>>For now take the Jr. off, but the John in New Kent >>definitely had sons William and Joseph, and a wife Susan.
I agree ONLY that there was a John ROPER Jr. in New Kent that had a wife named Susannah in 1686.
As noted in my prior post, there is NO EVIDENCE that the Susannah ROPER named as an co-executrix of the Estate of John ROPER was his wife.There is also NO EVIDENCE that the William and Joseph ROPER named as co-executors of the Estate of John ROPER were his SONS.You have simply ASSUMED THIS and you then base other speculative ascriptions based upon this ASSUMPTION which we are asked to take as true.
Due to the thirteen year lapse between the child Mary and the daughter of John ROPER named Anne (bapt 18 Feb 1699), I am NOT persuaded either that the later children had the same mother (Susannah) or even that the SAME John ROPER is the father.I view the former proposition as very UNLIKELY.On balance, the second proposition seems more reasonable were it not for other extant information which is highly suggestive that the John ROPER who fathered Joseph and William ROPER may very well have been John ROPER (b 08 Feb 1681 - Anne Arundel, d bef 12 Sep 1712 - NC).
Coincidentally, John ROPER, of Anne Arundel, who was probably Catholic, seems to have been belatedly Baptized at All Hollows Church in Anne Arundel on 15 Jan 1698/9.Perhaps he is about to marry in a Protestant Church.
We see an Anne ROPER (bapt 18 Feb 1699).It is UNCLEAR whether this is really 1699 or 1699/1700, the latter being a bit cumbersome to write old style.Thus, Anne arrives rather precisely about the time that one might expect a child if John ROPER, of Anne Arundel married immediately following his Baptism.
Then we see two more daughters:
Jane d/o John Roper bapt 1 Dec 1700 Rebecca d/o Jno Roper bapt 26 Jul 1702
This is followed in the New Kent records by a GAP of SIX (6) YEARS, as if the mother might have DIED or maybe this ROPER family simply MOVED AWAY.
Coincidentally, shortly before the birth of the third child Rebecca, John ROPER marries in Anne Arundel:
"John Roper and Ellinour Carter m. 23 Sep 1701"
Soon thereafter, All Hallows records record the birth of John ROPER's first child:
"John Roper and Elinor parents of Edward Roper son b. 17 Aug 1702."
The child is probably named for Elinor's father.
The ROPERs then DISAPPEAR from the All Hallows records.The Anne Arundel ROPERs are show to have sold substantially ALL of their land in Maryland from 1704-06.The Anne Arundel ROPERs begin to appear in the Colonial North Carolina records about this time.John ROPER purchases a plantation on the Matchapungo on the Pamlico Sound.
It is UNCLEAR where John ROPER's family lived at the outbreak of the Tuscarora War in September 1711.But the Matchapungo plantation would have been near the early outbreaks of hostilities.John ROPER is known to have died bef 12 Sep 1712.Elinor Carter ROPER seems to have survived the Tuscarora War.John ROPER's son William ROPER died childless bef 04 Jan 1729/30.
On balance, I believe that the John ROPER who fathered Anne, Jane and Rebecca was probably a DIFFERENT John ROPER than John ROPER, of Anne Arundel.I am mildly inclined to believe that the John ROPER shown to have fathered Mary ROPER in 1686 may have been the SAME John ROPER who fathered Anne, Jane and Rebecca, but I am quite doubtful that Susannah was the mother of the latter.
I believe that a case can be made in support of ascription of William and Joseph as sons of John ROPER (b 08 Feb 1681 - Anne Arundel, d bef 12 Sep 1712 - NC) but I believe that it is equally plausible that they are sons of a John ROPER, of Henrico County.There may have been a third contemporary John ROPER in Charles City County.
Whether John ROPER, of Anne Arundel, is the SAME John ROPER who patented the land in Charles City County remains UNCLEAR.We DO know that Thomas ROPER administered his brother's estate.We also KNOW that John ROPER first appears within the Charles City records precisely the year that the ROPERs departed Maryland.We also KNOW that Thomas ROPER assisted in procuring the Charles City County land, because this is expressly mentioned within the Patent."Edward" is also a given name that subsequently appears in MY branch of the ROPER family and the Chickahominy Plantation came down our branch of the family.
There was a John ROPER Jr. shown in the St. Peters New Kent Parish records.There was a John ROPER who died in Charles City County bef Jul 1737.There were also ROPERs in Henrico about this time.Some of the St. Peters records may have related to Henrico ROPERs.Other St. Peters records may have pertained to the family of John RAPIER, of King and Queen County, who settled on a tributoary of Jacks Creek.One ROPER family was probably seated in New Kent near Warreny Swamp and Old Stage Road.
Your UNSUPPORTED assumptions and conjecture do nothing whatsoever to advance ROPER genealogy.Rather than making false and speculative ascriptions, why not DELETE the FALSE ASCRIPTIONS and FRAUDULENT CONNECTIONS and join in some serious genealogy based upon actual FACTS rather than fiction?