William the Conqueror, King of England - Hunting William the Conqueror's DNA

My last reading about the Edmund Rice family emigration to Sudburry in Ma 1638 referenced a subtle but important reference to a "FAMILY DISTURBANCE" (IN TODAY'S LANGUAGE = SECRET). Now my search for the True nature of John Rice's birth parentage is now fully recorded above as non-negotiable because the TRUTH is at stake here, and my Family did not just fall from the Heavens as a fully formed branch of Jasper Tudor, Tacinda Tudor, Jane Grey, to Jane Mercer.....line...If you want me to proceed without your guidance that's all fine.....at 65 Im not an invalid will go to the records hall in ESSEX to seek my piece of paper that Identify's the Birth Mother of John Rice 1624. It seems unlikely to me they would baptize a male infant without the mother's name....father's could simply be unknown but not mothers. Kinds Regards to you for assistance DCR 1948

Dale C. Rice where did you see a reference to a "family disturbance" for Edmund Rice?

On line: about two weeks ago now, in the foudning family's of Sudbury, MA. Just a cryptic note saying that all family's have less than perfect histoies....that's about it...nothing in reference to John Rice or I would have been all over it. My information is Aural inside which some want to quash, but the DNA test that's coming will verify that John Rice and I share compatable DNA with the descendents of Tudor's not royal, but close relatives via The son of Henry VII other son when in exile in FRANCE...The Owen Tudors of that line is likely the Wm. Owen Tudor of Wales that I cited Early on....This connection via Tacinda Tudor to Jane Grey to to Jane Mercer is one of the last links I have to prove.....and the trip to ESSEX should put an end to the Mother of John Rice controversy....I expect to have a doccument that will link Perrott to the Tudors and all my family DNA and our faces will then make complete sense to me and hopefully the Geni community...DCR 1948

A little off topic but I really enjoyed skimming this link

http://www.sudbury.ma.us/departments/seniorcenter/services/custom/h...

And - sweet! Lovely archive for Sudbury town records

http://sudbury.ma.us/archives/index.htm

Has anyone done this for Concord, does anyone know?

this one is super too:
http://sudbury.ma.us/archives/

Dale C. Rice I am actually crazy enough to be trying to reconstruct the entire DNA profiles (autosomal, and X and Y and mtDNA) for both Edmund Rice and Thomasine Frost. So far I have 0%....but someday I think we will actually be able to reconstruct the entire DNA profiles for some of the early Colonials. We could then compare John Rice of Dedham with Edmund Rice of Sudbury and Richard of Concord etc. and relationships that arent clear now will become more clear. I expect this to take at least 5 years tho. And 20 years wouldnt be surprising to me.

Be patient, make sure each of the more recent parts of your tree are rock solid. Document, document, and go back and document some more. Work on all the local families, and again document, document and document some more. Try to find original records, see if something is mis-transcribed somewhere...go carefully, slowly step by step.

DNA test everyone you can.

Please see the dates of Birth of Edmund Rice Children listed on line at archive.org state university of masacheussets Amherst Libraries
Book: History of Sudbury 1638-1889 by Alfred S. Hudson published by Sudburry Press PO Box 218 Sudburry, Ma.

They start in 1616 with HENRY 1618 withEdward ( I understood Edmund and Thomasine Married 1618) Then Edmund, Thomas, Mary and Lydia 1627. So Im not clear about when the children arrived, two before the Marriage? Or is the author: Hudson mistaken? fyi DCR1948

I1 is the Haplogroup of Samuel Rice Con. so we presume is John Rice 1624 of E. Anglia. The Tudor DNA and John Rice's 1624 is of moderate closeness. See Edmund top line then Wm.Owen Tudor then John Rice .
13 23 14 10 14 14 11 14 1128 15 8 9 8 11 23 16 18 28 12 14 15 16 E.R.
13 22 15 10 13 14 11 14 11 28 14 8 9 8 11 24 16 20 30 12 16 16 16 wm.T
13 22 14 10 13 14 11 14 11 28 15 8 9 8 11 24 16 20 28 14 15 16 JR
For Info. only: These people seem to share fairly recent DNA and although not proved it is likely they share common ancestory within the last 500 to 1,000 years. Remembering that Wm O. Tudor is I1 not royal but from Wales and My Ancestor is Aurally identified as Tenby Seated Perrott ap Rice 1600/ DCR 1948

The auto correct closed the space on site # 20 should be blank or unconfirmed for John RICE thus it should read 28 14 _ 14 15 16..My test presumably will show a 12 in that position. fyi

It's a wise child that knows its own father.... :-D

The author was mistaken, he was giving approximate dates. You can see all the dates of baptisms etc at the ERA website.

In fact, read this
http://www.edmund-rice.org/library/ERA_Intro.pdf

Thank you, that's why I brought it up! DCR 1948

I want to make clear that I fully understand that John Rice 1624 is excluded from a Paternity by Edmund 1594....That's perfecly clear. They must however have an ancestor within 500 to 1,000 years of 1594, say 1066-1500 that would supply this level of DNA other than by Chance, since both Edmund, John Rice 1624 and Wm. Owen Tudor share Haplogroup I1.....If we deduct the most ancient first then we have a field of 1400 to 1600....and that's a managable field to invesitgate....I'll leave that to other's as now I am focused on Packing for London, Tenby, and Paris......The Bucket List trip of a lifetime: My Partner unknowningly made reservations at the sea side resort of TENBY not knowing that My aural history family was seated nearby....That's a Spirit Guide at work.....I say!DCR 1948

Hey, go for it! Even if you don't learn anything new, you'll have a wonderful time!

