John Perrot The Quaker Pope Converter His writings from Bedlam Prison

To be totally specific, "if there's any *direct-male-line* connection among the three of them" - more recent mixed male-female cross-linkages are likely, but not all that easy to find.

Justin definitely cross-links to Richard III via Edward III - Richard's great-great-grandfather. We don't know enough about Thomas Plummer's antecedents, but ol' Edward was just about everybody's great-x-grandfather - very prolific, and the younger sons and daughters had to marry whoever they could get.

Private User writes "I'm a little suspicious of the Perrot ap Rice to John Perrot II path, as it's the sort of thing that *should* have been found a long time ago. But that's not my field of expertise, and we'll see if Anne Brannen chooses to comment."

This is too late for the Welsh Genealogies. The lower cutoff date is more or less 1500 for them, though occasionally Bartrum adds more recent generations.

MBH: It is not true that I said Tudor's I-1 or I because I am. I did not say that. I said They are I because 3 illegitimate sons have I and then I listed them for you. Edwardes/Bluett to and Indiana Privatue University President still living. Dr. J.Pratt (soundex derived from place name Peratt II a place name River system in England ) His PHD is a science base degree and he affirmed to me his Haplogroup 4 years ago upon request. He even looks like Sir John Perrot's Son- Thomas, by Sinque Ports - Anne Cheney's and my cousin line through Robert Dudley.... to The Tudor's are what they are because of Henry Bolling broke le Teuton Sutton line. My line is a sister at Sutton/ Roger de Coursey's daughter, who is niece of Dudley/and my line. I did not say they are scientifically proved: I say this is the information handed off to me, and I bring it here to be discussed. I see nothing that proves Henry Bolling broke's DNA is PROVED as R1, so we should leave that as open territory to be looked at. You have set yourself up ad J.S. this time around and I did listento him I just did not see the DNA the way he did. Are you a PHD in DNA and Law? I have given new ideas to be investigated. And if the Kings Attorney's came to interview Anne of Cleaves with 3 infants adopted out the same year 1541 we ought to do more than dismiss the 450 year old findings. This is a discussion not yours to edit as your OLD information is being updated by DNA findings not Tudor Political documents. Right? They are simply wrong....What is right is I and my family have Tudor DNA down 5 lines and the most important one is Cleaves/Chalfant to Richard 1541, Elizabeth, Lucy Widmer All three born in the same year and Geni shows them as my great Aunts, and Uncles. So please just back off the condemnation and look at my page with my brother, Grandfather and Father and my face as living links to the Tudors/ Stuart lines. There is no reason to be nasty to this mystery.

Roots Web page is siting John Perrot Jr. and Son Richard who are I-1 as stated all along. So you are using the wrong person to prove the point. Peratt II is named after a placename river as code to other's that he's not Sir John's Biological son. My perrot connection is female at Margaret so no connection at Y. The Y connection is Peratt II /Sutto-Dudley. That is a cousin line to the Sir John Perrot at le Teuton de Sutton Decoursey/ Baldwin II line to me. DCR

Four Somerset descendants = R1b. Supposed descendants of John of Gaunt, therefore male-line cousins x times removed of Henry Bolingbroke.

Richard III = G2 and no possible doubt about it. Bolingbroke's second cousin twice removed.

Chances that Bolingbroke was anything *but* G2 or R1b = not very high.

As far as I can tell from your latest Gish Gallop, you are mixing and mashing direct male-line descent (Y-DNA), direct female-line descent (mtDNA) and mixed descent (autosomal DNA, which isn't at all reliable that far back). You're also mixing and mashing fact, rumor and scandal.

And you have TOTALLY derailed your alleged "topic" - AGAIN.

uhh, i feel i need to way in on this as it appears that i have been referenced (I assume i am the dr j pratt) as an authority on the topic (i'm not). when conveying my knowledge of familial chromosomal inheritance, I was basing my info solely on tracking traits back though time (mainly y chromosome) i have never had a familial dna test/screen/analysis done (waiting for desperately needed improvements in fidelity and reproducibility {currently there are many errors being propagated by dna testing organizations out there]). my connection to pratts/perrots etc in the past was based on deduction with a bit of inference. at no point did i intend for my statements to be taken as gospel, etc. it was educated speculation based on limited, often flawed data. as for this discussion, its possible, but i haven't seen enough of the data to be convinced eith way.

drsjp

Researchers reply:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Isa5c1p6aC0

Thank you Dr. Pratt. I think Dale is trying to claim you as a fellow "illegitimate Tudor", descended from Henry VIII and Agnes Blewitt. There was an intended discussion of that topic here: https://www.geni.com/discussions/134989 - which, however, was repeatedly hijacked.

