This discussion picks up where three previous discussions about the ancestry of John Rice, of Dedham left off.
Please consider carefully before posting. You might find it difficult to Unfollow if you later want out.
Please consider carefully before linking to profiles. Every user who follows those profiles will automatically follow this discussion. They might find it difficult to Unfollow.
If you want a quick summary, please see the project page for the Ancestry of John Rice of Dedham:
Thanks, Mark. I'm pleased with the way it's developing. Still quite a bit to do. Pieces to add, pieces to abbreviate, pieces to clarify, and links to create.
I've had a lot of help from Erica and Jennifer. They deserve a round of applause too, not least for their willingness to participate in long debates over trivial points ;)
Justin: I have now 3 I-1 M253 12/12 exact matches for Parrott and they lead to Parrott born in Glauster Va. one Lawrence 1700- March 9,1746. Before I joined the Parrott DNA project there were only two other Parrott who tested I-1. This Lawrence looks to be a grandson or son Of Robert or Richard Parrott sons of Parrott 1572 the Quaker. I believe you said I needed to find live descendents with the same blood haplogroups that fit into the storyline I was trying to demonstrait..... These people seem to meet that Criteria. If you wish you can access their files on my site but I listed them by initial because they are still living...you know where to look. DCR 1948
It's like any other source -- you have to be careful what you're looking at.
If you find it on the Records tab, it's a link to an original record. Exactly what we want.
If you find it on the Genealogy tab, it's a link to someone's compiled research (Ancestral File and Pedigree Resource File). Those two resources sometimes contain valuable clues, but they're often wrong. Don't rely on them to prove anything.
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=:3242... Please review the sources named in this doccument at the bottom of the page for reliability. If no objection you may be able to declair the Parents of John Parrott II 1572 Waterford, Ir. DCR
I see no proof of parents in this tree. In fact the compiler is very careful to make sources clear for each of the assertions. The evidence is compelling for residence and land ownership; considering time & place, reasonable for marriages; and no evidence to support parents. The citations say "this other tree says so."
At least that's the way I read the file.
Please Review the excellent Timeline. New information 12-14. A John Perrott born 1565 died without issue 1583 age 18. Believed to possibly be son of Syble Jones according the the Inner Temple Register. Meaning the John Perrott 1572 became JOHN the Quaker I suppose.
Big find was the joining of PERROTT family and WHITE FAMILY (see #12)
Whatever connections may (or may not) exist between John Perrott the Quaker and this family, he can with almost 100% certainty not be the same as a John Perrott born 1572. George Fox did not begin preaching until 1647; before that, therefore, there were no Quakers. It is quite simply not credible that someone born in 1572, who would have been 75 (then considered "a very great age") at the time that Fox began preaching, and at some time after this became a Quaker and started missionary activities in Barbados (even later, if I read you right, moving to the American mainland. A Quaker preacher in his 80s or 90s who took what were then the very real health risks (even to young people) of moving to the New World would have been so remarkable as to excite some written record, still more so if he then fathered a child.
One thing I've noticed about John Perrott the Quaker is an apparent problem with his date of birth. Many sources say he was "probably" or "possibly" a descendant of John Perrott the Lord Deputy "through an illegitimate line".
A careful reading shows the problem. The Quaker appears in Ireland, with a name that coincides with the Lord Deputy. So, there is speculation they are related but no proof. Calling the Quaker a "descendant" rather than specifying the relationship shows that there is doubt about his age. If he was born about 1572, then the chronology allows him to be an illegitimate son (although still no actual proof). But, the facts of his life suggest he was much younger, a generation later or even two generations later, which means if he was really a descendant of the Lord Deputy, he would have to be a grandson or even perhaps a great grandson rather than a son.
There seems to be no doubt that John the Quaker first appears in the records about 1656 when he was a Quaker preaching in Limerick. He was arrested 1658 in Rome. Released in 1661 and returned to London. Arrested in Canterbury 1662. Emigrated to Barbados Autumn 1662, where his riotous living scandalized other Quakers. Died in Jamaica before October 1671.
From the Dictionary of National Biography: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~parrott/john-quak...
His biography seems to fit a man born about 1620 to 1630, not 1572.
ON April 7,2014 at 12:47 Pm the search engine on the Mormon site called Family Search.Org returned the following information:
John Parrott/John Perrott/John Perrot Birth at Waterford, Ireland 1572
Father: John Parrott/Sir Knight of the Bath
Mother : Sybil Jones
Death: 1665/1666 Jamaca
Spouce: #1) Prunella Parrott #2) Elizabeth Parrott 1616
Children: Richard/ Parrott/ Robert /Parrott
Immigration: 10 April 1623 aboard the "Providence/Virginia"
Residence: Paraketo Point, Nansemond River, Virginia, USA
2nd Immigration: 1662 Barbados
Marriage to 2nd wife: Elizabeth about 1615
Information derived from the Ancestral File and Pedigree Resource File
Hense my question to Curators regarding the reliability of this site. DCR
There are a very few people at the time who are known to have lived into their nineties (nowadays, of course, not uncommon; my great-grandmother lived until 99; my mother is 95). One of the many changes is adequate heating in winter; until quite recently cold weather was known as "the old people's friend" because it carried people off before they got Alzheimer's and all the other nightmares of modern old age. Remember: few people in even late Tudor times (when your alleged John Parrott was born) had any glass windows in their houses. Almost no-one had all their windows glazed. And I doubt whether glaziers were among the early immigrants to America.
