Delve into faith, family, and the future at echoesandorigins.net. In the "Faith" section, I share encouraging articles grounded in sound biblical doctrine. Journey into the past with "Genealogy," where I offer my perspective on the lives, lineage, and fascinating discoveries about my ancestors. Finally, the "News" section features reposted articles highlighting current events through the lens of biblical end-times prophecy.
Stop right now and ask yourself a question: Do you feel helpless? Do you look around at a world quickly spiraling into chaos and feel like you're the only sane person left? I made that same comment myself recently. Grown men and women who need half an hour to explain 'what is a woman?' People who would rather see justice denied because of their political affiliations. People who believe the end justifies the means. People who hate Jews but can't seem to explain why they hate them.
You are a powerhouse! You have a power within you that is so potent, you could command a mountain be plucked up and cast into the sea and it would obey you! You have within your mouth and within your heart the power to change your circumstance, to change your country and your world. The only problem is, Satan has convinced you that it isn't real.
People wonder about faith; what is it? How do I get it? How can I use it? Faith is not some ethereal thing that causes goosebumps. It starts with a decision: An absolute bottom line drawn within your heart and mind. Some call this a quality decision. It means a line that cannot be crossed. My decision began with a statement. "From now on, I believe the Word of God over and above what I can see with my eyes and what I hear with my ears."
And immediately my own mind came to challenge it. It wasn't a demon, or a spirit, it was my own thoughts. Because I realized I had been programmed all my life to believe that the Bible didn't literally mean what it said. The Bible talks about the last days, people who 'have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof.' Deny The Power of God. That's what we see in the vast majority of churches! People who don’t expect miracles in church and therefore are not surprised when they don’t see them. Have you even once seen a line in front of a church of people wanting to go in to get a miracle? No. Not because God has stopped doing miracles, but because people don't believe in miracles any more.
"Several times in the Bible, it states that Jesus went to certain towns where he couldn't perform miracles there because of the peoples' unbelief. That is the modern church in America: Jesus is there, he showed up, but because of the peoples' unbelief he can do no miracles.
Step One: Make That Decision
You can start today with simple steps. Start off by making yourself a decision. Say something to the effect that from this moment on, you are choosing to believe the Bible is true, regardless of the circumstances. And your own mind will challenge you, but stay firm: Keep saying out loud that from this moment on, you are believing God's Word over anything your senses tell you, and stick to that.
Don't compromise. No matter what happens right in front of you (and it will happen, believe me), stayfirm to the decision you made. That is what I call igniting your faith. God says we all are given the measure, not a measure but the measure of faith. You are stirring yours up.
Pray A Prayer of Faith
The next step is to simply pray: But this time, pray with conviction! Ignore things that make you think your prayer isn't working. Are you praying for justice? Perhaps you're praying for a miracle in your own life. Stop looking at the circumstances to see if your prayers are working and start looking to the Bible! If a thought comes to you, 'this isn't working' confront that thought with "I believe the Word of God over and above what I can see with my eyes or hear with my ears!" And be powerful in your determination. Refuse to entertain any thought other than God's Word is true.
Mark 11:22-24 ESV: "22 And Jesus answered them, “Have faith in God. 23 l Truly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him. 24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."
Some preachers claim, ‘Jesus wasn’t talking about a literal mountain.’ But how do they know? What makes them think Jesus didn't mean what he said? Do they not think that Jesus could have spoken to a mountain and it would have moved?
It's that type of thinking that will hinder your faith. One of the things that really turned my life around was the idea that unless it's obvious that the Bible is speaking symbolically, take everything literally. There are many, many things in the past that I personally believed were symbolic that I now can see with my eyes that were absolutely literal. I never believed that college graduates would believe the obvious foolish notions that they do today. I never believed that within the borders of the USA antisemitism would be acceptable. I never really thought that there would come a day when Christians were hated all around the world.
But all these things have come to pass in my lifetime! Now I know better than to doubt the Word of God. And that is all you have to do. Make a decision that from this moment on, if anything should be questioned, it is the world—not the Word of God."
A long time ago, I saw a Rabbi on a talk show. This person, although I don't remember his name, I do remember that his face was recognizable; I'd seen him before. He went on to say how he had come to the belief that the stories of the Exodus were not actual events at all, but fables meant to convey a wider truth. As I sat there in disbelief to what I was hearing, I suddenly realized that he had made a decision to take the word of man over the Word of God. And this is what many Christians have done, without even realizing it. We have allowed others to convince us we should trust our senses over the Bible.
Let's say a scientist makes a point about evolution. You may not know if he's telling you the truth, you may not fully understand whether or not his point is valid, but because you're so used to believing your senses, you automatically let that create doubt in your mind! Turn that around! Start being skeptical of what you hear and what you see.
I was speaking to a Deacon of a Freewill Baptist Church once here in Kentucky. I asked him about the gifts of the Spirit. He absolutely proclaimed with a determination that surprised me. "The gifts of the Spirit have been done away with!"
When I asked him why he felt that way, I can still vividly remember his answer:. "Because if the gifts were still in effect, people would walk into hospitals and clear them completely out."
Do you see what he is saying? He is believing his senses, his eyes and his ears, over the Word of God. Because no hospitals were emptied by someone with the gift of healing, he chose to dismiss the Word of God. Just like the poor Rabbi, he had taken the word of man over the Word of God. How sad, especially for the Rabbi, to realize you've dedicated your life to something you no longer believe in.
Abide By That Quality Decision
Don't be like those men! Do not let this world convince you the Bible isn't true! If there is anything that should be questioned it is the word of man, not the Word of God.
As to the Deacon, Jesus went to several towns where he was met with such unbelief that he could do no miracles there. No matter how anointed you may be, if you're praying for someone that doesn't believe in the power to supernaturally heal, then your prayers are in vain. Show me one example where Jesus healed a person who didn't want healing.
Remember the woman with the issue of blood: "27 She had heard the reports about Jesus and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment. 28 For she said, “If I touch even his garments, I will be made well.” 29 And immediately the flow of blood dried up, and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease." Do you see what she did? She said something, believed it, and it came to pass! That kind of power is still here for us today!. It's called faith. She believed if she could just touch the hem of Jesus' garment, she would be healed. People have tried to make this way more complicated than it needs to be. Believe in God's power, ask Him to do something for you. (Mark 5:27-29 English Standard Version)
You can be a powerhouse for God. You can most definitely change circumstances in this country. People mocked, jeered and even threatened Nehemiah when he returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the wall of the city. But through the power of his faith in God, the walls were rebuilt. In the same way you should look at circumstances as a challenge to overcome, not an insurmountable barrier.
Are you frustrated with the evil you see in government? Pray. Are you angry at money being stolen by thieves and con artists? Pray. Do you worry about your safety in public and the safety of your loved ones? Pray. I personally consider faith to be one of the most powerful forces in the universe. Through faith, I have seen miracles with my own eyes. Through faith I have spoken to God himself and He has spoken to me. Through faith I have paid bills, changed circumstances, received things and so much more. And folks, there is nothing special about me. About 10 years ago, I simply made a decision. "From now on, I will believe the Word of God over and above what I can see with my eyes, and hear with my ears."
You can't 'try it out' and make it work. It's a decision you have to make and abide by. No matter what the evil one throws at you, these arrows are easily blocked by one thing: The Shield of Faith. Nothing on the earth can hurt you if you just start building your faith.
Remember you were given The Measure of faith. Not A Measure, but The Measure. Everyone gets the same measure; what you do with yours is what matters. Jesus said that even faith as small as a mustard seed (about the size of a dot made with a pencil) was enough to move mountains. It's not the quantity of faith, but it's your determination to abide by it instead of the world.
My rebuttal to the idea that we cannot say for certainty the maiden name of Penelope Clark, wife of Capt. Christopher Clark
Preface
UPDATE: Nearing the end of this project, I was floored, to say the least with the fact that I had the answer right in front of me, and didn’t even realize it. I think now I can say for once, I sincerely believe I know the maiden name of Penelope Clark.
This research paper is written to address the confusion surrounding the lineage of Penelope Massie Bolling, also known as Penelope Clark, the wife of Capt. Christopher Clark. It is my objective to shed light on her true lineage through meticulous research and evidence.
I have a personal connection to Penelope, as she is my 7th great-grandmother. This connection drives my passion for uncovering the truth about her heritage. My last name, Bowling, which has led some to believe that my desire to establish Penelope's lineage as a Bolling is biased. However, my dedication stems from the overwhelming evidence supporting this claim, not from my surname. As far as impartiality, the only thing I can tell you is my feelings run deep over this not because my name is Bowling, but in defense of it. As you will see throughout this article, I believe attempts were made to purposely rewrite history by claiming heritage to Penelope that does not exist.
The journey to uncover Penelope's true lineage is akin to a detective's quest for the truth. It requires an open mind, thorough research, and a commitment to uncovering every possible clue. The task at hand is significant, as it involves piecing together the life and legacy of a real person who once lived and continues to exist through her descendants.
