Curious.... [24 February 2014]
If killed on 20th in Sudbury, why would an Indian attack on the 21st come as a surprise? I considered that one of the two things in the Marlboro record must be incorrect - either he was not killed at Sudbury, or Marlboro's record got the date wrong. Of the two - a date - written by a terrified public servant - seems the more probable error. But draw any conclusion you wish. --jrm03063 22:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- If I lived then I could probably tell you what happened, but all we know is what the evidence says, and without actual evidence to the contrary, such as a document saying they marched to Sudbury in response to the attack, which would place their death after the attack on 21 Apr, as opposed to other possibilities, you are speculating and by making the change with no explanation, wrongly representing it as fact. At a minimum, it should be explained that this was your assumption, though I can think of many reasons why it might not be valid. Possibly because it was Lancaster men killed, nobody in Sudbury was aware of what had happened, and the attack was still a surprise the next day. Perhaps they were killed on the road to Sudbury, not in Sudbury, having surprised the Indians. --Jrich 22:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- As an additional note: the History of Middlesex County says the Indians attacked Marlborough Tuesday (18th) and Wednesday (19th), Sudbury Thursday night (20th) or early Friday (21st). So how much of a surprise this attack was seems in question. Perhaps the news was a surprise far away in Boston, but one would think by the 21st, the local inhabitants would not have been surprised. --Jrich 22:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
|
