John Rice, of Dedham

Dale - I know you like the idea that "this" Hackley family is the same as "your" Ann (Hackley) Rice, but there is nothing to suggest they are, and there is evidence against a connection to John Rice of Dedham.

The first & foremost is geographic. The second, perhaps even more important, is religion.

As rules of thumb Virginia arrivers were not dissenters or Puritans, they were economic refugees or adventurers.

As rules of thumb Massachusetts arrivers were Puritans, so were Connecticut arrivers.

And one fact you do have is that John Rice & Ann Hackley were Puritans.

Yes they were Puritans. But the people who put them togehter may not have been. My ancestor left John Rice in the Care of Puritans named ALLIN or Allen. And then the DNA trail goes south to Virginia, Barbados, and North Carolina. The Perrott Connection of Prunella & John the Quaker is still very much alive as the Fox family is also in my family of names.

Just because we don't yet UNDERSTAND how they were connected does not preclude that they were connected. That subset of logic is still in play in my view. Thankyou for your contiuing great work here on GENI.

There are a couple of issues with your statement above, if I may; and perhaps you can better explain some of the thinking behind these assertions.

"Yes they were Puritans. But the people who put them togehter may not have been. ..."

This "sounds like" you are saying the "marriage of Ann Hackley & John Rice was arranged.

Please elaborate.

"My ancestor left John Rice in the Care of Puritans named ALLIN or Allen. "

Unproven thought, no known facts to support it. Surely the minister of Dedham knew his parishioners. That is ALL we know.

"And then the DNA trail goes south to Virginia, Barbados, and North Carolina."

DNA does not work backwards in time. If you have DNA matches to people who trace their first known ancestor to Virginia arrivers, it suggests there is a common ancestor, perhaps in England, and perhaps "long before" Puritanism developed.

"The Perrott Connection of Prunella & John the Quaker is still very much alive as the Fox family is also in my family of names."

I would be less skeptical if there was one date stamped and unaltered list of names instead of this continual addition to them.

Also, in building my family tree, I have found pursuing "names in the family" a singularly un useful way to work. Too many name changers.

Geography, occupation, social class, religion ... These have been far more useful attributes.

This invites a debate between the EXPERTs here on GENI and the un-sophisticated family trail of information handed down to the present. I am not going to DEBATE anything. I am following the TRAIL I know of and recall. The emergence of memories over time as various keys to that memory unlockes them is well studied and is what is going on here....which is why the names evolved at various times. I had no full recollection when I started here 3 years ago, Now I have some semblence of that more complete recollection later after years of effort. That's to be expected and not "Suspicious" in the least.

I have respected your positon from the beginning, but I did not yield when others here said there was no puritan connection to John Rice in the beginning. Well there was a connection we simply did not know of it until the Perrott's at Sir Robert was understood. That's what I mean when I say we don't yet understand how these people connect. A little respect is all I am asking for now that we know Perrott's connect to the Rice's here on GENI.

"We" do not know any such thing as the Perrot's connect to the John Rice of Dedham family. You have found a trail of links as a result of this being a world family tree of some 78 million connected profiles. There is an implicit goal of finding links between all 7 billion people currently on the planet.

Until that is understood by you, you will continue to misunderstand the relationship calculator utility, and not use it in effective ways to find your true pedigree.

It's been, what? One year? Two years? And so far "the story" has not predicted a single unknown but verifiable relationship. That's a spectacularly poor record for any family tradition.

As well, finding relationships between arbitrary points on the World Tree says more about the depth of the data and the strength of Geni's algorithm than about where to look next.

I'm thinking Mark is right -- there are better ways to serve the Geni community.

Pardon me for existing. I choose not to ARGUE!

But, Dale, you don't choose not to argue. You "ask for a little respect" and the don't show it.

I'm going to do a little genealogical speculation myself tomorrow or the next day. But this is how I understand speculation to look like if it is to be accepted as legitimate on Geni. I'm currently doing a family called the Yonges, in Devon. One of them married a "Joyles Green, of Purbeck". I've decided that this must be "Giles Greene, MP, of Corfe Castle" [which is on the Isle of Purbeck]. So far as I can see no-one else has made the connection. There seems to be a Greene pedigree but I can't find it. I must therefore document why I think the relationship extremely probable.

The argument is as follows. Dates fit exactly.Two Yonge sisters married two Hill cousins in Dorset/Somerset. One of these Hills married a daughter of Giles Greene; his brother married Giles Greene's sister. Another Younge married a Hassard, a name which is uncommon; two Hill brothers married daughters of a John Hassard, MP for Dorchester and seven times mayor in the sixteenth century (whose biography is not on the internet version of the history of parliament series, probably because of a technical glitch but possibly because the family is hopelessly confused: there's a version of it in Burke's "Commoners" in the nineteenth century but this is obviously, and repeatedly, wrong). So I go on my interpretation of one written source, on the basis of apparently repeated intermarriages between three or four families. And I put my reasoning in the "About" Section

Much of genealogy in this period relies on heraldic visitations; i.e. oral history; the head of the family that was seeking to justify a coat of arms would tell the herald what he knew, or bothered to say, of his family - and he might lie, for that matter. It is amazing when you compare two visitations how many details differ when two families independently accept a connection; names may differ, a woman may be said by one family to be the daughter of someone who is in reality her brother. And this was of quite close relations. The conflicts get resolved (when they do) by finding a date for someone, either through an inquisition post-mortem, a will, or if you are lucky church records after about 1550. I have second or third cousins - and ones I have known quite well - who I can't document on Geni, so the oral history method don't work.

