When confronted with the numerous inconsistencies of the origin of the Meeks family in America I have created a plausible scenario on how the event actually took place. Here are the conflicts we need to consider:
- Dr. Priddy Meeks claims the immigrant was named William and he was from England and his generation would place his birth to be somewhere in the ball park of 1680 to 1700.
- There is a John Meeks living in St. Paul's Parish as early as 1711 how is likely a member of the family. This would seem to contradict Dr. Priddy's statement.
- It is believed that William Meeks (c. 1720) and John Meeks (c. 1725) were brothers. But DNA as suggested that their relationship may be more distance than that.
- Dr. Priddy claims the immigrant ancestor came from England, but other members of the Meek DNA project trace their lineage to Scotland.
In terms of immigration records of persons named William Meeks, we don't have many options. But there are several records of persons named John Meeks along with a few of them being indentured in New Kent County. One in particular, in 1667, shows a John Meeke and sixty others being indentured to three people: Robert Whitehaire, John Bowler, and Charles Edmond.
If we were to make the assumption that most indentures were under the age of 20 (this is my assumption, I don't know what the average age of indenture was), then a large number of these people were from Newcastle Upon Tyne. Including a Mr. John Meek, son of Francis Meek born on March 1, 1655.
This is interesting to us because Francis Meek was the father of Isaac Meek. By 1670, Francis had moved west to Cliburn, Westmorland County England, where his son Isaac would raise a family, with his youngest son being William Meeks, baptized on May 21, 1699.
Under this scenario, William Meeks from Cliburn England, the one that 99% of all online genealogies claim is the immigrant ancestor, is the nephew to the John Meeks living in St. Paul's Parish Virginia in 1711. That gives our William an American connection, a place to live if he were to move to Virginia.
Isaac was the older brother and he died in 1726, so it stands to reason that John lived long enough for William to grow up and move to Virginia and live with him.
This also provides a potential answer to why the DNA profile of William (c. 1720) and John (c. 1725) suggest that they are more distantly related than brothers. What if John was descended from John, son of Francis? And William was descended from William son of Isaac? This would place their common ancestor as Francis Meek. They would likely be the same generation though, which means there are two generation gaps between John of St. Paul's Parish and John born around 1725. I would guess the missing generation names as being John, given the appearance of that name in St. Pauls Parish through 1743.
So under this scenario they were 2nd cousins, which is more believable with the DNA analysis. However, they were obviously as close to each other as brothers because it was believed they were brothers by Dr. Priddy Meeks, who was a grandson of William.
This may also explain the wealth inequality found between William and John. John owned several hundred acres along Allens Creek in Hanover County. William first shows up in Goochland County and no land records to speak of. Maybe John inherited his wealth from his fathers. But William was the son of the immigrant William who merely lived with is uncle?
But what of the question of Scotland, since two members of the family can trace their lineage back to Scotland, shouldn't we be from there? To answer this question we have to accept the reality that people migrated. It has been found that thousands of Scotts migrated to England during the 14nth and 15nth centuries. There's ample time that the family could've split.
With that said, the area of Virginia our ancestors our found, mainly on the Piedmont, was mostly populated with immigrants from the boarder area of England and Scotland. And very few Scottish people were in Virginia before the 1720's. Cliburn England is within the realm of the boarder region, so in reality, given their location in Virginia, the William Meeks born in 1699 in Cliburn is the best candidate for the immigrant ancestor.
The biggest problem with this scenario is lack of proof. Evidence is severely lacking. But the story would make all the inconsistencies we see fall into place. Still, if we could prove this connection, then we can extend the family line another three generations up to Francis Meek who was born about 1627 in Newcastle Upon Tyne.