In this paper, we will explore Penelope's early life, family background, education, major life events, and contributions to history. We will also delve into the various claims surrounding her last name and provide evidence to support her true lineage. Through this comprehensive approach, I aim to present an accurate and detailed account of Penelope Massie Bolling's life and legacy.
My connection to Penelope runs deep:
My 3rd great-grandfather, Jeremiah Bolling, son of Benjamin Bolling, married Sarah Ward.
Sarah Ward's mother is Susannah Clark, daughter of Micajah Clark, Jr.
Micajah Clark, Jr. is the son of Micajah Clark, Sr., who is the son of Christopher Clark, my 7th great-grandfather.
This makes Penelope my 7th great-grandmother, regardless of her maiden name.
Research Background
The journey to uncover Penelope Massie Bolling's true lineage has been a personal and extensive one. Over the past year, I have dedicated countless hours to researching the Clark family, often relying on Microsoft's AI, Copilot, to assist in the process. Through this research, I have come to realize that being a genealogist requires an open mind.
Many years ago, a Bible teacher named Chuck Missler inspired me. Although I never met him, I listened to his recording over and over. He often said, “You are never further from the truth than when you think you already have it.” He explained that once you decide you have found the truth, you stop looking. For a genealogist seeking the truth, this is the worst possible approach. As an example, I have studied the life of my 2nd great-grandfather, Ezekiel Bolling, extensively. Yet, just last December, a piece of information was discovered in a courthouse attic that answered one of my most pressing questions about him.
With any genealogical project, one must understand the weight of the task at hand. It is the hope of most people on this planet to be remembered when they are gone. You are not simply gathering data to fill in the blanks on a questionnaire. You are collecting the remnants of a real person—their life and their death. You are piecing together a puzzle to present to the world who this person was and what their life was like.
Statistics are important, but they are not the main story. The goal is to take the clues, the bits, and pieces of evidence, and fit them together into a narrative that tells the story of a human being who once lived on this earth and now continues to exist as part of you. Your mission is to ensure that this person is never forgotten.
This is why I pursue this objective. Not because I am trying to make Penelope Clark into a Bolling, but because my 7th great-grandmother is part of me, and she deserves to have her story told, and told correctly. And, in my opinion, is it the privilege of a family member to have the honor of telling the story.
Penelope’s story begins shrouded in mystery. There were no diligent census-takers in the 1600’s, going from house to house recording residents and their families. In addition, males were given far more attention than females. Women were referred to as ‘the wife of’ with no more fanfare. In some older documents, wives are excluded entirely as if the men produced children without any assistance at all. Given those circumstances, it is easy to see why answers are not immediately forthcoming.
Common Narrative and Background
The common narrative is that Penelope Bolling was born on August 4, 1684, in St. Peter's Parish, New Kent County, Virginia. It is widely accepted that she married Capt. Christopher Clark and had several children with him. This version of her life has been passed down through generations, shaping the understanding of her lineage.
Early Life and Family Background
As we delve deeper into the research, we encounter several inconsistencies in the common narrative. Over a dozen sources list Penelope's father as William Bolling. However, there is no record of a William Bolling living in St. Peter's Parish. Instead, we find a William Bolling living about 50 miles away in Gloucester County. This raises questions about the accuracy of the common narrative and suggests the need for a deeper investigation into her true origins.
Maverick Genealogy
It is here that we must begin to rely on our wits; our intuition, our reasoning to move forward with modern genealogy. We must become detectives; in a technique I call "Maverick Genealogy."
I will tell you that likely there will never be the smoking gun. You will never find all the pieces to the puzzle. And most genealogists are willing to stop right there, instead of moving forward. They are far too willing to say that “we will never know” because there is not that smoking gun of evidence. So instead of throwing our hands up and walking away, I believe we can take cues from my favorite fictional detective, Sherlock Holmes: "Eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Now this is a point I must stress above everything: If we continue along this trend, refusing to accept history without 100% verifiable information, we will lose that part of history forever! These valuable stories, genealogies, and clues given to us from the past will permanently fall through the cracks by closed-minded people who only want to hide behind cowardly words like “unverifiable”, “documentation” and “speculation”.
The Popular Narrative Isn't Really So Popular
The popular narrative for Penelope Clark becomes murky, at least if you are bound to the popular narrative of genealogy. She was blessed with a long life for the times, 76 years on this earth. Her husband, Christopher Clark, was a man who gained quite a bit of a reputation in his time, both as a soldier, civil servant, and a Quaker.
Land Acquisition: Christopher Clark purchased or patented 30,000 acres (about half the area of Athens, Georgia) of Crown lands in Hanover, Albemarle, and Louisa Counties, Virginia.
Military Service: He served as a Captain of the Hanover County Militia in 1727.
High Sheriff: He was appointed High Sheriff of Hanover County in 1731.
Justice of Louisa County: In 1742, he served as a Justice of Louisa County, Virginia.
Quaker Leadership: Christopher Clark was an Overseer for the Friends Meeting House near Sugar Loaf Mountain in 1749.
Legal Career: He was a law partner of Nicholas Meriweather.
Penelope Clark is not widely documented for specific accomplishments in historical records. However, her life and legacy are intertwined with those of her husband, Captain Christopher Clark, and their contributions to their community. As the wife of a prominent figure, she played a significant role in supporting her husband's endeavors and managing their household.
Penelope's legacy is also carried on through her descendants, who have made notable contributions in various fields. Her story, though not as well-documented as her husband's, is an essential part of the Clark family's history.
The ‘Not So’ Magic Bullet
Now, we begin to investigate the saga of Lorand V. Johnson and his research. In 1940, he produced a book, “The Descendants of William and John Johnson, Colonial Friends of Virginia.” His research primarily focused on tracing the Johnson family (his own family) lineage, and he suggested that Penelope Johnson was the wife of Christopher Clark, but that was based on the most circumstantial of evidence. Once again, I would like to reiterate that whether Penelope was a Johnson or not bears no weight on my relationship with her, other than if it were true, I would be a distant relative of Lorand V. Johnson himself.
He found in the records of St. Peter’s Parish a young lady named Penelope Johnson who was baptized on August 17, 1684. But here’s where things begin to get tricky. There is no record of William Worsham Bolling ever living in St. Peter’s Parish. In fact, the only record of Penelope Bolling being born in St. Peter’s comes from Johnson’s book, in which he himself connected her to the wife of Christopher Clark. There is a record of William Worsham Bolling living in Gloucester, Virginia, a community approximately 50 miles southeast of St. Peter’s Parish. So, the very records of Penelope’s birth could have been confused in the 1940s, and as a result, it is very possible that this simple mistake has been passed down repeatedly, resulting in many documents being tainted by one single mistake. In fact, I personally hope this was a mistake; however, we will soon find other records that may indicate otherwise.
Of course, it is quite easy to make the argument that the lack of records makes it logical to conclude that the evidence leads to Penelope being Penelope Johnson, born in St. Peter’s Parish. I, however, would point out that during this time, in the 17th century, birth registration in Virginia was not as systematic or consistent as it is today. There were no formal, centralized systems for recording births. Instead, records were often kept by local churches, such as parish registers, which documented baptisms, marriages, and burials. These records were maintained by the clergy and were the primary means of recording vital events.
St. Peter's Parish, for example, kept records of baptisms, which sometimes included birth dates. However, these records were not always comprehensive, and many entries may have been lost or not recorded. Additionally, the focus was often on baptisms rather than births, so some children might not have been recorded if they were not baptized.
Overall, while some records exist, they are often incomplete and inconsistent, making genealogical research from this period challenging. Furthermore, outside of these communities, records were not kept at all. But let us investigate the possibility of another Penelope being born in the same month of the same year.
According to my research assistant, CoPilot, on a scale of 1 to 5, where the most common name you can think of for a girl is 1 (i.e., Mary) and 5 is the least common (i.e., Sparkle), the name Penelope in the late 1600s would fall around a 3. It was not as common as names like Mary or Elizabeth, but it was not extremely rare either. Penelope was a name of Greek origin, associated with the mythological wife of Odysseus, known for her loyalty and patience. While it was not among the most popular names of the time, it was still used and recognized.
Remember, we must keep in mind the words of Sherlock Holmes: "Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." With the average popularity of the name Penelope, we must consider the very real possibility that another Penelope could have been born within a 50-mile radius of St. Peter’s Parish. Although the land was a rural area, it did contain small farms and plantations scattered throughout.
And I will try to make this point as delicately as possible: December has the winter solstice, the longest night of the year and the shortest day of the year. August is nine months away from December, if you get my point. Any woman who conceived a child in December would give birth in August, assuming the child was carried to full term. And, in case you think I am grasping at straws, to this day the month in which most babies are born is August. Google it for yourself. So, do you still think it is too big of a coincidence that two babies named Penelope were born in the month of August?