Someone on the LDS site has simply put two or three John Parrotts together; as simple as that. A 51-year-old is unlikely enough to have gone to a new life in Virginia: he probably had a normal life expectancy of around 9 years if he stayed put; and Virginia was a place which left you without energy for a year or two while you got used (or not) to new biotics; i was a place for young people and a gamble at that.
I don;t know when the first Quakers arrived in the New World, but how could a Perrott in Virginia have been converted to Quakerism between 1647 and 1662, and then decided to wander off to Barbados in 1662 aged 80? If Virginia carried risks even for young people, then the Carribean carried even more risks - yellow fever, God knows what else. New people without built-up immunities died, in droves. A new 80-year-old (how would he have suppported himself?) would have stood little chance.
Among the other things that you assume are the same as today is the disease risk. Did you know that over 50% of British soldiers sent to West African forts in the eighteenth century died of disease in their first year there? The sailor's rhyme "Beware, beware, the Bight of Benin/ One came out where forty went in" may have been an exaggeration; but not all that much so. Of course our viruses and biotics were more dangerous to native populations over most of the world than theirs were to us; but all the same, the danger went both ways.
"Friends made a most profound affect on the course of American history. The first Quaker missionaries arrived on America's shores in 1656, one hundred and twenty years before the signing of the Declaration of Independence. ..."
Ann Austin and Mary Fisher, two Englishwomen, become the first Quakers to immigrate to the American colonies when the ship carrying them lands at Boston in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The pair came from Barbados, where Quakers had established a center for missionary work.
Long life seems to have been a hallmark of Parratt II born 1572. My Grandfather Andrew born 1833 was 54 when my father was born 1887 and my father was 60 when I was born. This is not a fluke, many of the Rice males have made it past 100. The study I last saw shows the average age among 300 assiciates is 73 and modal age = 82 among them. There is even a suspected blood anomolay of the TUDOR name that links it to survivability during the black plague of16th-17th centuries. If you find that all these sites are telling the same kind of story, I would think it has some basis in truth.
Okay, How about Geni?: See the Parents of James Parrott, bother to John born in ? Waterford Ir. Is this incorrect as well?http://www.geni.com/path/Dale+C+Rice+is+related+to+Sir+James+Perrot... this is where I get all my information. So it is all untrue? DCR
James Perrott's age is known. John Perrott the Quaker's age is not known. There is no proof they were bothers. That's the difference.
It's all just speculation until someone finds a document from the Quaker's lifetime that shows his birth or gives his age on a certain date. It's pointless to find a thousand internet sites that all copy the same information with no source.
Hire a researcher. The Vatican archives seems like a promising start. He was arrested in Rome. There is almost certainly a record there somewhere that describes his background.
Dale this is what FamilySearch.org says about the IGI files (International Genealogical Index)
2. Some of the information in the IGI was contributed by members of the Church about their ancestors (approx. 430 million names). The quality of this information varies. Duplicate entries and inconsistent information are common. Always verify contributed entries against sources of primary information.
The International Genealogical Index is a finding aid. Always check original sources. Entries often do not contain all the information in the original records, such as death dates or names of additional relatives. Sometimes only portions of parish records or other sources were indexed.
(and much more)
The site you asked me to look at was very clear that they were reporting what was in the IGI.
This is the same file you are seeing in many places.
Is this a file you consider reliable? FamilySearch.org does not. They call it what it is: a clue.
Mark: You may want to see the controversy in the Quaker early days begun by John Parrott the Quaker who refused to take his hat off during the prayers spoken by other :Friends. They seem to have no trouble identifying John Parratt 1572 as being the same one and his subsequent trip to Rome.
Alas Justin: John Parrott did not get near the POPE, he was clasped in jail in ROME on 2nd day of his visit there and transferred to Bedlam mental hospital where he languished for three years. He did write many letters and was released because of his affiliation with Sir John Perrott and the Quakers. But that's open for debate. Just reporting what I've read. And for the record here: You did tell me that the Genealogical / Pedigree records for LDS were generally reliable if they come from the more restricted or researced side of their web site. I gave you the location of his home in 1623 after he arrived by ship. Not reliable ?
Dale Rice 1948
No Dale, I told you that one side of the LDS records is reliable and the other side is not. You went to the wrong side. You should visit your local LDS Family History Center and have them give you some guidance in using the website.
I don't think you need any help to figure out what's wrong with the 1623 date. You already have the relevant information. Just use your common sense.
Justin: There were no" sides" from which to select. The Doccument states that Syble Jones the Mother of James Perrott on GENI, and Prunella Perrott are in Ancestral File and Pedigree Resource File. That's what i am reporting to you and others. There is no distinction to be made from the site.
In any event The Library of Congress has been enlisted to research this question of Arrival in Virginia 1623 on the PROVIDENCE and residence located at "Paraketo Point, Nasemonde River, Virginia".
The Virginia Historical Society records Henry Perrott of Middlesex Grey's INN as a resident in Virginia after this arrival so if there is a link between these two persons we should know by Friday next. I am uploading the doccument to Geni. DCR
Dale: Get someone to show you. It's very easy to use and very easy to see the differences, but if you don't see it you need someone who can show you in person.
There is an LDS Family History Center in Cathedral City (or there was when I lived in Palm Springs years ago). Call and find out their hours. Go in and ask them to show you. They won't care that you're not LDS.