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

There was a a Thomasine Frost who was married to Deacon Edmund Rice . She was the daughter of Edmund belgrave . According to Gilbert Park Fay Family Genealogy , The descendants of deacon Edmund Rice b. 1594 Eng. d. May 3 1663, Sudbury . Buried Wayland , mass. ( Marlborough was also mentioned) one of the ref. given was Mass Colonial records , vol . 1 . Pull it up and read it maybe it will help. i beleive all I typed in was Thomasine Frost and this was one of the hits I found.. Interesting to me as her parents are in my line. my line is edward frost m . to Thomas ia Belgrave parents of Alice Frost who married William Tilley. I beleave at that time they were either in Plymouth or Barnstable, Mass.

Perrott or Parrott. Name is spelled two ways and pronouced two ways.

"...Perrott got TAMZIN or Thomasine, wife of a prominant Rice Male in ENGLAND"

Dale,

There is more than one Tamzin, there is more than one "prominent Rice male in England."

The Edmund Rice family as noted by several is well documented, the family association is one of the oldest in America, and they keep up in "modern times" with DNA projects .. And more.

There was a mistake some years ago trying to associate his family with Welsh noble lines. It makes me wonder if that's the information your father had.

In addition, there was a mistake assigning John Rice of Dedham b 1624 as a son of Edmund Rice & Tamzin Frost. This was only disproved in 2005 with the DNA testing, which is information your father would not have had.

YES, lot's of effort went into identifying that my John RICE is NOT the son of EDMUND, but according to my father is the son of TAMZIN RICE Edmunds Wife in a likely spontaneous event or possible Rape: "Causing a HUGE row in the RICE family"....Because the Paternity of Edmund 1594 is a clouded issue....there is doubt that he connects to my PERROTT, but there is no doubt that my father STATED flat out that Perrott Rice was the father of Tamzin's child....Thus we have inductive logic at work...some take issue wtih that but we know that John RICE and his son Samuel are Haplogroup I1 and terefore since I am his descendent I too have the I1 Haplogroup which corresponds to a RARE blood group along the Coast of WALES: Tenby is the family seat for Perrott's line at CAREW CASTLE 15 miles East of TENBY....and thus falls into a RARE bloodgroup for that area....I1 is more common in E. Anglia...where Tamzin and Edmund have residence and property....We know that Perrott FAKED his OWN death in 1640 and his father Thomas having lost one Son to the KINGS ARMY helped Perrott as the JP in that area....Edmund and TAMZIN have left for America by 1638 and we have a 14 year old ancestor left behind by the name of John Rice 1624 born in the same region as Tamzin & EMUND with obfuscated birth because of a Rape or Affair, we don't know that yet....My father conteds that Perrott changed his Name to JOHN Rice and I say he assumed the persona of his DEAD CAVALIER Brother and retuned the 14 year old to his MOTHER in Ma. That's the story I have put together HERE on this site with the input of the participating specialist....and for which I am grateful....DCR 1948

Dale

We DON'T know much of what you just said, starting with

Samuel Rice is the son of John Rice of Dedham b 1624

We DO know that Samuel Rice is not the son of Edmund Rice - as of 2005.

Since your father did not have access to that information, having pre deceased it, he would have been using the then current knowledge of

John Rice b 1624 is the son of Edmund Rice & Tamzin Frost.

And he COULD have been referring to the then current thinking

Edmund Rice is from Welsh nobility.

I know of no way to prove or disprove an "out of paternity" event when the father is not known.

Therefore, the task, it seems to me, is to build the case for

Perrott Rice born (what date) is the father of John Rice b 1624 by an unknown woman whose given name was perhaps Tamzin. The birth event caused a scandal ....

Included in the information I listed earlier were all the children, they had by Thomasnia?Tamazine
Henry
deacon Edward b,.1619 d 1712
mary
Thomas
Lydia
Thomas
Matthew
Daniel
Samuel Nove 12, 1634 to feb. 25, 1684/85
Joseph
Benjamin

Children by Mercy Hurd

Lydia
Ruth

Dale,

I've been checking and re-checking the ancestry of Perrott ap Rice. I'm sorry to say that your version is a jumble of fact and fantasy. Perrott ap Rice had a very respectable and distinguished connection to the Tudors, but it's not what you've been told. What we have now on Geni is a sad mix of two different Rice families.

My best guess is that one of your dad's recent ancestors, probably someone in the 19th century, was a scholar who tried to figure it out. Maybe he or she got it right, but as it came down to you the story is the kind of jumble that's very common after a few generations of oral tradition.

