Thomas ap Rice - Conjecture regarding Thomas ap Rice and his blood lineage

There is a major flaw in the Alson Martin theory Dale, pay special attention to the first line.

"About 1490, Alice married David ap Rhys, a natural son of the
illustrious Sir Rhys ap Thomas, K.G., of Dynevor, by a daughter of
Gwilym ap Harry ap Gwilym Fychan, a landowner of Court Henry in
Llangathen, Carmarthenshire. On his father's side Sir Rhys came from
distinguished lineage tracing to the British prince Urien Rheged, and
through his mother descended from the same stock as the Tudor
dynasty. Henry VII owed much of his fortune at Bosworth to the
partisanship of Sir Rhys whom he loaded with honours and appoint-
ments, while his son, Henry VIII continued to extend friendship and
favour to "good father Rhys" as he termed him. Owing to his en-
thusiasm for unconventional dalliance, Sir Rhys became father of a
considerable number of natural children most of whom found no
difficulty in marrying aristocratic wives and founding families of their
own. Among these was David ap Rhys. The Rickeston line adopted the
name Rhys as their permanent patronymic,"

Alson/Alice Martin cant possibly have been of childbearing age in 1520, the year for the Field of the Cloth of Gold
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_the_Cloth_of_Gold
She married Daffid/David Ap Rhys c. 1490 and had 7 children by 1500.
After Daffid died c. 1500, she remarried to Thomas Bateman of Honeyborough as his 3rd wife.

Even if she was as young as 12 in 1490, by 1520 she would have been 42. And she was most likely older than 12 in 1490, so older than 42 in 1520. and even 42 back then for a woman was old. Not likely to catch the Kings attention or to get pregnant even if she did.

Furthermore, as for Beatrice, laundress in the household of Mary,

"*Beatrice ap Rice or Rhys (wife of David ap Rice or Rhys, groom) (1519-1558)" from http://www.kateemersonhistoricals.com/lists.htm

Furthermore, David ap Rice, husband of that Beatrice is identified as "BEATRICE ap RICE or RHYS (d.1558+) (maiden name unknown)
Beatrice was the wife of David ap Rice/Rhys (d.1540+), a groom or yeoman of the chamber in Princess Mary’s household prior to 1525. Beatrice became Mary’s laundress in 1519 and was still with her when her household was dissolved in October 1533. She also held this post when Mary was queen."
While the David/Daffid Ap Rhys of Wales we are looking at:
"David ap Rhys settled at his wife's home, and does not appear to
have taken an active part in public affairs. He had seven children, the
youngest being born about 1500. He died, probably not long after
this, and his widow remarried to Thomas Bateman of Honeyborough
near Llanstadwell. Bateman was married four times, Alice being his
third wife. She died before 1541." (Pembrokeshire Historian)

You are trying to connect Beatrice to Alice/Alson since they both have husbands with the same name, but they werent the same person, and their husbands were different David/Daffid Ap Rhys

I have been wondering about the BEATRICE named in this story all along, and couldn't understand how the Child born in 1530 named Mary could be Alswyn's, it turned out it was her daughter's child....The BEATRICE figure then must be the daughter of Helen Tudor-Gardiner, wife of the knight Sir Wm. Gardiner who was in service to Rhys ap Thomas? The conflict in the names has been troubling me for sometime, that's why I have referred to her as Alswyn Martin, aka "BEATRICE" I thought The DAughter of Helen might be a supervisor for the Lanundry....This causes me pause for sure....I knew that DAffid ap Rhys was dead by 1540 and that would make Alswyn at least 70 by 1558 when Mary died....I beleive Alswyn died 1565 or there abouts at age 85-87 which was indeed very old....I also wondered about her temptation at age 40 -42 which is what I calculated her age if born in 1578. The Beatrice figure then would be Helen's Daughter, the grand daughter of Jasper Tudor? I don't know....I'll look at it further....Clearly this is not the course I was on so that is very much appreciated.....Do you see anything there about Helen other than illigitimate daughter of Jasper and Myveiney? I know Gardiner had been a cloth merchant in London and Beatrice's Brother's Stephen was a high church official.....?

