Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Like the army of internet researches trying
to find links for the English ancestry of Josiah (1638),John (1643) and William (1672)
CHURCHILL, I have spent two years looking for
clues. As promised, I took the search to the
field (New England) and collected as much data as possible from libraries and historical societies. Though still collecting and collating the scads of data collected, prematurely I'm offering the following to fellow scroungers because it is a slant,insofar as I know, that has never before been presented on the web.
First, to establish a basis, a review of internet history follows: THERE IS
NO RECORD,EVIDENCE OR CONTENTION EVER PRESENTED, TO CONCLUDE JOSIAH,JOHN AND WILLIAM ARE BROTHERS. FURTHER, DESPITE, HUNDREDS OF INTERNET ENTRIES FROM MANY SOURCES DETAILING POSITIVE ANCESTRY, SOME
TRACING THE LINE BACK FURTHER THAN WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR (1066), CRITICS (or EXPERTS)
CLAIM ALL THESE ENTRIES ARE INCORRRECT,EVEN BOGUS. NO RECORD, NO EVIDENCE EXISTS FOR ANYTHING BEYOND THOSE THREE CHURCHILLS LANDING IN AMERICA NOT ONLY DIVIDED BUT MYSTERIOUSLY BY UNKNOWN MEANS,ALL JUST 'APPEARED'.
We must now add a new mystery man who has equally been a subject of heavy debates. That man is VINCENT MEIGS who arrived sometime between 1637 and 1641 (remember Josiah 1638,John 1643). There also is no positive date or place for Vincent's arrival.
Vincent Miegs enters the Churchill equation in that "Some" internet records claim Miegs is the grandson of Nicholas Meigs. Nicholas Meigs (Meggs) was married to
Jane Peverell, who upon Meigs' death, married
Roger Churchill, the progenitor of the Winston Churchill line. Roger's parents were
William and Mary Cruwys (Crense,etc.), who gave birth to another two sons, William and
John. John, of course, iS the computer-given
progenitor of the Americans Josiah/John/William.
William,(of the Roger, John era) rather ghostly forgotten, is said to be the father of ElizaBETH Ann Churchill. Though hard to trace on the internet, at least one source claims Elizabeth Ann married VINCENT MEIGS,who many other sources claim is the grandson of Nicholas and as such: THE FIRST LEGITIMATE LINK to the Churchill English ancestry many claim is Bogus!
For those acquainted with this story, there
is no need to review more history. However, for those who are not:
Most historical libraries carry a book written by A.L.Rowse detailing the Winston
Churchill ancestry. The intro claims Sir Winston previewed the book before release, offered editorial advice and endorsed it. The
book begins with an ancestral chart of Winston's line, back to William Churchill and
Mary Cruwys. Rowse states that all that PRECEDES William and Mary is probably
a fabrication (for vanity's sake) by the first Winston Churchill, designed with help from disreputable researchers. For that reason Rowse would not include the ancient portion of Churchill ancestry in his chart.
That suspect ancestry matches the very same lines reported by many internet sources.
It conforms also with a commercial scroll published as "The Ancient History of the Distinquished Surname Churchill." Although
small variations appear, most sources show
identical ancestry that leads, as indicated above, to 1066 and beyond.
Many,like Rowse, refuse to believe the ancient part, most informed won't even believe the more modern ancestry shown is part of the American Churchill heritage. Of those who believe, none have come forward with uncontested proof. THere is no proof, no link---unless it is with Vincent Meigs.
Although, nothing is evident Meigs descendants are concerned or even aware of the Churchill controversy,there has been an ongoing debate amongst them whether Vincent was even a son of Lawrence Meigs, let alone
being descended from Nicholas, father of Lawrence.
