This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: MichaelCharlesWight Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.wright/6416.1.1.1.1.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Melanie, What a fun question to ask! The short answer is I don't think so, but I really don't know! What I believe is that the Zachary Taylor Wright in the Footprints database was born in Indiana 27 Nov. 1848 according to a family Bible entry. But that is only the tip of the iceberg, and here is a chance to expound on the power of DNA testing to sort out long-standing controversy, which I can't resist. I told you there were some mistakes in the Footprints database I referred you to. The Zachary Taylor Wright part of this database is a great case in point. This entry in the Footprints database probably shouldn't even be there. I base that statement on the, now proven, fact that the entire section of lineage under Richard Wright (1730 - 1784)should be removed from the Footprints lineage chart. According to the DNA evidence that has recently been developed from descendants of Richard's sons, William R. Wright (Zachary's great grandfather), and Philburd Wright (Zachary's great granduncle) this line of Wrights is completely separate from the New England Wrights of Samuel and Thomas. When you compare the descendant DNA profiles for Richard Wright (1784/85) to those of Deacon Samuel Wright descendants, you can clearly see there is not even a remote resemblence. This confirms that Richard Wright of Rowan Co, NC came from a completely different place and Wright stock in England than Samuel and Thomas. Herb Arkin has Richard's (therefore Zachary's) ancestry as being Welch whereas Samuel and Thomas were of East Anglican stock from Co, Essex, England. If you care to investigate this Zachary Taylor Wright further, I would refer you to Herb Arkin, who manages the Richard Wright, Sr database and posted a response to you on this forum a few days ago. He has a completely different take on the lineage of Zachary Taylor Wright than what you see in the Footprints database and the birth date and place I cited above are from his records. (see http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~herbarkin/Wright html/d0073/g0000050.html) Just to recap the controversy, which you may already be aware of... The lineage according to Footprints is: Immigrant father Thomas Wright, Wethersfield, CT (1610 - 1670), James, Daniel, Richard (1730 - 1784), William, Samuel, Morgan, Zachary 12 siblings. The lineage according to the Richard Wright, Sr. database is: Welsh immigrant father Richard Wright, Sr, of Rowan Co. NC (1730-1784), William R., Samuel?, Morgan, Zachary 14 siblings different from those on Footprints. As you can see, the Footprints database attempted to incorporate the backbone of the Richard Wright Sr. lineage into its Thomas Wright descendancy chart. This has been on the Web like this since at least 1998. There was never any solid documentation to support that connection, but it was a putative hypothesis a lot of people have mistaken for fact in recent years. Now, since neither of the parentage claims in the Footprints or Richard Wright databases match the parentage you have cited for your Zachary Taylor Wright, maybe you make a third claim on the same man or we are talking about a completely different man. I don't know. All of these Zachary Taylor Wrights may be one and the same man,....or not. Again, I don't know and Herb Arkin is better equipped with facts and documents on his Zachary Taylor Wright, and NC Wrights in general, than I could ever produce for you. I would talk to him about it, if you haven't already. What is certain in my mind is that the Richard Wright Sr. lineage claimed in the Footprints database to be part of the Thomas Wright lineage from Wehtersfield, CT is dead wrong. That doesn't mean that everything else there under Richard Wright is probably wrong as well, just that the whole lineage under him is not in the right place and that includes the Zachary Taylor Wright to whom you have referred in your e-mail. The only other observation I have is that there were a whole bunch of kids born in the mid-1800s with the given names Zachary Taylor (your surname of choice). They were named after General and President (1849-1850) Zachary Taylor, who was for many frontiersmen and laboring folks the new Andrew Jackson type hero; bold and victorious in battle, hard working, honest and given to honoring the common man. He appealed to both Northerns and Southerners because he was both a staunch Unionist who opposed expansion of slave statehoods while at the same time being a slave holder on his plantations in Louisiana and Mississippi. In his day, many folks thought he was something very special and named their kids after him. That, to me, suggests there could be more than one Zachary Taylor Wright running around in the 1850 timeframe and that we should be a little careful about how we mush them together hooking them up with parents, spouses and children. Hope that helps, and I know I am preaching to the choir about the DNA stuff. I just thought it was a neat example of the power of DNA testing in genealogical research and the fact that you have a Zachary Taylor Wright in your sights means that the other DNA profile you should compare your Uncle's to is that of Richard Wright, which is Group 4 under the monster Wright-DNA results section for the R1b1 haploid group. This haploid group of results dwarfs all the others and might prove very interesting if your Uncle is a member of the group. It will be neat to see which group you do belong to and I sure hope the outcome is a narrowing of your focus in your paper research. Have a great day. Mike Wright Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.