No Really, I thank you because I have been uneasy about the name difference for some time....Daffid ap Rhys married to Beatrice is a logical conclusion to this story which I was reticent to pursue because that's a 3rd dose of Tudor Blood from Uncle Jasper via Helen to Beatrice Gardiner....we do know that's her maiden name.....Wm Gardiner was a knight and is believed by some to have swung the actual blow that struck Richard III in the head killing him.....FYI. The child William Henry 1521 born to BEATRICE is then Jasper Tudor's Great grandson and goes onto Marry Elizabeth Bateman? is that right? I also have him marrying Elizabeth Lattimer who's son is John Rice II. Not marrying into Bateman Family presents a problem for descendancy......This rocks my world all right.....Did you say Alswyn married Bateman not William 1521?

Assuming Beatrice was about 15 when she became Laundress she would have been born 1505 or there abouts....Older than 15 say 20 would put her birth 1590 so even she would have been age 30.....I've seen the date of birth but forgotten it, because I couldn't bring myself to go with the tripple dose theory of Tudor Blood.....William1521 does still marry Elizabeth Bateman but after he has children with Elizabeth Lattimer = John Rice II Robert, the first brother John I dies young....lets see if we can nail down Lattimer's death, must be about 1547?

I havent seen the marriage date reported for Alson Martin Ap Rice and Thomas Bateman, but clearly it was before 1541 and after 1500. As she apparently was his 3rd of 4 wives, clearly she died before him.

Where are you seeing this stuff about Beatrice's son William Henry etc?

William was born 1521 we know this because it was 9 mos. after field of cloth of Gold, Aug 1520 the date changes mid march to 1521. The diary of the Princess Mary Tudor shows the outlays for Clothing, education, and board for William at various locations and the last entry I saw was for August 1538 that would make William 16.....William 1521 is called HENRY in the household of Mary Tudor according to one these entry's in the household expense accounts....so the account's themselves are a matter of written certification that call William the son of Beatrice....She also has another son called Harry according to these accounts. Thus I was pretty convinced that Beatrice was Alswyn but I couldn't reconcile the two names. The one site you posted even uses the aka as Beatrice maning they didn't have the difference understood either... Alswyn's daughter Jonnet was married by 1530 and had the child called Mary, also entered into the Record of Princess Mary Tudor household expense accounts recounting her clothing expenses, and a Wedding Gown gifted to her by Princess Mary....Thus the birth in 1521 may not refer to Alswyn's William at all but a different William/Henry by Beatrice Gardiner who is the right age.....I just dropped that completely once I saw the Alswyn Martin Name. It is very confusing, I know. We do need to get to the bottom of this quandry....Also we know for a fact that Queen Mary extends the Coat of Arms and a Patent to William 1521 May 2, 1555 in partial recognition for his support during her assention crisis with Jane Grey....That's the one where the Pomegranite is on the newly patented coat of ARms. I took that to mean she was recognizing Wm. as her 1/2 brother even if born without cover of matrimony....This story hold together as a secret kept from the FAther, believed by all concerned to be Henry VIII or none of the actions make any sense by Mary Tudor...I showed that 3 children were born to Alswyn by 1521 and thought she was old to have others after that time....You say these children were born by 1500? So the child born 1521 can't be her son....it would have to be the Daughter Jonnet or Beatrice Gardner's child if the story is true..... Thomas, Jonnet, William, two more sons named as twins, Agness?, and Harry....would be the children's names born to Alswyn and Daffid ap Rhys.