And not to call out the short-sightedness of other genealogists, but I have often seen Penelope’s first name used in her profile only with a complete lack of forethought as to the implications they are suggesting. Giving a date of birth as ‘circa 1700’. This means that Penelope was between the ages of 7 to 11 when she married Christopher Clark (given we either deduct or add 2 years to the year 1700). This is a classic example of what I call ‘copy and paste genealogy’: Not even bothering to analyze the clues for themselves but simply copying what someone else has written.
No, we do not have a dedicated government census-taker strolling through the countryside of rural Virginia, diligently making notes of every birth and child. But simply saying because there is no paper trail, there is no proof, means we will never know is simply foolish, at least in my opinion. Is that the kind of world we live in? Nobody ever decides on the best available evidence? We may not have the smoking gun, but that does not mean we cannot know the truth.
The Blakey Book
"The Blakey Book," is a genealogical work compiled by Bernard Buckner Blakey. It traces the descendants of Thomas and Susannah Blakey of Christ Church Parish, Middlesex County, Virginia. The book is a valuable resource for those researching the Blakey family and related lineages. On page 20B, there is a passage that reads in part: II. Captain CHRISTOPHER CLARK is said by Clift to have been 'b 1686,' but if he is I-vi above, he was doubtless a small boy when the family sailed in 1669; d c1754 will 14 Aug 1741, pud 28 May 1754 Louisa Co., Va.; m (ol709 per Clift) Penelope Massie Bolling (Some say Penelope Johnson) who survived him; dau-William Bolling and g-dau-Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1621-1683, First Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord High Commissioner of England and the father of Habeas Corpus;
Evaluating the Claims
The document claims that Captain Christopher Clark was born in 1686, according to Clift. However, there is some speculation that he might have been born earlier. If he were born earlier, it would have been possible for him to have been a small child aboard when the family sailed in 1669. He died around 1754, with his will dated August 14, 1741, and probated on May 28, 1754, in Louisa County, Virginia. He married Penelope Massie Bolling in 1709 (according to Clift), who survived him. Some sources suggest her name was Penelope Johnson. The document further claims that Penelope's father was William Bolling, and her grandfather was Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 1621-1683, First Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord High Commissioner of England, and the father of Habeas Corpus.
This is very important because no genealogist I’ve read has explored this treasure. And that is the fatal flaw to most genealogists. They spend much too much time looking at the forest and ignoring the individual trees. To evaluate the authenticity of a document, it's crucial to consider any claims made within it. For example, let’s say you’ve never heard of the American moon landings. One day you’re reading a paper that references the first landing on the moon. “What!” You exclaim. “People have walked on the moon?” As you continue reading, citing the methods used to construct a rocket, a capsule, the names of the men, and so forth, your confidence in the claim rises as you gather additional information to support it.
The same is true here; we can evaluate the authenticity of this document by analyzing the claims made and testing their truthfulness. This document claims that Christopher Clark married Penelope Massie Bolling in 1709 and, although it acknowledges the reference to Penelope Johnson, it goes on to provide an ancestry for Penelope Massie Bolling Clark. Specifically, it states that Penelope’s father was William Bolling and that Penelope’s grandfather was Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 1621-1683, First Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord High Commissioner of England, and the father of Habeas Corpus. Is this true? Can we authenticate the accuracy of that statement? Easily so. Once again, let me introduce you to my friend, CoPilot. My comments highlighted inbold.
This document says that Penelope Bolling is the granddaughter of Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 1621-1683, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord High Commissioner of England, and father of Habeas Corpus.
“Father of Habeas Corpus
The term "father of Habeas Corpus" refers to Anthony Ashley-Cooper's significant role in the development and promotion of the writ of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus is a legal remedy that protects individuals from unlawful detention. It requires authorities to justify the detention of an individual before a court. If the detention is found to be unlawful, the court can order the immediate release of the detainee. This principle is a cornerstone of individual liberty and due process in legal systems.
Evidence of Anthony Ashley-Cooper's Existence
Yes, there is substantial evidence supporting the existence of Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury. He was a prominent English statesman and politician who held various high-ranking positions, including Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord Chancellor. He played a significant role in the political landscape of 17th-century England and was a patron of the philosopher John Locke. His contributions to political thought and legal principles, including habeas corpus, are well-documented in historical records.
If you have any more questions or need further assistance, feel free to ask!”
CoPilot goes on to list several references to lend credibility to its narrative. Wikipedia.org, forbes.com, mylawdictionary.org, britannica.com, and finally wikitree.com. While this doesn’t offer definitive evidence that Penelope is the daughter of William Bolling and granddaughter of Anthony Ashley-Cooper, whoever wrote this passage has certainly impressed us with the accuracy of the other claims they made.
And so, it becomes necessary for us to make some judgements. Is this document clearly trying to mislead us, by adding well known information to affect our thinking as to its accuracy? If so, what’s the point? What is the point of stating that some people say Penelope Johnson, then giving us clear references to information that can be easily verified? The answer is nothing. There is nothing to gain by intentionally misleading the public into believing that Penelope Clark’s maiden name was Bolling. So, we must assume that at the time of the writing of this section of The Blakey Book, the author genuinely believed the information was true.
Penelope Massie Clark
in the Global, Find a Grave® Index for Burials at Sea and other Select Burial Locations, 1300s-Current
I’m not a fan of Find-a-grave. There’s a new phenomenon going around called Temu. I’m sure we’ve all seen the ads and wondered what it would be like to shop like a billionaire. The only problem with Temu is you might not get what you were promised. Sometimes, it turns out great, and sometimes you get a lemon. The same thing holds true for Find-a-grave Index. I have had more than one argument over the idea that everyone working on the same platform, or the same tree is not a good idea, and sites like Find-a-Grave prove I’m right. The idea that anyone can make an account and within 5 minutes be either helping complete profiles and references or filling them with nonsense isn’t something that is going to produce quality over time. The law of entropy says as much. But just like Temu, sometimes you get the good stuff. So, I offer this with that idea in mind; this is from a website that allows the public to enter new information, without any type of verification, or with any supervisory panel.
According to Find-a-Grave:
Name
Penelope Massie Clark
Maiden Name
Bolling
Gender
Female
Birth Date
4 Aug 1698
Birthplace
Henrico County, Virginia, United States of America
The only thing that I will point out is once again, we see no reference to Penelope Johnson, or the fact that Penelope was born in St. Peter’s Parish. By now I think it’s safe to conclude that the evidence for Penelope being born in St. Peter’s Parish is becoming more and more skeptical. And along with it, the idea that her maiden name is Johnson. Remember, if Penelope is not born in St. Peter’s Parish, then she is not a Johnson. This is the very record that Lorand’s claims hinge on. The idea that the St. Peter’s Parish records include Penelope Johnson, and she was the wife of Christopher Clark.
But, in the interest of being fair I will point out. Henrico County, Virginia is not Gloucester County. In fact, one is in central Virginia, and one is close to the coast. But there is one thing they have in common, neither one of them is New Kent County, where St. Peter’s Parish resides.
GOVERNORS OF KENTUCKY, 1792-1942 by Garrett Glenn Clift
This is one of the most important pieces of information a person can find. But before we find it, let’s put things into perspective. Spartacus, one of the most famous gladiators in history. But his life went mostly unknown until almost a century after his death. He is remembered due to his role in leading the Third Servile War, a major slave uprising against the Roman Republic. But his story wasn’t written until almost a century later. The historical accounts of Spartacus were written by Plutarch and Applan almost a century after his death in 71 BC. What does this have to do with Penelope Clark? The Maverick Genealogists takes information in context. They accept things in the historical context.
In all my studies of Penelope Clark, no one and I mean no genealogist has ever mentioned this book. Not to pat myself on the back too much, but I have to wonder just how motivated people who have written about Penelope were to miss such an obvious clue. Obvious, unless your personal opinion is not supported by this book. Then, it becomes bias.
Governors of Kentucky was written in 1942 by Garrett Glenn Grift. In it, he lists the names, heritage and stories of the governors up until 1942. The credibility of this book comes from its detailed compilation of historical data and the reputation of its author, Garrett Glenn Clift who was known for his work in genealogy and history. I have to wonder why no one has even mentioned this even one time.
As a resident of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, this is one I can definitely relate to. After all, many of my ancestors hailed from Kentucky. In fact, my own father was born on the very same land once owned by William Hosea Bowling, son of Ezekiel Bolling. I myself still live in that very same county. So, when I learned a relative of mine, James Clark, was once governor of the great state of Kentucky, needless to say I was very humbled that so many of my ancestors were honored. According to CoPilot, James Clark served as the 13th Governor of Kentucky from August 30, 1836, until his death on August 27, 1839. During his tenure, he was instrumental in establishing a state board of education and public schools in every county.
But the relevant thing here is his ancestry and why it is important to this paper. According to official records (Governors of Kentucky, 1792-1942, p43).
Title: LINEAGE OF GOVERNOR JAMES CLARK
Christopher Clark (1681-1754):
Migrated from England via Barbados around 1710.