The consensus seems to be that Agnes was never at Court, and Henry did not visit her neck of the woods (North Petherton, Somerset) until her son Richard was about ten years old. (The sum total of evidence *for* the liaison seems to be that Richard Edwardes had red hair: https://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000007426365302 .)

Oh, and for the record: "Pratt" and "Perrot" are found side by side as separate surnames just about as long as there have *been* surnames.

The river in England is the Parrett, flowing through southern Somerset north to the Bristol Channel. It has gone by that name (with spelling variants) since before the *Saxon* Conquest, let alone the Norman.

As to Anne of Cleves and her *rumored* "children": apparently it was all just rumor, possibly fatuous, possibly malicious. https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/november-1541-anne-cleves-rumour...

Considering that Henry found Anne so un-sexy that he couldn't get it up, and Anne was so innocent that she knew *nothing* about the "birds and bees" until she had been married to Henry for some time and one of her English ladies enlightened her, the probability that there was any truth to the rumor is very, very low.

Deadly Decadent Courts - which all the Tudors' courts were and the later Plantagenets' had become - are *always* rife with rumor. But the rumors are generally about as reliable as the Weekly World News, and the stories about Royal bastards were the Tudor-era equivalent of "Bat Boy".

didnt know henry 8th was the suspected father in the debate. i didnt pass off on that. also, i have pratt coming from preaux in france (as one of many points of origin). so i dont think too much can be rest upon any one theory, even as a member of a group of theories. too much uncertainty genetically (one possible mixup can have catastrophic, exponentially increasing incorrect results). this is why i tend to avoid most of these debates claiming true genetic background.

My apologies to Dr. S.J.Pratt: I meant to keep you from the scalding remarks of this search for the Truth behind my 92 year old father's assertion in 1978. Ms. Helms does not want to discuss any part of it nor does she want You in particular to have results that compare favorably to the alleged sons of Henry Tudor. Which for the pupose of framing the discussion were listed as Dr. Richard Edwardes/ Agness Bluett mother, Thomas Stuckley who is part of my cousin line and my 3rd cousins 8th great uncle. Sir John Perrot by Mary Berkley Pugh whom I contend you are indeed a grandson via his thomas Perrot linkage. I don't recall at the moment but I thought we established your male line was Pratt the same as listed born 1565 found by MBH. I suppose my spelling of the name could be off but the Place name river was used to set him apart from Sir John's Line. I suppose I should not have tried to conseal your identity but It's often contentious where my family story bumps up against the RECORD...oh dear, what ever will we do if find Henry Tudor liked his 4th wife to have accidentally got her preganat as the Expert here says is impossible. My Chalfant line is deep 8 direct back to Lucy , Richard, and Eliabeth. As you can see the mere suggestion of anything but offical TUDOR Political History is not enough for a modern DNA based question to be posed for some. Again Dr. Pratt, I apoligise. DCR 1948

Still on the Hunt for Perrot ap Rice's Educational Venue. Thinking St. Daffid's had a Priory near Tenby? Don't know but that's a good place to look also. DCR

https://www.geni.com/path/Thomas-Stuckley+is+related+to+Harry-Rice-...

Harry Storm Rice and I share 3rd great grandfather at Edward Rice of Pomfret, Con. He and I share I haplogroup. And just so there is no confusion the R1b suggested by JS in Dr. Richard Edwards does not square with the son's of sons down to the Present day show as I-1. The mystery endures, and the investigation lurches forward. DCR

https://www.geni.com/path/Thomas-Stuckley+is+related+to+Henry-VII-o...