All the Names and DOB's are from Community Trees: They show Martin1400 + Bowen 1430 = Alsywn Martin 1470 andDaffid ap Rhys 1470= Thomas, Jonnet, Williaim, Heuell & Euell, Harry and Alswyn all born 1500 meaning they don't know when they were born. William + E. Bateman = John I, JohnII, William, Thomas and Elsbeth ? all born about 1540 so nothing firm....I knew that Alswyn would have been too old in 1521 to have a child then and moved her dob from 1570 to 1578 which would make her 42 in 1520. The confusion over the Name Daffid ap Rhys is what still throws me....He's the son of Sir Rhys ap Thomas and Eva F. Gwillim according to Family Trees but i have seen him listed under the name Jonet mathews as Sir Rhys had 9 family's.... and Gruffed was born to Eva Ferch Gwenllian his first wife and Gruffed his only legitimate son and heir. DCR

Helen Tudor GArdiner 1560 was married to Wm. GArdiner by 1580 and they had sons Stephen who became Mary Tudor's Churchman of favor after being let out of the Tower , Thomas Gardiner, Joan? Gardiner and Beatrice GArdiner, I think was the youngest of the children so Born about
1490 or 1495 making her the correct age of 25 in 1520....

The Daffid ap Rhys I read about died 1540 not 1500 and alswyn would not have remarried at 70 to Bateman...this seems off to me.... What other Daffid ap Rhys was there? I mean if he's born to Sir RHys in 1470 that's prior to Bosworth by 15 years....Sir Rhys son by Jonet Mathews is that a second Daffid to Eva's Daffid?

I dont think anyone is sure when Beatrice Gardiner was born. Before 1485 as she is named in her fathers will that year. Stephen was apparently NOT the son of William Gardiner (altho he was at one time reported to be)...William Gardiner left a will which named his 5 children as Thomas, Philippa, Margaret, Beatrice and Anne.
All 5 children appear to be unmarried and not of age in Jan 1487/1488.
I'd say anywhere from about 1475 to 1485 for the birth of all 5 children....

As for who the other Daffid is, Im not sure....

Unless the Household expense accounts are wrong for the Princess Mary Tudor We do have Expenses listed in April and August 1538 for William's table and education expenses for the person of William/Henry ap Rice....Since Alswyn is too likely too old...then we are left with Beatrice Gardiner, grandaughter of Jasper Tudor, last name unknown? She would have been 37 years old by the calculations made for her at her father's death....She does not appear to be a married woman as Alswyn ap Rice was and gives this story even more unique Tudor DNA to what I was proposing....Beatrice is a person of Record, devoted to the Princess and we must assume that she stays in for the long haul until Queen Mary dies 1558....Making Beatrice born 1485 73 to 78 years of age. The story of Perrott connecting to this line of persons seems quite clear....so the last person recorded by the Princess Mary Tudor Household Expenses was for Harry....who was not born by 1500....as we have his expenses recorded for 1538 as well. What should I look for regarding Beatrice Gardiner? The Tudor Women site did not have the record of Alswyn or they would have named her, so Im thinking out loud here, if she was Gardiner, that would put her in proximity to the King as a second cousin by birth and Helen Tudor as first cousin. YES?

This line of Elizabeth Rice who marries into the Thomas Family leads to the Prothero Line and Lucy Barlow Walters....In tracing it down I did not see Lucy mentioned....she is the mother of future James Crofts son of Charles II and erstwile wannabe King who adopts the Scott Name in place of Crofts. This line is open for investigation and leads to the American Browne Family I think from past reading... Any help there Ms Erica?

Dale - there are amazing amounts of Brown/e families. Please indicate

First & last name, birth date, spouse

Or if you see the Geni profile, start a discussion from it, then I can see what you mean because I have a visual orientation.

Thanks!

I found my answer, this part of the family is well after 1630 so does not apply....I followed it out...some other family. Did you happen to see my post on the site for Homes of nobility on line? great site!

Ms. Erica: The Rice Pudding Doccument with a Library of Congress number (?) I'll have run that down for you, cites unequivically that John Rice 1624 is the son of Tamzine Rice, which could be true if the father was not Edmund as the DNA PROVES....My point here, is the Aural History I provided to the discussion means the behaviors of leaving John Rice 1624 behind in Stanstead upon their emigration and his reappearing in FRAMINGHAM/ and his otath taking of 1642 puts him back into the lives of his mother in Dedham. I know you say his blood group is Rare in south Wales 1623-24 but if my bloodgroup is I1 then we have the proof that John Rice and I connect. What then comes into question is why is the blood not R1b1 as a Plantagenat/Tudor descendant should be. I do want to understand how the determination was made for the RECONSTRUCTED DNA of John Rice 1624 was made from two Samuels, his sons born in Dedham and then moved on to Con.