I am prepared to accept that you have mnemonic tricks which makes your memory of what your father said better than most people's. But did your father have those mnemonic tricks? And his father? Etc etc.

Mark

And one of the points about Mark's logic case "breaks down" when tried to apply to Puritan ideologists emigrating to Colonial America.

They (maybe) start off with traditional affiliations, but they "quickly" break down in the new geographic realities; and you will see that pattern, and pattern break, repeated in each generation, so by the time the Rice's are homesteading in Montana, there isn't even a Neligh, Nebraska connection to the new family.

But - you know this from your own family tree, where a woman of possibly French (??) descent married a man of known English ...

I will advise you that Neleigh is a shortened version of North Leigh, inEngland where the Perrot's hung out near the Perratt River. What does it mean? Nothing at this point, just another coincidence to ponder. Now all I did was put up an innocuous relationship which I said was coincidental, but the response of 3 very well versed persons has been less than affirming.

I do what I do and I report back. Your attacks for this simple affiliation says to me that you are not , repeat NOT interested in my story at all. That's what you have indicated even though I have done all that's within my grasp of events to show you something you REFUSE to see. No problemo....I know what I am looking for, and you clearly don't have a clue.

I don't have a clue, did you really just write that?

No, you couldn't have, it will vanish shortly.

Please explain what you mean by "attack."

You put up a path link. I have said repeatedly that this is meaningless information for me, and does not help me help you.

If you want to keep a record of path links, it is best to do that on your own document on your own computer. Or in a discussion asking for no response.

But if you pose it as a query and a request for developing information from it, then an explanation for the query, each and every time, is needed; as well as the course of action requested by your "dear readers.". Sometimes you qualify a link path with an FYI, that is helpful.

Done with this thread for today, thanks all for you continued intrerest. DCR 1948

wow that gentlemente write better englishe dan me in dhis ouvrage ....

Lloyd, thanks for these links about Robert Ryece. I was interested enough to read all of his letters to Gov. Winthrop in your link above. Ryece was certainly a friend of the Puritans in New England and took an interest in their doings. The letter I thought was particularly interesting was the one where he is reporting to persecutions in England under the Bishop of Norwich. That summer's events were the same ones that led to the flight of Rev. John Allin to America. It would be easy to imagine Ryece as someone who might sponsor the emigration of a poor relative to America.

I've been looking at other Rice families in East Anglia.

Here's a Rice family in Cromer (Norfolk):

Indenture of agreement between John Rice of Cromer, husbandman, and Elizabeth his wife, Thomas Fish of Cromer, mariner, and Mary his wife and Thomas Kymball the younger of Denver, cooper, and Margarett his wife. (29 Dec 1647)

Denver: Grant by John Rice and wife Elizabeth to Frances Kymball widow, in consideration of quitclaim by her of right in property in Denver, of messuage and 2.5a. land in Calys Croft in Denver and third part of their fen beyond the river there. (1648)

These are both from an online search in the Norfolk Record Office, http://nrocat.norfolk.gov.uk/DServe/DServe.exe?NS&dsqServer=NCC...

The tempting connection here is the Kimball family. Richard Kimball, of Rattlesden & Ipswich and Henry Kimball, of Rattlesden & Wenham, both from Rattlesden (Suffolk) were early immigrants to Essex County, Massachusetts.

Thanks, Lloyd. This you posted this the other day. Or at least I've seen it somewhere the last few days, and you've been doing some good research so I think it was you ;)

Dale hasn't had much oomph to capture new details in Geni profiles, so I took a few minutes this morning to build on the work you'd started of entering this family on Geni.

Robert Ryece, died 1590
Robert Ryece, of Preston

You or someone else might decide to fill in the details and link to your sources, or we can just leave it for now.

Michael, I hid your message. Sorry, but it would re-ignite old wars. We want to stay on topic, or as much as genealogists ever can ;)

As long as I'm doing this, I thought I might as well add a profile for John Rice, of Cromer, who I mentioned above. There isn't enough to connect him to anyone except in his, but this can be a placeholder for any future information.

"It would be easy to imagine Ryece as someone who might sponsor the emigration of a poor relative to America. ..."

We are talking about this Robert Ryece, of Preston the antiquarian ?

(beginning to understand the train of thought)

Justin - I'm "not" seeing a lot of movement from Essex MA to Norfolk, Suffolk & Middlesex MA in this period in the Mass Bay. Rather the (mysterious at times) relocations are "minister driven.".

That really is the key to these communities I think. They followed their teacher.

