This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: MichaelWright12 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/surnames.wright/6959.2703.2.1.2.2.2.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: No, Charlie. Wade in anytime you want. It was perhaps I who threw out a red herring. You do your work carefully so your contributions are always worthwhile to consider. All I'm saying is that, I personally, intend to continue to take note of the contradiction. Who knows, maybe something solid will come up in the future and nail it down for us. I just haven't seen it, IMO. In the end, this may be an issue that doesn't warrant too much debate, anyway. After all, by the end of September 1675 we all agree Sgt. Samuel Wright was departed for sure and we just argue whether it was the 2nd or 18th, Northfield or Bloody Brook! These were terrible times for the settlers and both engagements were just part of an ongoing campaign of ambush and pillaging designed to drive the settlers out. He gave his life to preserve our heritage in this land. Of course you are correct that "Lt." Wright was put in charge of the small garrison at Northfield just days before the 2 Sept raid and so it is reasonable to assume he was there on the 2nd leading a defense, such as it could be mounted. One might say that the preponderance of the circumstantial evidence, albeit, being all second hand hearsay, would convince a reasonable man that the reports of his death at Northfield are true. That would mean that 59 years later his descendants, who were testators in the custody and probate records of Samuel Wright (III) were confused or deliberately substituted one battle for the other, hoping to impress, since the Battle of Bloody Brook was so much more devastating to the settlers than that at Northfield, notwithstanding the loss of the additional men in Beers rescue company on the 4th. It could happen, and it wouldn't be the only instance of that sort of thing. I have in my notes that the birth date notation for Benoni was also based on just the assumption that Samuel died on the 2nd and not on any contemporaneous records. It seems that Mother would have been very clear on this, but we have nothing from her in testimony. I hold it open in my database, just to serve notice that there is a contradiction in the records I can't convince myself I should ignore one in favor of the other. Well, in any case, it has been fun and we now know were each of us stands on the issue. That is always good to know. Best Regards, 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.