Reginald Foster born in England in 1636, the son of Reginald and Judith Foster who emigrated to Ipswich, Massachusetts circa 1683.
He married Elizabeth Dane, daughter of John Jr. and neice of Rev. Francis. He lived in Chebacco, Massachusetts. He died Dec. 28, 1707. Children:
Elizabeth, b. 1653, who married Simon Wood 8 August, 1684
Judith, b. 20 Jan 1659
Isaac, b. 1656, styled Corporal, his wife is not known, he had 6 children
Sarah, b. ?, not mentioned in father's will in 1707
Mary, b 18 Jun 1662; not mentioned in father's will in 1707
John; b. 15 Jul 1664, married Mary ?, was styled Sergeant, and had 6 children
Rebecca, b. 26 Feb 1667, died 1 Jul 1684
Naomi, b 6 May, 1669; not mentioned in father's will in 1707
Ruth, b. 17 Dec, 1671; died January 1, 1677
Eleanor, b. 14 Jun 1673; mentioned in father's will
Hannah, b. 5 Oct, 1675, not mentioned in father's will in 1707
Nathaniel, b. 19 Sept, 1678, married Joanna Marshall
↑Foster Genealogy; Frederick Clifton Pierce; Press of W. B. Conkey; 1899; page 124-127; Digital Image, The Internet Archive
↑The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, Volume 30 Vols. 37-52 (1883-98); see page 83; Genealogy of the Fo(r)ster Family; Descendants of Reginald Fo(r)ster of Ipswich, Mass by Edward Jacob Forster, MD; Reginald Jr is person #5, found on page 84 with his parents, and on page 86 and 87 with his wife and children
I concur with Kyle. Nathaniel is the key. They both have the same son, hence the same Renold/Reginald must be the same person. The fact that Foster-5466 has no other information other than his name and fact that he is Nathaniel's father would make me believe it is the same person. Why is Nathaniel listed in the "Children's list" in the Biography, though, and not in the Profile data on Foster-5384? oversight?
Foster-5466 and Foster-5384 appear to represent the same person because: See Foster Genealogy to indicate that the relationships here all relate to the same person. I think in those days "Renold" must have been a sound-alike for "Reginald"