Blanche, Thurmon, "Curiouser and curiouser!" cried Alice. ..... It looks to me that we have THREE versions of Capt Richard's will. Weygant says (p59) that the will was recorded both at Albany and New York City which might account for TWO versions. But THREE!!? Thurmon, I don't think you said where your version came from. This might help. On the face of it, it would appear that Weygant's version would be the later version as it contains additional wording. As far as I can see your version and Weygant's are the same with the exception of Weygant's containing the additional words "... my house, homestead, orchards and meadows and all my books. I leave to my son Josiah Crego, and to the heirs of my daughter Mary Dean deceased, ..." between the words "I leave to my son John after my wife's decease ..." and "... and to my daughter Catherine ...". There are two additional bits of wording in Thurmon's version. In line 3 the wording is "the use of my home lot" - Weygant's version does not have the word "home". Thurmon's version also names the witnesses which, interestingly, include none other than Richard's old friend Josiah Crego. The version quoted by Roy Crego has further variations. His version has "..the use and improvement of my homelot..." - the other versions do not mention "and improvement". His version also has slipped into it the word "wellbeloved" to describe his son Josias Crego. Roy Crego has Josias; Weygant has Josiah. These differences are probably not significant. Roy Crego also names the witnesses, - as in Thurmon's version except that Henry omse appears as Henry Nase. Thurmon's version is described as an abstract of the will, meaning, I assume, that it is not to be taken as a literal copy but rather as a summary of the wording. Crego's version is obviously a summary apart from a couple of short quoted extracts. Weygant's version states "It reads as follows:" which I would take to mean it was a literal copy. It seems to me there were either two versions of the will or there has been an error in transcription. If there were two wills then Thurmon has the earlier one, the additional bequests to son Josiah Crego and to the heirs of deceased daughter Mary Dean being added as an afterthought. If there was only one will then the error appears to be in Thurmon's version in that a whole line might have been left out in the transcription. The possibility of the will being altered at the last minute is explainable. It would not be unusual for a testator to forget the heirs of a deceased daughter until maybe being reminded by another family member. It would also be perfectly understandable if Richard had left Josiah Crego out of the first version of his will if Josiah Crego were in fact only a stepson and not his natural son. Thurmon, I'm afraid you are well and truly side tracked now! Over to you. Where did your other version come from? Best.. Chris