Very recently descendent Rick Meigs posted an internet bombshell which in part, follows:
"THE CHURCHILL (Elizabeth Ann) AND VINCENT MEIGS CONNECTION HAS NEVER BEEN PROVED." And,
'THAT VINCENT WAS THE SON OF LAWRENCE MEIGS IS JUST PURE FANTASY -- IT WAS JUST CONJECTURE PUT FORTH BY HENRY MEIGS IN HIS
1901 HISTORY AND GENEALOGY." And, he adds with irony, "WE JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET THIS
KILLED. SMILE!"
SINCE THAT PRONOUNCEMENT, INDEED DATA ON
THE ROOTS WEB,FOR ONE, HAS BEEN CHANGED TO REFLECT NEW DATA ANNOUNCED BY MEIGS.
THIS VERY COMPELLING DATA CLAIMS RECORDS
WERE DISCOVERED TO PROVE EMMA STRONGE AND NOT
ELIZABETH CHURCHILL, WAS THE WIFE AND MOTHER OF VINCENT MEIGS. (Lots of other details are also given - "Meigs Family Genealogy Forum")
"BAPTISMAL RECORDS WERE DISCOVERED" TO SUPPORT THE CLAIMS, WHICH LOOK IRREFUTABLE.
LEFT IN THE WAKE FOR CHURCHILLS HOWEVER, AT LEAST FOR THIS ONE, IS TOO GREAT A NUMBER OF CO-INCIDENCES TO DISMISS CIRCUMSTANCES THAT STILL HINT A STRONG MEIGS/CHURCHILL CONNECTION.
FIRST, WHAT REASON WOULD HENRY MEIGS HAVE FOR MAKING THE VINCENT TO LAWRENCE CONNECTION?
NEXT, THE NEW MEIGS DATA SHOWS EMMA STRONGE BEING BROTHER TO ELDER JOHN STRONG,THE PROMINENT NORTHHAMPTON,MA.SETTLER
WHO ARRIVED AMERICAN CIRCA 1630. FIFTH GENERATION, MARY STRONG MARRIED A SIXTH GENERATION CHURCHILL, THOMAS FOSTER. THAT IS
FACT, NOT CONJECTURE.
NEXT,SOON AFTER ARRIVAL, VINCENT AND FAMILY TOOK UP RESIDENCE IN GUILFORD,CT., DESPITE INTENTIONS (according to Meigs) OF GOING ELSEWHERE. Perhaps by co-incidence, several inlaws of the Churchills, including
Robert Foote, son of settler Nathaniel Foote,and Hurlburts and Griswolds - all from
Wethersfield, apx. 40 miles north, settled in virtually the same area.
NEXT, DURING THE MASS MIGRATION OF THE CHURCHILLS AND OTHERS TO VERMONT IN THE LATE
1700'S, WE FIND A BRANCH OF MEIGS SETTLING IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE STATE, NEAR ST.
ALBANS. A PLACE WHICH EVEN TODAY IS COMPOSED OF VERY SMALL FARMING COMMUNITIES. YET, ALSO
SETTLING IN THAT REMOTE REGION AT THE SAME TIME WAS A LINE OF CHURCHILLS.
FINALLY, THE GIVEN NAME "JANNA" appeared in the Churchill ancestry, to my knowledge for the first time,in 1738,with Janna, the son of Nathaniel Churchill and Rebecca Griswold, in MIddletown, Ct. Just a bushell of miles south,in 1739, in Wallingford, was born another Janna,-- MEIGS, son of another Janna, born 1699 in Guilford or Middletown where some of his siblings were born.(Same place as Churchill descendants).
His father was also Jannah (only with an H added).
Co-incidences all? Perhaps. But, statistically I would say it's much too soon
to give up close research on this one! Does anyone have more info, pro or con? And, do we
have research volunteers?
For the record, the American Churchill info presented here is authentic, researched and listed on many internet sources. Of those
presented here, Janna is my fifth generation grandfather, Foster Thomas is my sixth. Both
Janna (1815) and Foster Thomas (1827) died in
Georgia,Vt. FT's wife, Mary Strong, died 1864
near Plattsville,WI.
.
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/churchill/messages/1089.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|