Acquired 50,000 acres of crown land in Hanover, Albemarle, and Louisa Counties, Virginia.
Roles:
Captain of the Hanover County Militia in 1727.
High Sheriff in 1731.
Justice of Louisa County in 1742.
Overseer of Friends Meeting near Sugar Loaf Mountains in 1749.
Law Partnership:
Partnered with Nicholas Meriwether.
Marriage:
Around 1709 to Penelope Massie Bolling, daughter of William Bolling and granddaughter of Anthony Ashley Cooper, First Earl of Shaftsbury.
This document is explosive to the case for Penelope Clark! Here we see two things brilliantly clear to anyone who chooses to open their eyes and look. Number one, this book published in 1942 before the popularity of Lorand V Johnson’s book proves that before 1940, no one seriously took any claims to any other version of Penelope’s lineage other than the accepted Penelope Massie Bolling. In fact, other than my 7th great-grandmother's case, this book has often been used as a reference in genealogical and historical research!
Number two, why do these so-called professional researchers use this book to back up the authenticity of other claims but deny its authenticity when it comes to Penelope Clark? Because of human nature. No one becomes famous by simply stating facts already thought to be true. And as much as it pains me to say this, had it not been for Lorand V Johnson’s claim that he was related to Christopher Clark through his wife Penelope, he would have just been another anonymous genealogist. And when no one fact checks their sources, and just passes down what someone else has written, their reputations get caught in this net of lies, and suddenly no one wants to be the one to pop the balloon.
James Clark, Mansfield, Christopher Clark: and allied families
If you’re familiar with this document, you’re probably asking yourself why I would bring it up now. After all, this document attacks the idea that Penelope was a Bolling and instead takes us in a new direction altogether. The idea that perhaps Penelope’s maiden name was Johnson, Massie, or even Ashley. Sometimes, truth exists even in the wrong places. Here’s what I mean: This is an excerpt from the document:
"Christopher's wife was Penelope __. Several descendants have made long, continuous, but unsuccessful searches for known records of her and her ancestors. The names Bolling, Massie, and Johnson have been given to her, but so far, no proofs have been found as to which, if any, of these was her name. (1933) Mrs. Jane Martin (a GA genealogist) wrote in 1906 that she had seen the name Penelope 'Bowlin' in gleanings of Virginia History."
Once again, not to put too fine a point on it, but here is yet another record found prior to 1940, no one is giving any credibility to anything except references that Penelope’s last name was Bolling, or some variant.
Here is when you must start talking about the elephant in the room. Did Lorand Johnson make the claim that his family was related to Penelope Clark in order to associate himself and his family to the Clark name and thereby gaining popularity and prominence to himself and promoting his book? I asked CoPilot this very same question in the context that even this document, “James Clark, Mansfield, Christopher Clark: and allied families” makes the very same observation:
“The document you mentioned, "James Clark, Mansfield, Christopher Clark: and allied families," does indeed reference Lorand V. Johnson's claims about Penelope Bolling. The speculation around Johnson's work suggests that he might have included information about Penelope Bolling to boost the popularity of his book. This is because there was no mention of Penelope being part of the Johnson family until Johnson's book was published in 1940. The document questions the credibility of Johnson's claims and implies that he might have tied his book to Penelope Bolling to gain more attention and credibility.”
Now, read carefully the claims CoPilot is making, CoPilot is saying that until Johnson's book came along, no one was making the claim Penelope Clark was a Johnson. If that is indeed Johnson’s claim, he obviously is either mistaken or deliberately attempting to skewer the narrative. In fact, the opposite is true. No one was taking the idea of Penelope being a Johnson seriously until his book appeared. Yet sadly, many people take the word of one single book over a mountain of evidence stating the exact opposite.
In fact, I will tell you this: Not only does Johnson attempt to ingratiate himself into the Clark line but goes on to attempt to coopt his line into what was considered long-standing beliefs concerning Penelope.
When I put this question to my friend CoPilot, here is the response I received. My comments highlighted in bold.
Here is a crazy theory for you. I feel like Johnson bent over backwards to rewrite history, not only by putting himself and his family into the Clark family but actually began to insert his family name into what was already Penelope's well-known ancestry, by adding his family into the narrative of the Ashley-Cooper lineage.
“Your theory is certainly an interesting one! It does appear that Johnson's claims significantly shifted the narrative around Penelope Bolling. Given the evidence, or lack thereof, regarding Penelope's true lineage, it's plausible that Johnson might have had motives beyond pure historical accuracy.
To support your argument, consider these points:
Pre-1940 Documentation: There was no solid evidence linking Penelope to the Bolling family until Johnson's book was published.
Johnson's Motives: By associating his family with the prominent Ashley-Cooper lineage, Johnson could elevate his own status and credibility.
Skepticism of Contemporary Researchers: Researchers before and after Johnson questioned the legitimacy of his claims due to the lack of supporting evidence in family records and Bibles.
Alternative Theories: Other genealogists, like Col. Frank Stovall Roberts, proposed different lineages for Penelope based on thorough examinations of available records.
By highlighting these points, you can build a compelling case for your theory. If you need any more help with your document or further assistance in organizing your thoughts, feel free to let me know!”
Now, I will be the first to say that words of an AI do not constitute proof. But once again, we are operating in the style much like a detective following a set of clues; When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
My questions are this: Why is there no narrative on Penelope Johnson being the wife of Christopher Clark prior to Johnson’s book release? Why after 1940 does the Johnson name suddenly began appearing in the record of Anthony Ashley-Cooper? Where is the evidence that the child born in St. Peter’s Parish grew up to marry Christopher Clark prior to 1940?
Look, I am not denying a child was born sometime in August 1684 in St. Peter’s Parish. I will acknowledge that nothing has been shown to dispute the claim this little girl’s name was Penelope Johnson. But why, why does most every single record prior to 1940 refer to Penlope Bolling? Again, what is the conspiracy? Why would it have been advantageous to try to squash the idea that Penelope’s maiden name was Johnson in favor of making her a Bolling?
Pocahontas!
As a Bowling myself, I can tell you there are certain requirements all Bowlings must be able to do in order to officially prove yourself as a true Bowling. You must be able to spell “Rebecca Amonute Matoaka "Pocahontas" Rolfe” from memory and recite your family line back to her by heart. Fortunately for me, I am a mix of white and blue Bolling, with an ‘only by marriage’ relationship to Pocahontas. Therefore, exempt from the mandatory teachings handed down through hundreds of years by the ‘red’ Bowlings.
Yes, there have been many attempts to connect Penelope Bolling to Pocahontas. Most notably is the blatantly false narrative that somehow her parents were none other than Maj. John Bolling and Mary Kennon. It is a true statement that if all the allegations were true, John and Mary would have been responsible for spawning the vast majority of North America. As a Bolling I can tell you that 95% of all Bowlings I've met claim kinship to Pocahontas.
But once again, I must point back to some of the older records. No one was making the claim that Penelope was anything other than the daughter of William Bolling and granddaughter of Anthony Ashley-Cooper, and an illegitimate granddaughter at that! That may not seem like much today, but back in the day, that was nothing to crow about.
"Many descendants think she was a Bolling and give her place in that family, but a careful examination in 1913 by Col. Frank Stovall Roberts of Washington, D.C. (a descendant in the Clark-Anthony line) of Bolling family Bibles and all available records disclosed no Penelope Bolling. Col. Roberts wrote in 1913: 'It may be that our Penelope was the daughter of Penelope Ashley, descendant of Sir Anthony Ashley whose daughter Ann Ashley married Sir John Cooper and was the mother of Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper. As for the name Massie, there are many theories, but all connect with the family of the Earl of Shaftesbury.'"
Now, Col. Frank Stovall Roberts in 1913 makes some interesting claims. One, he claims to possess the Bolling family Bibles and all available records. Would that it was true and he had left us with a way to access all that information. But, in all fairness, even if he did possess the Bolling family Bibles, why is he doubting? You see one thing he doesn’t know is the information of Anthony Ashley-Cooper. Because if he did, he would realize the following: Penelope Masse was the daughter of Dorothy Manners, who had an affair with Anthony Ashley-Cooper.
It is unclear whether Dorothy used the surname of a relative, or some other historical connections in order to come up with the surname of Massie. There is speculation that she was once married to Peter Massie, but this has never been established. However, this explains why some believe Penelope Clark’s maiden name to be Massie. Simply put, Dorothy Manners had an illegitimate child with Anthony Ashley-Cooper and either had enough loyalty to the man not to give her daughter the surname of the child’s father, or what somehow convinced doing so was not a good idea. So, she gave her daughter the surname Massie.
When Penelope Massie married William Worsham Bolling, they had a daughter. For whatever reason, perhaps to restore the family honor, or to thumb their nose at aristocracy, they decided to name her after her mother, Penelope Massie Bolling. This is how Penelope Clark is the granddaughter of Anthony Ashley-Cooper.