Many times books publish things that aren't true. Unless the book has a source citation on the fact that we can look up and verify, we have to assume that the author may have been mistaken. I have shelves of books that contradict each other, it was very common for mistakes to be published, and never corrected. If a correction ever did appear it would be in one of the major journals, usually when the family was re-researched in an article.

I am quite sure that John Rice did not take an oath in Framingham, at least not in 1642, and most likely never.

I have little doubt that you are a direct descendant of John Rice 1624 Dedham. As for how the determination was made, its pretty simple: Two descendants are tested from different lines, in this case from Samuel Rice. When they match each other perfectly one can determine that each of those values are the values that Samuel Rice had. Y-DNA doesnt mutate frequently.

As for why not what you think a Tudor descendant should be, its reasonable to think that a common Wales haplogroup would be the haplogroup, but we really dont know what the Tudor haplogroup was for sure. Even if we did, its possible to be a descendant but not a direct male line descendant, even one daughter in the line would mean that you wouldnt have the Tudor Y-DNA.

I get that....Im preparing for the eventuality that Im R1b1 a2a....If that's the case then i want to know how they arrived at I1 for John Rice 1624...that's all. My preference is not to be R1b1a2a because i think Henry Tudor VIII was not a great ancestor....I am in love with his Paternal Grandmother Margaret Beaufort, and the Plantagenant King Henry VI....Both of whom are aspirational Role Models....That would be a luxury and quite a suprise! My grandmother lines on the Mills and Earls side both trace to Plantagenants in Edmond Mortimer the Duke of March as my mother indicated....I don't mean to sound like a fool here, Im just not liking Henry Tudor much. Not that it matters one wit. LOL

Dale - they arrived at i1 for John Rice b 1624 of Dedham because that is the group for tested & verified descendants of Samuel Rice of Dedham & CT.

You are a descendant of Samuel Rice. Therefore it would be quite strange if you are NOT i1.

John Rice b 1624 is "the most likely" father of Samuel Rice. The only way to know this further is to compare descendants of John Rice Jr of Dedham & Needham with known descendants of Samuel Rice. Apparently there is no one tested yet from the John Rice Jr. family.

The only possibility I see is that Samuel Rice was not the son of John Rice b 1624. If that is the case, and his proven haplogroup is i1, rare in Wales, then why even worry about who were the parents of John Rice?

Well i suppose the story of Perrott and Tamazin is not important in the large scheme of things....All other aspects of the story seem to be true so I suppose my nature is that someone has to beat me to a bloddy pulp before I yield....I will remind you that I was a police investigator and that's a trait you would want to have in the person investigating what happened to a missing loved one.....On some issues I have lightnig understanding....some other issues just take longer and more smacks in the face as it were! LOL.

DNA for geneology is still a very new field. It's certainly hard for me to wrap my non science mind around it - all those little numbers to tell me I'm from Western (or is it Northern) Europe, like I didn't notice that looking in the mirror? :):)

That's why I look at history & narrative more. I grew up on the "westward bound" pioneer stories - the royalty stories were for fun, because they were so remote from every day experience. The surprise from doing geneology more seriously is to learn we really do connect with & descend from these historic characters, just rarely in the ways we "thought" we did.

I believe you asked me once where I got the information of Anne Cheney as being the Wife of Sir John Perrott....I was just on a site that I goodgled as Perrott ap Rice 1600: Tenby and the site called Perrott notes publication of world wide books came up which stated flately that Ann Cheney was his heir...fyi they had an unusal spelling for Cheyney but it was clear who they meant....I am on the trail of Perrott's exploits and Sir John came up with Carew Castle among his assets duiring his attainder for treason...Nice bunch of people those Tudor's!
DCR 1948

They are always entertaining anyway ...

The source doccument was an electronic book very ancient you sound like you don't believe them....is everything suspect?

When it comes to me personally being at all "closely" related to any sort of nobility, extreme skepticism. Stastically - of course I descend from Charledmagne, most Western Europeans do.