Dr. Pratt is quite capable of defending himself.

thanks, not sure i need to defend my self but good to know i can. as i said, i have yet to weigh in on the topic (may avoid completely until i've educated myself more on the possible connections at issue. it is my experience so far that pratt was exceptionally in england and wales from ~1000-1500, leading to many branches that may well add to confusion more than alleviate it. but i guess that's what we're here for.

sjp

My apology stands and I did not try to defend anything but the right to state a case and then have it openly discussed which MBH resists at every level. I am certainly glad that you were not part of the effort to find Higgs Boson Ms. Helms. We can each find a way to be critical: or helpful. So as I stated before there is reason to believe the Blood of Owen Tudor was that of Henry BOLLINGBROKE IV. You have registered your opinion Ms. Helms but now I am looking to see if the I-1 Haplogroup is the one that the alleged sons of SIr John Perrot carried forward to his legitimate son, and cousins at Thomas Sutckley/ Dr. Richard Edwardes can be construed as evidence against what is generally accepted. We know what you think Ms. Helms: and your opinion and that of JS have been duly noted. I said there seems to be reason working backward from known descendants that the Blood of the Scion in this case is Henry VIII is I-1. It's a valid question and I will not be run off by the stamping of feet Ms. Helms.

This is a variation of the logical fallacy "Post hoc ergo propter hoc". Certain parties *believed* (but not proven) to be descendants of Henry VIII have tested as Y-haplogroup I1, therefore Henry VIII "must" have been I1 as well.

One only has to look at the often-referenced Somersets (R1b) vis-a-vis Richard III (G2) to see that it doesn't necessarily follow. (The paper trail says that the Somersets are direct male line descendants of John of Gaunt, who was also the father of Henry IV Bolingbroke.)

Incidentally, the likelihood that the "true" Plantagenet haplotype is I1 is very slim - their line originated in Anjou, *not* Normandy, and there were not a lot of Norsemen in *that* area.

Sadly, there is no possibility whatsoever of finding anything out from the remains of John of Gaunt - they went up in flames with his tomb and everything in it in the Great Fire of London, 1666.

There is no "opinion" on whether the Somersets are R1b - they *are* R1b.

There is no "opinion" on whether Richard II was G2 - he *was* G2.

There is no "opinion" on whether the Plantagenets originated from Anjou - they *did* originate from Anjou.

There is no "opinion" that the Somersets don't match Richard - they *don't* match him. There is, at present, no hard evidence for why this is so.

And that's the difference between facts and opinions.

It's not right, at least, I think that the first of the "Folku", might indeed have been from Scandinavia, they appeared in that area after that some chieftains, petty kings, fleed and just as a fun fact, Folke means chieftain in old norse. "Folke är ett gammalt nordiskt namn med betydelsen hövding", as I see it, there's nothing that indicates that Folku is a pure original french name, and Plantagenet ancestors comes from them, if I recall it right, and I guess, not knowing for sure, that that name was not a commoners name at that time, as it occurs sparcely on some runestones but is connected to people with wealth.

One theory I have among many others is that those who went to Anjou, later sent one back to Sweden, Folke den tjocka, Earl of Östergötland Folke den Digre Ingevaldsson (Bjälboätten) even though that family had been gone from Scandinavia for over 200 years, they could take back something that they had previous lost and first until now had the oppurtunity to do so, and one of the later sons, Birger Jarl, belongs to the Haplo group I1 (I-M253), anyway, the people refered to down under this, was most likely of scandinavian origin and later refurbished to look native.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingelger
Ingelger, count of Anjou

Ulf, I would suggest you not forget about the Franks, who were more or less Germanic in origin and overran France long before the Norse had gotten out of their fjords. (Heck, they gave France its *name*!)

Ingelger's "family lore" seems to be that he was of Gallo-Roman ancestry, which sharply increases the chances that that he was G2a rather than I-anything. (The Romans brought a significant minority of G2a wherever they went -*they* may have gotten it from the Etruscans.)

Boy howdy are we FAR FAR away from the topic as announced in the title - but then, the "topic" was never more than a flimsy excuse for Dale to continue to publicize his speculations.

Yes, far away, but theories, might someday become facts if investigated, or disproven, but in the end, the truth must be what we seek, but but, too many settle for the very idea or the belief itself.

Rollo is brother or Uncle to William the Conquorer? Can we start there? The man identified as my 7th great grandfather Perrot ap Rice learned to read and write well at the Theological/Legal level at a Nearby Priory no doubt, St. Daffids will be asked if they have any record of his attending there. His father is John Peratt II 1565 or Pratt however you wish to spell it. MBH you have scoffed at my father's contentions long enough: For your edification Kindly understand that Robert dudley's Mother is our maternal first cousin and my father's family had been marrying into this line of Ancestors for at least four or 5 generations as both share a common ancestor set of great grandparents....and we all know cousins married cousins to maintain the proptery rights .