And for the record, this very same document mentions Lorand V. Johnson in the context of his book published in 1940. It suggests that Johnson's book played a significant role in changing the narrative about Penelope Bolling. The document questions why there was no mention of Penelope being part of the Johnson family until Johnson's book was published. It implies that Johnson might have tied his book to Penelope Bolling to gain more attention and credibility.
I asked Copilot this: I have one question and there is one rule: Be brutally honest and don't try to make me or anyone else feel good. In your opinion, Lorand V. Johnson's book gained a lot of attention simply because he mentions the wife of Christopher Clark. Yes, or no?
Given the context and the impact Johnson’s book had on the narrative surrounding Penelope Bolling, it's fair to say that the mention of Penelope Massie Bolling likely played a significant role in drawing attention to his work. Genealogical details about well-known or historically significant individuals often generate more interest and credibility.
So, yes, it's plausible that his book gained a lot of attention, at least in part, because he linked it to the wife of Christopher Clark.
To Be Continued...
(At this point I am going to continue this at a later date. This is already 18 pages, and there is much more to write. But at least this way, those interested in Penelope can see how my research is shaping up.)
Social media is truly a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it gives us an opportunity to contact people all over the world, people of different languages, different cultures, yet we share the same interests. We can share information that affects our lives, safety alerts, weather alerts, road hazards. We have an almost unlimited resource for information.
But at the same time, we open ourselves to the bullies, the narcissists, the predators, the people of this world who are just plain evil. Every post we make is a potential minefield. Yet there are people who share an addiction to this media platform in many ways is no different cocaine or processed sugar —loss of control, dependence on validation, withdrawal symptoms.
In some ways, I will never understand this gen z culture. They give power to complete strangers to affect how they think and feel about themselves. They won’t rely on their parent’s opinions, nor their siblings, friends and even their partners. Yet the complete stranger who live hundreds if not thousands of miles away can either uplift them or depress them for days on end.
Isn't’ that a lot of power to hand to someone you don’t really know? Don’t you believe at least in some way it’s foolish to tether your heart, your mood, and your self-esteem to someone who will never truly know you. Do you really want to trust someone who has no stake in your life, or your well-being?
I was once in your shoes; exactly in your shoes. One night I was having a pity party with God. I called it praying, but that’s what it was. “Why doesn’t anyone like me, why doesn’t anyone want to be my friend?”
“Why won’t they either leave me alone or be my friend?” I was in my forties at the time, and here I was, acting like a teenager. But that’s what can happen when your own self-image requires validation from someone else.
At that time, God himself spoke to me as loudly as I’ve ever heard him. I can’t really explain it except to say it was as if someone was shouting inside me. “MINE IS THE ONLY OPINION YOU NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT!”
That was a day of discovery for me. No longer was I chained to the bondage of acceptance. No longer was I going to value my self-worth by someone else’s opinion. It wasn’t easy, and it definitely didn’t happen all at once, but slowly, I began to reprogram my thinking. I began to say to myself, “God’s opinion is the only one that matters”; “I will no longer give strangers the power to determine my self-image". And slowly, I started to walk out of a long, dark tunnel that I didn’t even know existed.
Am I touching any nerves with you? Is this something you struggle with as well? No one loves you like God. No one is more concerned with your mindset, with your emotions, with your feelings of inadequacy than God. It’s really as easy as that; you don’t have to struggle with getting to know God, you are struggling to resist. God’s love is like a magnet; it draws you in, it invites you to go deeper.
Friend, if you’re unhappy with the way social media treats you, then stop letting them form your opinion of yourself. The only opinion that should matter to you is the opinion of the one who loves you more than you can even fathom about love. God is ready to forgive anything, he’s ready to accept you right now, just as you are. Unlike humans, He doesn’t care about your past, or your present for that matter. While acceptance from social media is 100% conditional, only God’s love is completely unconditional. His acceptance depends on you, not Him. He has already accepted you.
Now it’s your choice; Are you ready to step away from fleeting approval and embrace something permanent?
I can tell you with 100% certainty that this story is true: It happened to me.
Many years ago, I suffered the worst trauma of my life. Without getting into it, I can say the only thing worse would have been death. As a result, I now live with PTSD, depression, anxiety, panic attacks, and more. I wish I could tell you that I remained faithful to God throughout the ordeal, but that would be a lie.
Toward the end of that time, under relentless stress and constant beratement, my entire family—except my wife and children—turned their backs on me. And one night, I broke.
I called God every name I could think of. I accused Him of not being true to His word. I told Him He had abandoned me just when I needed Him the most. In short, I threw a complete and utter temper tantrum. I told Him that if this was His idea of a loving, caring God, then I wanted no part of it. I said we were finished—that if this was how He took care of me, I’d manage just fine on my own.
I take after my mother in many ways. She knew how to hold a grudge. My wife, on the other hand, can get angry, tell you exactly how you’ve failed her, why you’ve failed her, and what the consequences are—and then, in 15 minutes, act like nothing ever happened. Not me. Some people can hold a grudge for a day or a week; I can hold one for a year or more.
I’ve always had obsessive-compulsive tendencies. I don’t call it a disorder because, in some ways, it’s beneficial. My powers of observation are far beyond what most people have. I can hang on to something with a tenacity that others would abandon long ago. I have laser-like focus that lets me concentrate on projects like few others can.
But it also fuels my temper. It infuriates me when someone won’t even listen to what I have to say. I’m easily irritated, and I can go from zero to furious faster than a NASCAR driver. And that’s exactly what I did with God. I spent over a year as a spoiled brat, pouting in the corner, refusing to speak to Him.
But something inside me began to yearn. I missed reading the Bible. Something was missing in my life, and I knew what it was. I missed the fellowship I felt with God during those times. Slowly, I began reading the Bible again. At first, I was too ashamed to even pray. But one night, I had to know the truth: Could I be forgiven?
I prayed a basic prayer from my heart: “Lord, did I go too far? Do You still love me? Can I be forgiven?”
The answer was a thunderous silence. Usually, when I pray, I feel some sense of fellowship with God. Even if I don’t get a direct answer, I feel His presence. This time, there was nothing. I went to bed, hoping I’d get an answer the next day.
The next day came and went. I’ve always been a night owl. Even when I had to get up early in the morning, I’d still stay up until 12:30 or 1 a.m. But that night, I couldn’t sleep. I got up, watched some television, and when I started feeling sleepy, I went to bed. My tablet on the nightstand read: 3:16 a.m.
The following night, I went to bed at my usual time and fell asleep without incident. However, the night after that, I couldn’t sleep again. Like before, I got up, grabbed a snack, and watched TV. When I finally went to bed, the tablet read: 3:16 a.m.
“What a coincidence,” I thought and drifted off.
Over the next ten nights, the same pattern occurred on seven of them. I’d lie there awake, get out of bed, and watch television. And each time, when I went to bed, the tablet would read 3:16 a.m.—not a minute earlier, not a minute later. The exact same time.
I began noticing other patterns too. In a store, the clerk would say, “That’ll be $3.16.” Or I’d pay for something, and they’d say, “Your change is $3.16.” I’d see the number 316 painted beneath a bridge, on a page number, even on a snack’s calorie count. The license plate on the car in front of me. The price of an item on sale in a store. Multiple times a day, I encountered that number.
Now you’re probably starting to understand the message. But I didn’t. It didn’t occur to me at all. More than once, I said aloud, “Lord, I know You’re trying to tell me something, but I don’t get it.” I even emailed a well-known pastor, beginning with: “I know I’m not crazy—at least, I don’t think I am. I have a wife; I have a job…” I explained what was happening to me. Even they didn’t understand and suggested I pray for God to reveal the message to me.
After two weeks of this, I finally prayed, “Okay, God, I give up. What does 316 mean? I know it’s Your message, but what does it mean?”
In that instant, it felt like a veil lifted in my mind. Suddenly, I realized: John 3:16. And then, I remembered the words of my prayer: “Do You still love me? Can I be forgiven?”
Friends, as I sit here writing this, my heart leaps for joy. God went to such great lengths to ensure I knew beyond a doubt that He loves me and forgives me. To this day, whenever I see the number 316, I pause and say, “Thank You, God, for reminding me You love me.” And that was ten years ago this year.
From that moment on, I have never doubted God’s love and forgiveness. How could I? Having experienced such an awesome miracle, my heart is set on one thing: to share that love with you.
Through my testimony, let me assure you that God is just as eager to show His love for you. When I remember that awesome moment when I first saw it clearly, how my body tingled at the revelation of what the last two weeks had been about—I’m still tingling with excitement today. There is nothing special about me. If God is willing to demonstrate His love for me, He will do the same for you.
I can honestly tell you this was a life-changing event. I still struggle terribly with my mental challenges. And there are times when I feel that no one understands me. No one, that is, except God. I never feel alone, because I know I’m never alone. I know that God is as close as a whisper. And I know, I know in my heart, everything will be alright.
