Analysis. Relationship between John Keys and Roger Keys

Contents 1 Related 2 Analysis 3 Footnotes	Return to Old Augusta County!	Keys Tapestry Register Data Notebooks Analysis Bibliography Graphics YDNA Keys Links Index
	……………………..The Tapestry Families Old Chester OldAugusta Germanna New River SWVP Cumberland Carolina Cradle The Smokies Old Kentucky

Related

Person:John Keys (18)

Person:Roger Keys (1)

Analysis

There is considerable speculation regarding the relationship of John Keys (18), and Roger Keys (1) of Augusta County. Some researchers have claimed that John was a son of Roger. While possible there are a number of issues associated with this view.

First, John was considerably older than Rogers other children. John Keys was clearly born before 1733 ^[1], and Roger's other children were born approximately in the 1750's, this would create a 15-17 year gap between children, which is problematic at best.

Second, this would also require that Roger Keys' wife Sarah Adair would also have to have to have been born many years before her sister, Anne Adair, the second wife of John Wilson. ^[2]

Third, a 1789 land record in Rockbridge County^[3] refers to the land "formerly the property of Roger Keis and at his death descended to the said John Keis and his heir at law", which John Keys sold to Roger's [likely eldest] son Samuel Keys. ^[4] Clearly from the last item, John and Roger were closely related; otherwise its unlikely that property would "have descended" to John by inheritance. Moreover, this last point may contain the definitive evidence that John is not the son of Roger. The quote refers to the property descending to "John Keis and his heir at law". This is slightly ambiguous: is John Keys the heir at law, or does it refer to John Keys and another person, that person being heir at law? It seems most likely that the latter interpretation is correct, and that this other person "Roger's son Samuel". The term "heir at law" is commonly used when the deceased died intestate, and when there is only a single male heir. If that male heir were also underage, he himself could not receive ownership of the property. Rather, the property had to be transferred to someone else, who would formally owned the land until the heir-at-law came of age. That seems to be what happened in this instance, and is strong evidence that John is not the son of Roger, but an older relative, probably his brother.

Footnotes

1. ↑ He was old enough to witness the will of Benjamin Borden written in 1753, implying a DOB of no later than about 1733
2. ↑ Need dates and supporting evidence. The argument given here is incomplete.
3. ↑ See: Notebook. Miscellaneous Data for John Keys of Old Augusta
4. ↑ Is "likely eldest" in the original? If not this should be enclosed in square brackets; better would be to explain this outside of the quote than to include it as part of the quote.