He is My 29th great grandfather.

Thinking outloud here: The 4 site of variance between John Rice 1624 and Edmond Rice 1594 would mean that a common ancestor to both the Perrott's and the ap Rhys family would point in the direction of a cousin to Sir Rhys ap Thomas near East Anglia around 1593.....I don't know if the Baker's or Frost men have such a connection but since the Perrott figure is now locked into the Sir Rhys ap Thomas line via son DAvid and William 1500 that means that Edmund's father has to be at least 1 step away from the direct line? I don't know who that would be....but we should be able to crack this among the GENI system of relatedness and the combined insight of all the Maven's thereby.....YES? DCR 1948

They must be born 1543 to 1573 or ages 20 to 60 years of age. We know that many sites record Margaret Baker as his mother, who was married to both brother's Henry T. Rice 1555 and Thomas H. Rice 1558. The Puritan men of the ERA would need to be excluded as this may have been extra Marital with the Margaret BAker figure.....???Anyone? DCR

AND, the BRanch leading to Henry T. Rice and Thomas H. Rice, brother born to Henry Rice 1540 ca would likely point at? The Outsider, thread to both lines.......say a Scott? We have that in the mix around this time but I don't recall any scotts connecting to Rhys ap Thomas.....They would be contemporaries of the 2 Rice Brothers of E. ANGLIA if they are from the William Rice/ Lattimer marriage.....Griffeth would be a good place for someone start, just see if perhaps there is a DNA project somewhere with first 25 sites recorded.....YES?

Dale I think it may be "off" to think of the DNA steps as being that close in time. Trust me - I think you are pulling ahead of me quickly in learning about DNA, you're doing great with it, but I get "struck" by "relatedness" referring to HUNDREDs of years, not a single generation.

Dale C. Rice The possible connection between John Rice and Edmund Rice is likely before recorded family history (think 500 AD, *maybe* 1000 AD almost certainly before 1300 AD, could even be 3000 or 4000 years back)

Men get their entire X from their mothers. So, Dale C. Rice your entire X is from your mother. *If* facial appearance was based on the X, and you were looking to explain a resemblance, you would then have to find a line from your mother to the Tudors, not your father.

Exactly, so the X that girls get from their Father and the other X from their mother constitute to 100%....Faces are inherited from the X information on the genetic transfer from Jasper Tudor to his daughter to Tacinda onto the Jane to Jane to Margaret Mercer to son Thomas to the Sons Perrott via the mother....They pass on what they get from their mother's to their daughters and the son's get father's Y & X from mother....Isn't that the same?

I see that I mistated the ratio of X to Male children....sorry, was trying to convey 50% idea but was thinking about the multiplier concept....not trying to change anything here, trying to come to a complete understnading...DCR

Kris: The cousin line of Sir Rhys ap Thomas, say the Griffeths should be a fertile list of persons aged 20-45 in 1493 and contemporay to the Mother identified as Margaret Baker according the sites I've seen. That would be Griffeth, or Vaughn....not likely a son of Sir Rhys ap Thomas as that is represented in the John Rice 1624 of record. The person may have a stewart connection as well....but clearly not a royal. Was thinking about this for a bit and the Rice cousin line does interesect with Thomas Carew line. fyi

I'll look into the Mercers but again, even if John Rices mother was 100% Tudor on both Xs it makes no difference, Your line starts with John Rice and he would have passed 0% of his X on to his (presumed) son Samuel.

John RICE 1624 X comes from unknown Mother....so we can't say much about his DNA until I get a baptismal record from ESSEX....Do you know, has anyone ever gone over to actually lay eyes on the alleged Baptismal record from the STANSTEAD Church of John the DIVINE and Mary the VIRGIN congregations? I posted the electronic address for that office after working with the Church people in STANSTEAD....My grandmother would have contributed the X for her son my Father and an X for his sisters....they would only have DNA from the most recent of parents according to what I understood you to say.....No DNA passes from Great great grand parents then? Only from Immediate generation of Mom and DAD? possibly 1 grandparent's X but the same Y DNA is ancient as the line itself then? DCR 1948

I am a direct line to him.

Since I have looked at THe Wm Owen Tudor DNA and haplogroup and they He is most likely the descendent of Henry Tudor VII son while in France, the line is named Tudor, but not deemed Royal...He known to be I-1 Haplogroup....and that comports with the ap Rice line that joins the Tudor line 4th cousins in Rhys ap Tudor being an ancient line of the Welsh scion leading to John Rice II and Thomas Rice 1570 married to Margaret Mercer....So the John Rice/Samuel Rice DNA that is similar is steming from a joint ancestor preceeding both lines and that is what informs the Henry VII DNA onto Henry VIII as well. Thus a kind of triangulation by the FRENCH Bred Tudor line of Roland DeVelville, leading to 3 owen Tudors and 2 Samuel Tudors may be helpful in unraveling this DNA Gordian Knott, YES? DCR 1948

William the Conqueror, King of England is my 26th great grandfather.

William the Conqueror, King of England is your 26th great grandfather