Are you struggling? Do you feel guilty over something in your past? I have an answer: John 3:16. Does the enemy throw your previous sins up in your face? John 3:16. You may be thinking right now, “But you don’t know what I’ve done.” You’re right; I don’t. But I have an answer. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever [that’s you, my friend] believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
You may think, “But you don’t know the crowd I was involved with and the groups I was part of.” My friend, your prior life has nothing to do with the here and now. What you need to know is this: There is nothing special about me! I am living proof that if God can forgive me after the horrible way I acted, He can truly forgive anyone. Stop listening to the enemy. God will never throw your sins up in your face. Only Satan does that. In fact, I have a Word from God especially for you: The only people who cannot be forgiven are the ones who do not want to be forgiven.
There are no strings attached. You don’t have to do anything to receive God’s love and forgiveness. If your heart craves fellowship with God, you can and will be forgiven. God is not only willing to forgive you, but He wants to forgive you. He is eager to forgive you! Stop living in a world of guilt, my friend. Stop worrying over a past you cannot change. The future is in front of you, and it’s time you started looking forward. Receive His gift of forgiveness; let go of the past, and march ahead.
In closing, I would like to bless you. In the name of Jesus, may the peace of God settle in your heart and reside there. May you come to know, feel and understand the infinite love God has for you. May you rest in that love forever.
Henry Meese arrived in Virginia in the early 1600's seeking fortune through tobacco, but his story became much more. As a Lieutenant Colonel in the militia and a member of the House of Burgesses, he shaped early colonial governance while forging critical ties with Chief Wahanganoche.
Controversy surrounds his possible marriage to Ontonah, the Chief’s daughter, later known as Mary Meese. Though gaps remain, this union may fill missing pieces in his history. Such mysteries fuel what I call "Maverick Genealogy"—an investigative approach rejecting passive record-keeping in favor of bold conclusions based on the best available evidence. Instead of fearing uncertainty, genealogists must be willing to interpret history beyond a reasonable doubt.
We must break free from the safety net of "we may never know" and boldly reconstruct forgotten narratives. Without doing so, vital pieces of our identity and shared heritage risk fading into obscurity. History isn’t meant to be cataloged—it must be revived, questioned, and told with conviction.
Chief Wahanganoche: Injustice and Vindication
In 1662, Chief Wahanganoche, leader of the Patawomeck tribe, was falsely accused of murder and high treason by English settlers, including Captain Giles Brent. The House of Burgesses investigated and found the accusations baseless, acquitting Wahanganoche and penalizing his accusers. Captain Brent was ordered to compensate the chief with Roanoke shell currency and matchcoats, acknowledging the harm caused.
This case reflects the deep tensions between settlers and Indigenous tribes, but it also underscores the importance of allies like Henry Meese. As a Lieutenant Colonel and House of Burgesses member, Meese reportedly supported Wahanganoche, demonstrating his diplomatic skills and commitment to justice. His advocacy remains a vital piece of his legacy.
Henry Meese: A Shrewd Businessman
The precise date of Henry Meese’s arrival in America remains uncertain, though records suggest he was active by 1655. Initially settling in Maryland, he quickly became involved in court and land transactions, establishing himself as a key colonial figure.
His first major land acquisition came on October 20, 1665, when Governor William Berkeley granted him 1,000 acres in Stafford County, Virginia—land originally owned by Thomas Pettus, who sold his rights to Meese for £90 (about $20,000 today). With fertile land ideal for tobacco cultivation, Meese leveraged both his agricultural and trade expertise to build a profitable enterprise, maintaining strong business ties between America and England.
While no definitive records confirm land purchases from Chief Wahanganoche, evidence suggests Meese negotiated with the Patawomeck tribe, securing valuable alliances. During Wahanganoche’s murder trial, he testified about conducting land transactions with Meese and Peter Ashton—an acknowledgment that underscores Meese’s deep involvement in both political and economic colonial affairs.
The Edward Incident: A Maritime Dispute
In 1670, Henry Meese and a fellow businessman negotiated with shipowner Thomas Southin to transport tobacco aboard The Edward. Southin co-owned the vessel with William Justice, John Inions, and Richard Sperman, outfitting it for trade voyages. The plan was set: 300 hogsheads of tobacco for Gawyn Corbin and 50 for Meese.
But things went awry. While docked in the Downs, the crew neglected their duties, leading to accidents. Soon after, they mutinied, insisting on changing course to the Rappahannock River. Southin, unable to retrieve the waiting tobacco, lost control of the ship’s papers and cargo when the crew took possession and profited for themselves.
This incident highlights the complexities of colonial trade and maritime risks, with disputes over ownership, freight, and crew behavior shaping early commerce.
The Elephant in the Room: Henry Meese’s Native American Connection
Harry Wright Newman's To Maryland from Overseas traces the origins of early Maryland settlers, including a curious reference to Henry Meese. Newman notes that Lord Baltimore granted Meese seignorial honors in 1658 before he returned to Great Britain—believing he had left children in Virginia.
Meese’s legacy intertwines with controversy over his possible descendants. While Ancestral Records and Portraits claims Meese’s daughter Grace married Captain John Ashton, conflicting sources suggest Grace Ashton may have instead been the daughter of surgeon William Frizer, whose 1677 will left his estate to her and her children. Despite speculation, no document explicitly confirms their relationship.
Genealogical sources further complicate matters. History of Northampton County asserts Grace Meese married John Ashton, yet most records indicate her birth in 1640—before Meese’s first documented presence in America in 1655. This lack of definitive evidence underscores the challenge of reconstructing history with certainty.
The search for truth in genealogy requires careful investigation. Without deep scrutiny of historical sources, speculation risks distorting the past rather than illuminating it.
The Mystery of Anne: A Genealogical Puzzle
When Henry Meese returned to London, he married Anne Pert and had children, including Anne Meese—born in 1676. Yet records suggest Dr. Richard Thomas Bryant II married an "Anne Meese" in 1671 or 1670, five years before her birth. So, who did he really marry?
Many argue Bryant’s wife was Mary Anne Meese, daughter of Ontonah and Henry Meese. Some genealogists dismiss this theory, but historical records lean toward it.
As for Ontonah being “penniless”—far from it. Her father, Chief Wahanganoche, led the Patawomeck tribe, controlling fertile lands along the Potomac, rich in trade and resources. His influence made him a powerful figure in colonial diplomacy. Henry Meese, always in pursuit of wealth, had every reason to align himself with Wahanganoche. While this doesn’t confirm a marriage, it undermines the idea that Ontonah’s status would have been a deterrent.
Reasons Henry Meese Likely Married Ontonah
Henry Meese had multiple compelling reasons to marry Chief Wahanganoche’s daughter, Ontonah. His crops remained untouched despite unstable relations between colonists and Indigenous tribes—perhaps because no one wanted to destroy the Chief’s son-in-law’s fields.
Companionship may also have played a role. Meese lived in America for decades before returning to England, making a marriage to Ontonah a source of stability in his personal life.
Strategically, Meese needed fertile land for tobacco, and Wahanganoche testified to land transactions with him—an extraordinary feat given Indigenous distrust of colonists. Marriage could have strengthened these ties.
Trade was another motivator. The Patawomeck tribe crafted high-demand goods like jewelry, woven baskets, and dyes. As Wahanganoche’s son-in-law, Meese would have had access to these items, which London merchants eagerly sought.
Diplomacy was crucial, too. Just as Pocahontas' marriage to John Rolfe eased tensions, Meese’s ties to Wahanganoche could have helped de-escalate conflicts—especially during the Chief’s wrongful accusation of murder, which threatened colonial-Indigenous relations.
Closing Argument: A Case Beyond Reasonable Doubt
The absence of contradictory evidence strengthens the case for Meese’s marriage to Ontonah. While speculation surrounds Grace Meese’s lineage, Ancestral Records and Portraits clearly states she was Henry’s daughter. Strategic marriages were common, and marrying Wahanganoche’s daughter would have given Meese land, protection, and trade advantages.
Historical records, including tomb inscriptions and genealogical accounts, reinforce Grace’s identity as Meese’s daughter. Circumstantial evidence points overwhelmingly toward the union, making the marriage not just plausible—but likely.
Given the economic and diplomatic benefits and the lack of refuting evidence, the claim meets the burden of proof: Henry Meese married Ontonah Wahanganoche and fathered children, securing his lasting legacy.