I will enlist the help of some other users and curators who have expertise in this area to get it sorted out for you, at least on Geni.

You should, however, continue to work with Erica and other experts on colonial American genealogy to sort out the supposed rape of Edmund Rice's wife Tamzin by Perrott ap Rice. I don't want to touch that.

Judy

I believe your info matches the Geni profile here:

Thomasine Rice

She is noted as "Mother of millions" and has almost 100 managers - presumably descendants - on Geni.

WE all agree that EDMUND RICE is NOT John Rice 1624 FATHER....Kindly do grant me that Perrott ap RICE of Rickerson/Goggerdan descent could be His Father, via a woman named TAMZIN....Perhaps not EDMUND....THERE is Robert RICE born to HenryThomas and Margaret BAKER....I don't know....but the cousin line I am siteing is between the WM RICE /1521 Thomasine Minn/Myall lines and THE WIlliam RICE/ Elizabeth Latimer line which goes to PERROTT 1600 via Thomas RICE 1570 and Katherine PERROTT....I don't understand what you are not understanding in this? He had two wives and therefore the two lines of cousins converge upon William ap RICE 1521 of the Household of PRINCESS MARY TUDOR.....What don't you get? IT's plain as day to me.....DCR 1948

There is no evidence yet connecting Perrot ap Rice to John Rice of Dedham b 1624. You have a theory - that's great, work on the proof.

Jumbled? YES, I can only relate to you what I had when I started and there was nothing but the Name TAMZIN and Perrott RICE who faked his own demise to start over again in AMERICA as JOHN RICE....Everything else I've tried to communicate to you in the only language I know, and certainly it is convoluted in and around sir Rhys ap Thomas.....David RHys Rice is not the son in question fyi Justin....He figures into the equation by virtue of Marrying Alswyn Martin.....I put the Alswyn figure into the mix confusing her with BEATRICE....But it's not the right age as Kris Pointed out 4 weeks ago....so now we have to look at a younger woman.....It turns out THAT Jonnet ap Rhys daughter of DAFFID ap Rhys another son of Sir RHys ap Thomas is Married to BEATRICE ap Rice and THAT girl, is born about 1500 making her the EXACT age to fit the HENRY TUDOR and Field of Cloth of Gold 1520 encounter.....So the child Born to her is likely the Williiam 1521 aka in the books of the PRinces as Harry ap Rhys and Mary ap Rhys born to Jonnet 1530 are the King's children....The why for is they stay in contact with the KING by doing his laundry and prosper as I have layed out for you including recognising Wm./Henry or Harry if you perfer in 1555 by granting his own Coat of ARMS....That's what I have DISCOVERED on LIne....not from my FATHER.....THIS all leads to the Perrott line and cousin lines being in contact at some point with John RICE's Birth 1524. Like I said, I want to hash this out....I don't care if Tamzin is EDMUNDS WIFE or not....but that's the closest relatve with the same PEDIGREE where it can come together....I know there are others but they are self-eliminating because they don't derive from Willimam Henry apRICE 1521. does that help? DCR 1948

Sorry; John RICE's birth 1624. DCR

It still doesn't work, Dale. It's never going to work in the way you want it to because it contradicts the primary sources. Perrott's ancestry is known. It is not disputed. Perrott was not a male line descendant of the Tudors, but he was a distant cousin on a maternal line. William ap Rice was not the same person as Henry, and he was not the son of Henry VIII. Probably neither was Henry. No matter how many ways you shuffle the pieces, you still come up against the evidence.

I'm leaving open the possibility that John Rice of Dedham was the illegitimate son of Perrott ap Rice by a woman named Tamzin. That's all you're going to be able to salvage from this, and even that has to remain, for now, in the field of unsupported family tradition.

Well then let us begin again: I've been referring to the line from Thomas ap Rhys 1570 son of John Rice II and Katherine Perrott. Is that not the CASE?
William ap Rhys of the Household of Princess Mary Tudor is whom? What do you say is his relevence to the story? I've told you what I've read....your turn....He was called William and Harry in the Household expense accounts on line....Are they incorrect? Is William Not the son of the BEATRICE figure: whomever that may be? Jonnett ap Rhys/JEnKins is the name I found...I didn't want it to work anyway, this is what I understood they were saying....Contradicts what source? DCR 1948 help me understand your statements I am all ears!

I NEVER, EVER SAID this was a KNOWN line.....Justin? Where did you dream that up....This has always been from the start a TENUEOUS theory of the How can this be true? That's what I have said from the beginning so we can get it untangled....BASED UPON TAMZIN and Perrot's son. How do you say that William ap RICE 1521 comes into the world? DCR

Dale,

The line from David ap Rice down to Perrott ap Rice is a proven line. The proof doesn't match your family tradition. I'm just the latest in a string of people on Geni to examine the evidence and come to the same conclusion.

