Reasoning behind Item #1
A. John & Zilpha's first boy was Blakely (b. about 1780). He is the first documentable example in our line to bear it as a first or middle name. (Also in DB's descendants) There are lots of Blakelys after him, but he's the first. So there were no Uncle or Auntie Blakelys running around previously, suggesting that the introduction of "Blakely" as a Eddins name started in his generation.
It was common practice to name the first child or two after a parent. It would not be surprising for the first boy to be named after the wife's father or using his surname. For example, Nancy Hendrix, wife of James A. Eddins, named her first boy after her father (Peter Hendrix > Peter Eddins). John & Zilpha had business dealings with Dionysius Blakely (Lexington plats); they were neighbors (1790, 1800, 1810 Censii); and DB & JE served together in SC's Third Regiment (1780 garrison report)
It was common practice to name the first child or two after a parent. It would not be surprising for the first boy to be named after the wife's father or using his surname. For example, Nancy Hendrix, wife of James A. Eddins, named her first boy after her father (Peter Hendrix > Peter Eddins). John & Zilpha had business dealings with Dionysius Blakely (Lexington plats); they were neighbors (1790, 1800, 1810 Censii); and DB & JE served together in SC's Third Regiment (1780 garrison report)
Reasoning behind Item #2:
A. As mentioned, the name "Blakely" runs like a river though our family. As it happens, it also runs like a river through other families who are descended from Dionysius Blakely.
DB had at least one son and at least four daughters: John, Mary Polly (m. John Hidle), Elizabeth/Leodicia/Dicey (m. James Eidson), Nancy (m. William Perry), and Sarah. Plus probably an unnamed daughter who married Hardy Harris. Many of the Hidle children and grandchildren had "Blakely" as their first or middle names.
B. In earlier posts I proved that Dionysius and Zilpha were contemporaries, and so not parent/child. They were also neighbors. They could have been cousins, but my hunch is that they were brother and sister.
B. In earlier posts I proved that Dionysius and Zilpha were contemporaries, and so not parent/child. They were also neighbors. They could have been cousins, but my hunch is that they were brother and sister.
C. This postulation needs more exploration.
Reasoning behind Item #3
A. DNA kits from the James A. Eddins line (my line) match kits from the John S. ad Anna Obedience Eddins (Edom Moon) lines and the Elizabeth Eddins (Benjamin Wingard) line. So one parent contributed DNA to both the oldest child (Elizabeth), two middle children (John S. and Anna Obedience), and the youngest child (James A.). That parent was either John or Zilpha, probably Zilpha.
B. In the February 1816 deed in which land is given to James A. Eddins and William D. Eddins, Zilpha says:
"...and in order to make their lot, as nearly as possible, equal to the part which my elder children have had...
https://books.google.com/books?id=aqsKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=zilpha+eddins+1831&source=bl&ots=yFcQ69utag&sig=X3KZkIMGGTftVRM60gI_wfuJPDo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGk8q49LvUAhVB4D4KHYPEDnUQ6AEIMjAC#v=onepage&q=zilpha%20eddins%201831&f=false
She doesn't call the other children "...his elder children...." She says, "...my elder children...."
While researching Irena Green Bibb Garrett last month in AL, I found the will of Edward Garrett, her second husband. Irena and Edward both had children from previous marriages. Though they were married thirty or so years, his will left her some things but clearly mentioned "his" children. Not "our" children, but "my children." The language was very specific, just as Zilpha's was.
Assuming that's true: therefore, if Zilpha was the mother of the youngest child (JA), she was the mother of the oldest child (Elizabeth), and thus the only wife with whom John Eddins had children.
As more people get DNA tested, we may be able to finally prove or disprove this theory. Hang on!
Reasoning behind Item #3
A. DNA kits from the James A. Eddins line (my line) match kits from the John S. ad Anna Obedience Eddins (Edom Moon) lines and the Elizabeth Eddins (Benjamin Wingard) line. So one parent contributed DNA to both the oldest child (Elizabeth), two middle children (John S. and Anna Obedience), and the youngest child (James A.). That parent was either John or Zilpha, probably Zilpha.
B. In the February 1816 deed in which land is given to James A. Eddins and William D. Eddins, Zilpha says:
"...and in order to make their lot, as nearly as possible, equal to the part which my elder children have had...
https://books.google.com/books?id=aqsKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=zilpha+eddins+1831&source=bl&ots=yFcQ69utag&sig=X3KZkIMGGTftVRM60gI_wfuJPDo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGk8q49LvUAhVB4D4KHYPEDnUQ6AEIMjAC#v=onepage&q=zilpha%20eddins%201831&f=false
She doesn't call the other children "...his elder children...." She says, "...my elder children...."
While researching Irena Green Bibb Garrett last month in AL, I found the will of Edward Garrett, her second husband. Irena and Edward both had children from previous marriages. Though they were married thirty or so years, his will left her some things but clearly mentioned "his" children. Not "our" children, but "my children." The language was very specific, just as Zilpha's was.
Assuming that's true: therefore, if Zilpha was the mother of the youngest child (JA), she was the mother of the oldest child (Elizabeth), and thus the only wife with whom John Eddins had children.
As more people get DNA tested, we may be able to finally prove or disprove this theory. Hang on!