Granted, but I think we've been over this enough to see that John Rice's parents aren't going to just magically spill out from some source. I think it's worth adding and documenting every Rice we find, especially from East Anglia. In fact, if anyone were seriously researching the ancestry of John the first thing they'd do is start building a database.

Along those lines, here are two follow ups from my correspondent:

Mistley - burial of John Rice, son of John 27 Feb 1631
If this was John Ries, of Mistley bapt 31 Jul 1629 (not proven) you can probably cross him off your list of possible John Rices
Seax has digital images of the Mistley registers. One of your discussion group might think it's worth taking out a 24hr subscription (£5) to check the original records.

North Walsham - baptisms for children of John and Mary Rice (son John 1668 & daughter Mary 1669)
also William bapt 1665 and Thomas bapt 1675, father John (no mother's name)
It's possible, though by no means certain, that the father, John, was the illegitimate son (John Rice, of North Walsham) of Margaret Rice bapt there in 1630
Would be worth checking out original registers, including burials, but can't find an online source for these.

Estimated birth date for John Appleton of Preston is ...?

And pursuant to Justin's point - indeed make profiles as we go along. If these twigs and branches don't end up relevant now, surely they will in future.

Off-track again (sorry). I see Dale is still looking for the origins of John Perrott, immigrant to Virginia. I think he may be right in associating the family name to the River Perratt (in Dorset/Somerset) and is probably right in looking in Western England for this man. Devon gentry pedigrees quite often have people who are called Perratt/Parratt, but no-one yet has been able (or perhaps bothered) to put them together. This suggests to me that some of them at least were quite prosperous yeomen who were occasionally able to marry into gentry families. Devon families were quite prominent in "settling" in Ireland, both in Munster (co. Cork) and elsewhere, and also in Virginia.

If Dale wishes to follow this line, let him. Church records in Devon are quite good at this time. But he should know by this time that you cannot simply connect any John Perratt/Parratt that you find on LDS. The Yarde family in Devon, on which I have done a little research, seems to have hundreds of people called Gilbert Yarde, many of whom lived at the same time.

Mark

I think our common goal for Dale is that he will begin to take responsibility for his own search, and that he will learn to check the available sources before offering grandiose solutions.

There is no evidence that John Rice, of Dedham, was the son of a man named John Perrot, and it's not at all clear which of the several John Perrots best matches the latest version of Dale's family story.

Certainly, Dale needs to be allowed to pursue the research in whatever direction makes sense to him, but let's remember that there is also a parallel search for the ancestors of John Rice that excludes the family story as a source.

This is a probability question. You can invent someone that meets your present understanding as a more reasonable candidate to my candidate but you would be missing the upline heritage that exists in my family tree.

The reason you can't find the parents of JOHN RICE of DEDHAM is that information was INTENTIONALLY squelched and kept from public knowledge for reasons the very detailed ancestory given by my father was pointing at.

By ignoring that history, you are eliminating the pool of candidates that can fill the role. The probability that his parents were yomen of East Anglia with no connection to the Tudors, Bacons, Carews, Roche, de la WARE's, Warrens, Littletons, Phillips, ap Rice's, Gardiners, Dudley's, and the DNA profile that reflects the source family of I-1 Haplogroup to the Tudors/Stewarts/ & The Russian Tsar Nicholas is simply too much to accept. Since all these people have been linked to the various women of the family, it stands to reason that the father of John Rice came from the Cousin lines which cross connect these names.

I appreciate your very hard and insightful work Justin: But your conclusion is WRONG. John Rice of Dedham is the product of an NPE which someone undertook a HUGE effort to obscure. Who that is will be revealed in time....I am confident in that as the time has come for the hidden to become known. Mark is correct about the Perratt's and that's the name given so I will stay with it, Thankyou. DCR

No, Dale. The reason no one has found John Rice's parents is that, like most of the Colonial immigrants, he was just too obscure to leave any record.

There is a relatively limited number of family names in English (although it may seem varied, and of course is compared to Korea, where there only six family names and where a tannoyed announcement at an international conference of "Driver Kim, please come to the main entrance" is guaranteed to cause multiple car crashes). Similarly there is a relatively limited number of common first names.

A single haplogroup of Viking origin is guaranteed to have descendants of noble and common status in England, Wales, Scotland, Normandy, and Russia. Perhaps even in Istanbul (the Varangian Guard, the Emperor's bodyguards, were initially recruited from Vikings via Russia; and there is a graffito in Viking runes in Aghia Sofia by some bodyguard who was bored with the service; then they took Anglo-Saxon refugees from William the Bastard's conquest of England). Remember, some 12% of people across large swathes of Asia are likely (on current genetic theory) to be descended from Ghenghis (or Chingiz) Khan.

Mark

For the Appletons, "Preston" could just about be anywhere in England. But there are two villages of that name in Kent, and an Appleton family (the Baronets Appleton allegedly started in Kent and then ended up in Essex and Suffolk. There also seems to be an early West Country connection through the Mildmays)

I'll do a (very little) work on this.

Mark