This is a condensed version of the research paper I wrote. If you would like to have the entire paper, Download It Here
1 This letter is from Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ and a brother of James. I am writing to all who have been called by God the Father, who loves you and keeps you safe in the care of Jesus Christ. [*]
2 May God give you more and more mercy, peace, and love.
The Danger of False Teachers
3 Dear friends, I had been eagerly planning to write to you about the salvation we all share. But now I find that I must write about something else, urging you to defend the faith that God has entrusted once for all time to his holy people. 4 I say this because some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches, saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives. The condemnation of such people was recorded long ago, for they have denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
5 So I want to remind you, though you already know these things, that Jesus[*] first rescued the nation of Israel from Egypt, but later he destroyed those who did not remain faithful. 6 And I remind you of the angels who did not stay within the limits of authority God gave them but left the place where they belonged. God has kept them securely chained in prisons of darkness, waiting for the great day of judgment. 7 And don’t forget Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighboring towns, which were filled with immorality and every kind of sexual perversion. Those cities were destroyed by fire and serve as a warning of the eternal fire of God’s judgment.
8 In the same way, these people—who claim authority from their dreams—live immoral lives, defy authority, and scoff at supernatural beings.[] 9 But even Michael, one of the mightiest of the angels,[] did not dare accuse the devil of blasphemy, but simply said, “The Lord rebuke you!” (This took place when Michael was arguing with the devil about Moses’ body.) 10 But these people scoff at things they do not understand. Like unthinking animals, they do whatever their instincts tell them, and so they bring about their own destruction. 11 What sorrow awaits them! For they follow in the footsteps of Cain, who killed his brother. Like Balaam, they deceive people for money. And like Korah, they perish in their rebellion.
12 When these people eat with you in your fellowship meals commemorating the Lord’s love, they are like dangerous reefs that can shipwreck you. [*] They are like shameless
shepherds who care only for themselves. They are like clouds blowing over the land without giving any rain. They are like trees in autumn that are doubly dead, for they bear no fruit and have been pulled up by the roots. 13 They are like wild waves of the sea, churning up the foam of their shameful deeds. They are like wandering stars, doomed forever to blackest darkness.
14 Enoch, who lived in the seventh generation after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said, “Listen! The Lord is coming with countless thousands of his holy ones 15 to execute judgment on the people of the world. He will convict every person of all the ungodly things they have done and for all the insults that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”[*]
16 These people are grumblers and complainers, living only to satisfy their desires. They brag loudly about themselves, and they flatter others to get what they want.
A Call to Remain Faithful
17 But you, my dear friends, must remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ predicted. 18 They told you that in the last times there would be scoffers whose purpose in life is to satisfy their ungodly desires. 19 These people are the ones who are creating divisions among you. They follow their natural instincts because they do not have God’s Spirit in them.
20 But you, dear friends, must build each other up in your most holy faith, pray in the power of the Holy Spirit, [*] 21 and await the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will bring you eternal life. In this way, you will keep yourselves safe in God’s love.
22 And you must show mercy to [] those whose faith is wavering. 23 Rescue others by snatching them from the flames of judgment. Show mercy to still others, [] but do so with great caution, hating the sins that contaminate their lives. [*]
A Prayer of Praise
24 Now all glory to God, who is able to keep you from falling away and will bring you with great joy into his glorious presence without a single fault. 25 All glory to him who alone is God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord. All glory, majesty, power, and authority are his before all time, and in the present, and beyond all time! Amen.
Hope In Jesus
Does this happen to you? You struggle, you try your best, but still you sin. And the first thing someone does is condemn you. Maybe they don’t mean to offend you, maybe they think they’re helping; but all they do is make you feel guilty.
Let me make this perfectly clear; this book is not referring to you! This book is referring to people who intentionally sin, believing that grace has given them the right to behave any way they choose. They are like unlearned beasts who return to their previous way of life and tell themselves they’re Christians. The Bible tells us that in the last days people will have a form of godliness but will deny the power thereof.
This book is for you, to warn you what to avoid, not to condemn you. This is a book of hope! Jude is writing to you my friend, hoping to warn you about what is happening in the world today. He wants to make sure you know that there are deceivers out there who will stop at nothing in order to confuse you, to worry you, to make you powerless. Because let’s face it, you are a threat. Any person who knows how to pray is a threat to the evil present in the world today.
Government can’t stop evil; laws do not stop evil. There is only one thing that can, the power that resides within you. Your prayer can and will stop evil in its tracks. You can move mountains, you can change circumstances, you can lay down at night in peace. God has not given you a spirit of fear, but love, power and a sound mind.
If your heart is pure toward God, if you are consciencely believing in God, and His son Jesus Christ you have nothing to fear. You have the promise of The Apostle John, “But if we confess our sins to him, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness.”
God really isn’t much interested in our actions. It's our hearts that He pays attention to. Many people are still hung up on trying to fulfill the law of the old covenant; they either have forgotten the concept of grace or never knew it to begin with. If you fall short, all it means is you are living in a fallen world and sometimes you miss the mark.
So, don’t let others condemn you when you miss that mark. Pick yourself up, ask for forgiveness and move forward. Don’t let anyone lay extra burdens on your, demanding you follow rituals and traditions. Know this, your salvation is a gift, it cannot be earned, nor is it kept through works. Remember Galatians Chapter 3;
“1 Oh, foolish Galatians! Who has cast an evil spell on you? For the meaning of Jesus Christ’s death was made as clear to you as if you had seen a picture of his death on the cross. 2 Let me ask you this one question: Did you receive the Holy Spirit by obeying the law of Moses? Of course not! You received the Spirit because you believed the message you heard about Christ. 3 How foolish can you be? After starting your new lives in the Spirit, why are you now trying to become perfect by your own human effort? 4 Have you experienced [*] so much for nothing? Surely it was not in vain, was it?”
Here is your word from God today, if salvation can’t be earned by works, it cannot be kept by works. Good or bad; your heart is the important thing. A person who knowingly continues to sin without remorse is deceiving himself; but a person who humbles himself before God is exalted. Heaven is a real place, and I’m sure you don’t want to miss it. The message you heard in the beginning is still just as true today; believe in Jesus, depend on His work to save you, not your own.
In today's world, it’s hard to miss the growing tension, uncertainty, and moral drift that seem to echo the warnings given in Scripture. Matthew 24 speaks of wars, famines, earthquakes, and an increase in wickedness. It warns of false prophets and deception, emphasizing that these are merely "the beginning of birth pains." Similarly, 2 Timothy 3 paints a sobering picture of the last days, describing people who are self-absorbed, arrogant, and lacking in love or self-control.
When we look around, it's tempting to ask: Are these signs happening now? Are we nearing the end?
From conflicts erupting across nations to the widespread disregard for truth and morality, many believers are seeing parallels between these prophecies and current events. Headlines filled with natural disasters, human suffering, and societal unrest certainly feel like echoes of the Biblical warnings.
Yet, Jesus reminds us in Matthew 24:36 that no one knows the exact day or hour—only the Father. Our focus should be less on predicting timelines and more on preparation, living out our faith with integrity and urgency.
This world can feel overwhelming, but we are not called to fear. Instead, 2 Timothy 3:14-17 encourages us to stand firm in the truth, seeking wisdom in God's Word and allowing it to equip us for every good work. By turning our attention to faith, love, and service, we can find peace amidst the chaos and be lights in a world that often feels dim.
The signs may be many, but the message remains clear: Be ready, stay rooted in faith, and share hope with those who need it. As we witness the uncertainties of our times, let us find strength in the promise that Christ’s return, though unknown in timing, is certain in fulfillment.
When I started this journey into researching the life of my 2nd great-grandfather, I never thought I’d get to know him in such a personal way. Through the study of Ezekiel Bolling, I came to learn the true purpose of genealogy. Not to collect a bunch of facts, but to give everyone the gift of having their story told. It is the hope of every human being to be remembered. We know we’re mortals who are on this earth a short time. But we’d like to have our memory preserved. To be remembered; that is our hope and our dream. And that is what a genealogist does. We take those cold, hard facts, and we weave those into a tapestry, a story that tells the life of an ancestor, thereby preserving his memory forever. That is the duty and the passion of a true genealogist.
The Early Years
Ezekiel Bolling, born on July 11, 1815, emerges as a character rooted deeply in heritage and history. He was likely born in Russell County, Virginia, despite alternative claims of Robinson in Wise County. Ezekiel's father, Jeremiah Bolling, migrated from Frederick County to Russell County between 1810 and 1820, shaping the family's beginnings in the region. Jeremiah, born in 1782, was the son of Benjamin Bolling and Charity Larrimore, while Ezekiel's mother, Sarah Venable Ward, descended from Shadrack Abner Ward and Susanna Clark.
The Bolling family legacy was rich, tracing back to Colonel Robert Bolling, whose lineage included pivotal figures like Edward "Ned" Bolling and Mary Agnes Bolling Baker. These familial ties connected Ezekiel to a broader, intricate web of cousins, including Nancy Baker, his future wife and fourth cousin. Their union was steeped in shared ancestry, as both traced lineage back to Edward Bolling and Mary Agnes Bolling Baker.
Beyond marriage, Ezekiel's genealogical tapestry illustrates a community built on intertwined bloodlines, providing a unique view of the societal networks of his era. This narrative sets the stage for a life shaped by history and connections—Ezekiel Bolling’s legacy begins with his place among family, both past and present.