Mildred Marguriette Rice-Wanker

https://www.geni.com/path/Lady-Mary-Dudley+is+related+to+Mildred-Ri...

Jane Guildford mother of Robert Dudley is listed ast First cousin x 19 removed yes or No? The Answer is yes, so Robert is our 2nd cousin yes or no? Yes he is. We have a blank at who was the mohter of John Peratt II or Pratt if you like, but we know his DNA was handed off to his son Perrot ap Rice 1598. Why do we know that? Because not only does my family say so, but because Thomas Perrot who raised him was most certainly part of hughe French Perrot line of R1b. The first born son was/ is Perrot ap Rice . So the DNA holds up by comparing my DNA and all upline male to male births to Perrot ap Rice as we said from the beginning. A reasonable look at the cloest relatives of Dudley are his 2nd cousin John Dudley 1850 whom I share 23/25 match and his 6th cousin Robert Sutton 1637 which is much better 60/67 markers. John Sutton being a maternal Great Grand father descended from Baldwin II of Flanders. Robert Dudley is 25tj great gramdspm and Geni showed me at 35th great grandson of Baldwin who's sister married Roger DeCoursey builder of Dudley Castle. If you can't follow the smoke to the Fire Ms. Helms I have news for you....You have no proof that Henry IV is R1b but I have evidence linking every Tudor as I-1: That's called preponderance of the evidence and plenty to move forward with professionals to do this search. I can't lay out any better path because as I said from the FIRST DAY 8 years ago: I don't understand what happened but this is what my father told me. So you must stop acting like I have to prove anythin but what I have regarding Perrot ap Rice 1598 first born son who is not R1b like Thomas Perrot. There is plenty of evidence that le Teuton de Sutton 875 and Rollo are connected and I would ever so appreciate it if you would stop calling me incompetent. DCR

PS: We know that Perrot ap Rice 1598 had a son Thomas Price of Liether born 1630 ca and that he received his inheritence early from his mother Pricilla of 50 lbs sterling and left Wales for a time 1562 arriving on Starr March 2, 1652 and was met by one Rice Hughes of the James River ?? That's how the captains log listed it. We then show that Thomas Price joined in the trade on the James Rivers because it is noted that Rice Hughes received 200 acres on the York nearby the locale of the 100 acres of his cousins John Rice Ancient Planter at the Rapids on the James River 1619-20. For the years 1651- until he is cited in court in Tenby 1657? was for failing to pay 50 shillings ..Thomas Price Thomas Price clearly returned to Wales after Perrot ap Rice became Quaker and sold his merchant vessel to the Cousin Hooe Family and that line of Native American's of Pughe/Atkins / Price are my DNA MATCHES of I-1 not R1b...Thus you have two male lines to look at as J.S. said I had to find and I did. There's plenty more proof if you simply open your eyes and mind to a method of verification in DNA which got around both sides of the Atlantic at Jesse Hughes and Robert Hughes both Quakers after their Father left for Rome around 1654. Every bit of this makes sense once you plug into the fact that he was a Scoundrell from his father a Scoundrel raised by Sir John Perrot at Carew Castle along with foster brothers Willliam and Sir James. There is much to be done to Verify...and if you don't want to help in that then kindly leave me to those who will help. DCR

Does it not help you to eliminate the disproven, the impossible, the improbable, the unlikely; and “then” open “new” possibilities?

Dale, you’re just repeating stories. If you work more with facts you’ll get into more interesting possibilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Davids

This is a bit farther than I thought for Tenby but it's close enough by ship. A Knights son would have passage for that and tuition too. Geni does list Perrot ap Rice 1598 as acousin, not yet my grandfather but the linkages are all over at every major family in Wales and England to Tudor/ Sutton-Dudley/ Herbert/ Blue Knight of Gwent and Ralph Neville as 14th ggreat grandfather making his daughter and her sons Richard III and Edward IV my 2nd cousins. Again Geni links me to them it's not just my say so. DCR

Ralph Neville, 3rd Earl of Westmorland