Over the last few days I've been thinking about "our noble & titled ancestors" and challenging myself to come up with ANY who emigrated to Colonial New England.

The best I can do is:

- the tragic More children of Mayflower 1620. It was a nasty divorce with allegations of adultery. The father wanted them out of his sight and shipped them off in custody of a kind (or bribed) Puritan. All died except one. And I don't think they were particularly "grand."

- Lady Moody of Gravesend, the first woman "planter.". She took tea with her neighbor Anthony van Salee who owned Turk's Island, now Coney Island, said to be a smuggler's haven. But that was New Amsterdam - not New England, and again, Lady Moody was not a "peer."

- Lord de la Warr of the Royal Province of Maryland.

That's about it. Do you know of any others?

Myles Standish was knighted I believe and from a distinguished lineage. He was the hired professional soldier by the extremely middle class Puritans who actually organized - and succeeded - in colonizing New England. The first merchant adventurers of the Roanoke Colony & of Jamestown, driven by the profit incentive & funded by bankers in London, basically failed miserably.

Yes, tracing back from the Mills family on Geni I ended up in the Family of Edmund Mortimer, Duke of March and many others before him....The EArls family seemed connected that way also the Hall trace bck from Mary Hall to Elizabeth Foote/Neimeiah Churchill back to Arabella? Not sure on that one...but I just kept follwing the hits on Geni for Rebecca Mills/ Samuel Rice
I also just scanned the wills of Pembrokshire 1500 tp 1700 finding James Rice, Perrots Son, Thomas Rice also Perrotts son Mercers, and various persons named on the monument at Tenby....But NO PERROTT...It is odd to be declared dead by the nose counters and have no Probated estate YES? The list about 150 names long and I took a good 20 minutes to scan and rescan all the names. NO Perrott, just sons James/Thomas which is interesting because the Thomas who came back to England Died 1711 and this Thomas was abpit 1676/ sp can't be the same one...Remembering Perrot or John Rice of Virginia Sponsored Thomas 1652 to come over to Va. at an undisclosed location, which I think is the trading post on the James River. See Trader John Rice Hughes

Dale - I have nothing to say about your Perrot quest I haven't already said. I do not believe they connect with your New England Rice family.

I have worked on the Churchill & Foote families of Connecticut & the Geni trees should be in good shape. There's an excellent Foote Family Association used as a guide.

If you have any questions about profiles in that area, start a discussion from that profile so I can easily see it, please.

Yes, well.....a genetic Bottleneck occured in this family concerning the traits of the Valois line as they were transmitted to Edmund Tudor via Catherine of Valois and Tudor genetic material from Owen to Helen Gardiner to Beatice Gardiner in the household service of Sir Rhys ap Thomas and arrived at the filed of Cloth of gold 1520....Henry Tudor provided a 2nd dose of Valois/Tudor/Plantagenat DNA to William/Harry 1521 who's son by Elizabeth Bateman John Rice II marries the Katherine Perrott of Scottsborgh/Gogerddan estates grand daughter of Henry Tudor via Mary Berkley....This third does of Tudor/Valois DNA is a Bottleneck resulting in very strong and repeating physical phenotypes including blood disorders/ skin disorders which match the Tudor/ Valois line....The Stewart blood arrived in 2nd great grandmother form the Churchills it seems or you would not see what you see in the RICES of NEbraska...I have researched this and a GENETIC Bottleneck is at work here....so despite not fully understnading how it was transmitted nevertheless it was, and the story of Perrott and TAMZIN connect in ways not yet seen. The Genetic distribution of these TRAITS are Profoundly obvious to even the most jaded geneologist....ANd facila recognition in police work is a scored apptitude which I did very at....Say all you wish, I have the story and the genetic history is plane view for anyone to see....and there is no other explaination except for what my father asserted to be is in fact true. My job is to find the doccumentation which places Perrott in Proximity to TAMZIN....That's all we lack because as has been stated we don't know what the TUDOR Royal Haplogroup is.......One or two lookalikes can be disounted but not 7 or 8 in the same family....This would also be true for other Children of Thomas Rice 1560 and Margaret Mercer's children.