Read the article I linked above:

http://welshjournals.llgc.org.uk/browse/viewpage/llgc-id:1041698/ll...

"Rickeston and Scotsborough: A Study in Family History" by Major Francis Jones, a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and Wales Herald Extraordinary (1966).

He's an eminent historian and an expert in this field. If you disagree with his conclusions, tell us where you disagree, then cite your sources. Easy as that.

I think you people have to understand something here towns changed counties.Some towns didn't exist under the names they are now. I alway use as an example, because I live here. Saugus was formed as Saugus in 1629 but the powers to be changed her name to Lynn iby 1815 what is now saugus was back to being Saugus, Lynnfield had split off. So had Nahant, and several other towns leaving Lynn much smaller. So when they say someone was born in Lynn, sure they were but it's really saugus.Depends on what part of the area they were born in. Something with cambridge and three other town, You need to understand might not be dedham. Counties have changed as the population grew. I found Rice people in about every single town and county. Quess what in the vitals( Early Vital records 1600- 1849, Dedham isn't even listed.It should be in Norfolk County. May be lumped into Concord or Watertown.
I found Tamisen Rice m. a Benjamin Parminter on Sept 22, 1680. in Sudbury, Middlesex County.
Also found Tomazne ( may really tamisen) wife of Edmund Rice , death June 13, 1654.
Fair warning there are a lot of Rice people out there. There's a lot to go through.
As far as Plantagenet connections I have no clue. Why doesn't someone check out Plantagenet Ancesty by Douglas Richardson He might have something usefull in there.

Thanks, Judy. I don't think this problem involves a problem with boundaries. We all know about those. John Rice was married at Dedham in 1649, and admitted in 1651. There's no evidence of him anywhere else earlier in Mass. So, he was there and nowhere else. The changing boundaries don't affect the problem.

Douglas Richardson does not deal with this line, nor do any of the other popular American reference works.

Welsh journals.OrG is not available on line right now but I read pages 19 through 21 earlier as you suggested, and I had seen all of it last February...That's where I came up with the name Alswyin Martin instead of BEATRICE like the Women of the Tudor Court....I had to include her, but DAVid ap Rice and Alswyn Martin are not the BEATRICE and Daffid ap rice with a Daughter JONNET born about 1500 unless I misread it.....David's mother is listed as Eva Ferch Henry....Different Woman wrong David....The one I cite is DAFFID of Jonnet Mathews and Sir Rhy ap Thomas.....fyi. DCR 1948

PS: I have written Bob RICE of ERA and he is suggesting a test at 101 markers, I have 1/2 that in CASH....but he said there was financial assistance if I didn't want....and I don't, because of my trip in Sept. to TENBY...fyi so hopefully they will accept my $149/ and give me the results on Y and Mt. DNA for the same price and Family Ancestory.com....just fyi.DCR 1948

I have never disputed PERROTT ancestory: Im the one who found it last February and told Y'all about it....But being told it does not comport when I have eyes in my head that says he's descendant from Catherine Perrott and John Rice II of RICKERSon is bit unnerving....I m here to figure this out....my schema is my current understanding....I have approached this openly and you continue to say I have a PRECONCEIVED notion which is utterly untrue....The only thing that makes sense is to test and see if my father's statement fit's and so far it seems to.....so kindly stop loading my efforts with preconceived Ideas other than what I was told.....You all have convinced me of the story that John Rice 1624 was 14 when Edmund and Thomasine left for Ma....that is TRUE......I can subtract as you can....now how did he get to the Dedham community? I dunno? you tell me....I told you one possible way....but unless he had passage paid for him at age 26 or had his own money....then my story is better than yours....Why? because my story comports with human behavior of jealsousy and RAGE and recrimination....and we know that John RICE WORKED for his father in Law Hackley....and would never ever be allowed into DEDHAM without a PURITAN stamp of approval....Right? Now showing up at age 16 under escort by his DNA father and going to FRAMINGHAM to start is more credible than popping out of the sky to Marry is it not? I say yes....The fact is he does Marry....and we have the best minds that say his son SAMUEL born 8 years after his first son John Dies in infancy is a reasonable assumption made by everyone up until now....What are the facts? Let us reason together.....It's right here in front of us....in my opinion....My discussion with you is based upon the idea that we can work out the TRUTH over time....My effororts are to make sense of the data collected thus far....that's all. DCR 1948

Dale

I'm not sure you have a context for the early arrivers to Massachusetts & that may be part of what's throwing you?