The Bakers of Tennessee
James "Jim" Walter Baker, born in 1782 in Tennessee, was a figure surrounded by both controversy and tragedy. He was accused of involvement in the "Baker’s Rock incident," an alleged attempt at starting a cult, though this holds little relevance to his movements. A more defining event in his life occurred when Jim sold a horse in Tennessee that soon after died, sparking rumors that he may have knowingly sold a sick animal. When confronted by disgruntled buyers, Jim was not home, and his wife, Elizabeth Shepherd, assured them he would return later that evening.
The men, fueled by anger and alcohol at a nearby tavern, waited for Jim’s return. That night, tragedy struck as Jim's house burned to the ground, killing his wife, Elizabeth. Some accounts speculated children may have perished as well, though no records confirm this. The cause of the fire remains unclear, but speculation suggests it may have been an act of drunken vengeance by those men, assuming Jim was deliberately avoiding them.
Following this devastating event, Jim fled Tennessee and settled in Virginia, where he connected with relatives, including the Bollings. This relocation raises the possibility that Ezekiel Bolling, who later married Jim’s daughter Nancy Baker, might have known her since childhood. Perhaps their lives intertwined long before their union, with shared roots and a legacy shaped by the ties of family.
Ezekiel And Nancy's Relationship
Ezekiel and Nancy Bolling shared a relationship rooted in deep familial and historical ties. By 1850, census records show Ezekiel living with a woman named Nancy, born in 1812, who identified herself as "Bolling." Evidence supporting their union comes from the death certificate of their daughter, Mary Ann "Polly" Gilly. It states that Polly, born on December 29, 1832, was the child of Ezekiel Bolling and Nancy Baker. This suggests Ezekiel and Nancy likely entered into a common-law marriage around 1830 or 1831.
Although some claim Sharon Carr as Ezekiel's first wife, the timeline leaves little room for this possibility. Ezekiel was just 17 when Polly was born, making Nancy the most likely candidate as his first wife. It seems improbable that the next of kin reporting Polly’s death in 1928 would misidentify her mother, further solidifying this connection.
Having likely grown up near Nancy, Ezekiel knew her from a young age. Around 15 or 16, they decided to marry but possibly forewent a government marriage license due to jurisdictional or logistical challenges. Instead, they had a church wedding, which was a common practice of the time. Ezekiel's good standing in his community suggests their relationship was accepted, and the likelihood of living together outside wedlock seems slim.
In 1849, as Nancy's health began to decline, concerns about their children's legal rights or other implications may have prompted the couple to formalize their marriage. On April 19, 1849, they were married in Pike County, Kentucky. Sadly, Nancy passed away between late 1850 and 1852, leaving behind a legacy through their eight children:
Nancy's life and her relationship with Ezekiel are testament to resilience and the enduring bonds of family.
Who Is Sharon Carr?
The mystery of Sharon Carr remains unresolved. Despite claims that she was Ezekiel Bolling's first wife, there is no concrete evidence to support her existence. The sole mention of Sharon Carr appears as an addendum on Ezekiel Bolling's profile on find-a-grave.com, but no census records, birth certificates, death certificates, or other historical documents substantiate her identity.
In genealogy, the adage "you can’t prove a negative" rings true. While it’s impossible to definitively prove that Sharon Carr never existed, the complete absence of records casts significant doubt. For now, Sharon Carr remains a shadowy figure in Ezekiel's story, with no verifiable connection to his life or legacy.
Providence "Patty" Short
Providence “Patty” Short is another name often mistakenly associated with Ezekiel Bolling as a supposed wife. However, this mystery is straightforward to resolve. Providence did not marry Ezekiel but instead became the wife of his brother, Jeremiah Bolling Jr. The 1850 census confirms this, showing Providence living with Jeremiah “Bowlen”—a misspelling, but a reliable indication of their union. Additionally, this is corroborated by a record on findagrave.com that lists Providence as Jeremiah Bolling Jr.’s wife.
This clears up any confusion and firmly places Providence’s story within Jeremiah Bolling Jr.’s lineage, rather than Ezekiel’s.
Nancy Davis Bolling, b. abt. 1829 d. bef. 1900
Nancy Davis Bolling, born around 1829, presents a puzzle for genealogists. While her early life remains largely undocumented, her story intertwines with Ezekiel Bolling's through a marriage confirmed in 1998. Researcher Michael Dye uncovered lost marriage records in Russell County, Virginia, among which was Nancy and Ezekiel’s wedding on September 13, 1852, officiated by William G. Hale. Beyond this date, details of Nancy's life grow scarce, including uncertainty surrounding the birth of her first child, John M. Bolling, listed only as born around 1852.
Before marrying Ezekiel, Nancy Davis is found in the 1850 census living in Grayson, District 19, Virginia, in a household that includes her mother Sarah and stepfather Pleasant Perkey, following the death of her father, Peter A. Davis, in 1840. The household's composition is as follows:
Pleasant Perkey, 37 years old
Sarah Perkey, 42 years old
Eli Davis, 23 years old
Nancy Davis, 21 years old
Ruth Davis, 19 years old
Lucinda Davis, 17 years old
John Davis, 15 years old
This record substantiates Nancy’s lineage through Peter A. Davis and places her with family during her early years. By 1860, Nancy appears in census records as Ezekiel’s wife, her birth year listed as 1830 and her age as 30.
Nancy and Ezekiel’s son Eli P. Bolling’s life ended tragically on January 31, 1913. Born on October 5, 1861, Eli died after ingesting two ounces of Carbolic Acid, a substance commonly used in coal mine lamps. Family accounts recount Eli's son Andy desperately trying to stop him, painting a harrowing picture of the challenges of mental health struggles in the era.
Nancy Davis Bolling’s life is marked by gaps and questions, but her legacy persists through her children and descendants.
Nancy's Ancestors
Nancy Davis Bolling’s ancestry carries a fascinating blend of history and speculation. She was the daughter of Peter A. Davis (1800–1841) and the granddaughter of Henry Davis, born in 1756 in Rowan County, North Carolina. Peter's grandfather, Jacob Austin Davis Sr., is believed to have been born in the Patawomeque Indian Village fort (Fairfield), located in Augusta County (later Rockbridge County), Virginia. The story surrounding Jacob involves connections to Native American heritage, with claims that he married Nancy Redfern, possibly the daughter of Abee Redfern.
The narrative deepens with the lore surrounding Chief Thunder Black Hawk, a Cherokee leader born around 1700 in Canada West, British North America. He was said to be the son of Corn Tassel and Abee Red Fern. Chief Thunder Black Hawk reportedly had nine children, including Elizabeth Red Fern Blackhawk and Nancy Redfern, whose lineage is intertwined with that of Jacob Davis. While Nancy Redfern was partially English, possibly appearing white, it is suggested that Jacob Austin Davis’s upbringing in an Indian village may have shaped his outlook and led to this union, breaking societal norms of the time. Whether this story is true remains a topic of genealogical debate, but it endures as a compelling thread in Nancy Davis’s ancestry, especially with evidence of Native American heritage in her descendants' DNA.
Nancy Davis lived with her family in Grayson, District 19, Virginia, as shown in the 1850 census after her father’s death. She later married Ezekiel Bolling in September 1852, a marriage officiated by William G. Hale. Nancy passed away sometime between 1890 and 1900, leaving behind seven children:
John M. Bolling (1852–)
Lucinda Jane Bolling (1853–1929)
William Hosea Bowling (1855–1943) (marking a spelling shift in the family name)
Delaney Bolling (1857–1870)
Rena L. Bolling (1861–1929)
Eli P. Bolling (1861–1913)
Rutha V. (Bowling) Sesco (1864–1939)
Nancy Davis Bolling's story, though incomplete, reveals a life touched by cultural heritage, family bonds, and enduring mystery.
Ezekiel's Final Years
Ezekiel Bolling's final years were marked by resilience and familial connection. Following Nancy Davis’s passing sometime between 1890 and 1900, Ezekiel moved into the home of his daughter Sarah Bartley, who was living in Elkhorn, Pike County, Kentucky. The 1900 census curiously lists Ezekiel as Sarah’s brother, though her death certificate—erroneously dated September 31, 1936—confirms him as her father. By this time, Ezekiel was noted in census records as blind, a poignant detail reflecting the challenges of his later years.
Elkhorn, situated near the Virginia border and The Breaks State Park, likely served as Ezekiel's last residence. Though the records do not explicitly state it, it is believed that Ezekiel passed away there on July 11, 1907, his 92nd birthday. His body was then returned to Flat Gap Cemetery in Flat Gap, Virginia, where he was laid to rest, a testament to the strength of his connection to the land and family that shaped his remarkable life.
Conclusion
When studying a person so closely, it is easy for that person to become larger than life. My father, Elmer Bowling was born in 1920 just a few years after Ezekiel's death. This is a condensed version of my paper "Ezekiel Bolling, Larger Than Life" for a complete copy download a pdf from the link.
