Nel Hatcher asked:

> I have the following record:
>
> Charles City Co. record of 13 April 1693 with the text "John Hardaway, Jr.
> being aged 15 years, chose as his guardian his brother-in-law Henry
> Hatcher
> of Henrico."
>
> Noting the date of this record, what would be the definition of the
> relationship between John Hardaway and Henry Hatcher?
>
> And would anyone consider them to be step-brothers?

Yes. That would be the first interpretation in 1693. "In-law" in English
records almost always meant "step" before roughly 1720. Even after that
you will find step-relations called in-laws, but "step" came into use in
the modern sense along with the earlier one. By 1800 or so it had almost
completely replaced the earlier meaning.

The people related by marriage whom we now call in-laws (mother-in-law,
sister-in-law, etc.) were just called by the usual kinship terms (mother,
sister) in early days. So If John's sister had married Henry Hatcher,
Henry would most probably be designated "his brother" or possibly "his
kinsman". If the writer wanted to be precise, he might say "husband of his
sister [name]", but that is uncommon.

Go with step-brother until proven otherwise.

Kathleen Much

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html