Over 20,000 people left (what is now) the United Kingdom between 1620-1640. Then it stopped because of Cromwell's Revolution. The religious troubled were over (for a while). In fact quite a few colonists returned .

The migrations were to

A) Virginia - "merchant / adventurers"
B) New England - "saints & sinners"

(Nb: of course I am speaking in broad generalities)

John of Dedham was a B.

So - who were these people, how did they get here, and why?

They took ships. They were recruited. They traveled in family groups. They looked for strong, craft skilled, working persons, willing to pioneer & take a chance. Many were religious refugees as mentioned until you're sick of hearing it.:):)

If John came about age 20 as a single person & he had some skills on offer - farming of course, but weaving, carpentry, etc were also recruited - he is an excellent candidate for pioneering.

That he stayed in Dedham (Justin & I both had ancestors who moved on) suggests he fit in comfortably. He had his allotment, he raised his children, he didn't get into trouble, he did some service to the town.

And then in the next generation his children expanded their farms, or started to move on to new territory opening up in Connecticut - as your ancestor Samuel did.

I don't want to use the word "typical" because to paraphrase Tolstoy, every family is unique. But certainly there is nothing that seems unusual from, say, my farming ancestors of Concord.

I should also add - "and some of my ancestors arrived as single working men." Abigail Rice, daughter of Richard Rice of Concord, married Dr Reade, b abt 1623, possibly in London. His ancestry was subject to a book reviewed as "possibly the worst hash made of early Reade families conceiveable" (but quite good in later generations where the author had access to actual facts).

There is no record of Dr Reade's arrival, our 1st knowledge is from birth records of his children (Concord records are not as good as Dedham's). A couple of his children moved on to Connecticut ... Is this sounding familiar yet?

Im pretty clear that he did fit in...Im also pretty sure he was 16 upon arrival and 23 when he married....with the support of EDMUND and Thomasine....he did as he was instructed....That seems clear....I will look again for the OATH data notes I took...Happy to re-examine my assumption. but honestly, I had never heard of John RICE and ANNE Hackley before Jan of this YEAR.....as stated earlier, I began with Tamzin and Perrott Rice who changed his name to John....fyiDCR1948

PS: MS Erica, if you see any dealings between Father Hackley and Edmund RICe prior to 1649, kindly chime in....Im betting there was an agreement to Work John Rice for the hand of Hackley's Daughter in an arranged match of sorts....so land trades, or other dealings with Hackly become very important would you agree? DCR

Why do you think he was 16 on arrival?

Dale, you mis read the Framingham Oath of Fidelity information, which is very easy to do. There was no John Rice who signed it. It was signed by Henry Rice, one of Edmund Rice's sons, in 1645, and later by Edward Rice, another of his sons.

Again - there were 6 known Rice arrivers to Massachusetts before 1650. They are not known to be related (except speculatively). They are not known to have known each other either, why should they? They lived in different communities, they had different occupations, and not all of them left male descendants.

I'm familiar with 3 families from disambiguating my ancestress Abigail, I can't say anything about the Boston settlers. But the 3 families of Edmund Rice, Richard Rice & John Rice seem to have had no contact.

You could as easily in fact postulate a relationship with "my" Richard Rice as with Edmund's. You don't because of the old error of "John Rice is a son of Edmund Rice.". You don't let go of the Welsh nobility idea because of the old error that "Edmund Rice descends from Welsh nobility."

No, you are not understanding the way the utopian Puritan experiment that was the town of Dedham between 1636 - 1652 functioned, you are imposing other ideas onto it instead of reading for yourself what it was.

How does it seem clear that Edmund and Thomasine (Frost) Rice had anything to do with John Rice of Dedham, let alone instructed him to marry?

Bob Rice has the right idea, test 111 markers on the Y. Find Rice males in the UK and get them to test thru the Edmund Rice Association as well (or at least FTDNA so they can be in the project). Hope to find a match. Hope the match has a good paper trail back to early 1500s.

I've been all over the ap Rhys/ap Rice of Wales tree. Jonett/Janet ap Rhys that you mention as a possibility for Beatrice married William Warren., and died his widow age 70 in 1570. They had 9 children, none named John.

dedham was early . Yet on the online cpopies of vitals not there. Either they lost the records, or they were in corperated into another towm.Back then boundries were changing all the time.Or they jsut were transcriped. Many of Plymouth county records ( vitals ) are still being worked on. Like I said before there were Rice lines all over Mass. In almost every town And since they were involved with frost lines more then likely also over over N.H. and Maine.