Asking a question about my ancestor Jonathan Fairbanks of Dedham Massachusetts. He is mentioned in the 1650 will of George Fairbanks, clothier of Sowerby, Yorkshire. There are arguing theories about who Jonathan's parents were. In George Fairbanks' will (he died unmarried and childless), he mentions his own siblings, as well as his cousins, and mentions a "Mr. Johnathan Fairbanks" although he doesn't designate his relationship to Mr. Jonathan. A copy of the will was sent "to his loving cousin Jonathan Fairbanks in New England."
One site asserts that the "Mr. Jonathan Fairbanks" mentioned was not Jonathan in New England, but was some cousin who became a local vicar. That doesn't make much sense to me because why bother sending a copy of the will to New England to show someone who isn't even a beneficiary of the will? It doesn't state what the relationship is to "Mr. Jonathan Fairbanks" but then sends a copy of the will to Jonathan Fairbanks in New England "cousin" to George the clothier, so I can't think of why Mr. Jonathan Fairbanks mentioned wouldn't be the Jonathan in Massachussets.
A lot of sites have been claiming that Jonathan Fairbanks of New England was a younger half-brother of the George Fairbanks of Sowerby, and that because they weren't very close, George describes him as a cousin rather than a brother. They say that in the 1600's cousin was a term used in general to describe kinsmen. That doesn't make much sense to me when he describes his siblings in the will as brothers and sisters, but then sends a copy to his "cousin" in New England, but maybe I'm wrong. Has anyone else ever heard of someone describing a half-sibling as a cousin back in this time period?