho:" in signifying the "Thomas" for his letter's signature. There can, however, be absolutely NO mistake that such does mean "THOMAS"...OK!! So now then, please make NO mistake about this, just as the British Library has made no mistake in listing him as THOMAS too, OK (listed on their web catalogue as "Thomas Desborow," for any enterprising enough to wish to find this there). I must take this opportunity to say also that the red wax seal-symbol on Desborow's letter, which I so carefully described, may indeed actually indicate ship MASTS, now that I get used to the idea (has to indicate something comprehensible, heh??!), and this also since 3 so-called "trees" obviously show only the middle one as very appropriately taller than the other two, despite being enclosed in a circular "cartouche" border line (therefore, this is exactly ALSO like the actual masts of a "full-rigged" ship!)...Oddly enuf, the ship model I bought at Windsor in England late last December truly did remind me of Mike's own reference to that "Thomas Desborough, Master of NY" captured in the "Mary" by a French privateer, 1746. MY very speculative history (now) about our earlier several "Thomas Disbrows" of our own line (as perhaps having at least something to do with the SEA), is certainly PARTICULARLY provocative for me. This is because such may be especially important to! my own slightly later family history in the CT/NY area. This is because my own grt-grt. grandfather, Captain David Disbrow (of Thomas' line not so very long afterward!) was himself a sea-going captain of coasting schooners (who died in a storm almost exactly 100 years after the 1746 date above). Further, my own David Disbrow was himself a "Desborough, Master of NY" (my Captain lived in New York City at the time of sea-going death, at the heyday of seafaring there!). He too could have commanded full-rigged ships out of NY Harbor....So, now, at least you, can see my important stake in the very curious line of 'wild' speculation about the 1664 letter. Don't worry, you sceptics out there, it's just as likely that the "Thomas Desborow" of my speculation has nothing whatever to do with our family line,...But then who is HE....No doubt, we'll SEE afterall! At least wish me luck! STSquires