John Perrot The Quaker Pope Converter His writings from Bedlam Prison

Now Dale, that's nothing more than a chart of the writings of various founding Quakers, without any link to the writings themselves.

You have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that Perrot ap Rice and John Perrot the Quaker were the same person - and there is a great deal of actual evidence to show that they were not.

You are still peddling two additional unfounded speculations: 1) that Perrot ap Rice was the son of Sir John Perrot (no evidence that he was, significant evidence that he wasn't) and 2) that John Rice, of Dedham was the son of Perrot ap Rice (no evidence that he was, circumstantial evidence that he wasn't).

MBH: Scroll 1/2 way down on that list and you will find the writings John Perrot the Quaker whom My 92 year old father said was Perrot ap Rice 1598...Not son of Sir John Perrot but the son of FOSTERED SON: John Peratt II 1565 son of Robert Dudley 1532 and unknown woman. That's the heart of the story. I put the list up because the writer's skill telling his point of view is so very modern as compared to the rest of the Theologians of his age. That's the jumping off poing. DCR

PS: When I bring a point here for input and discussion most often I find no interest in looking for helpful verification. I get the back of the Hand. I am not going to do the kind of research you all do because it takes far too long and I have no time being 71. So My point in starting the discussion of John Perrot the Quaker is bring the list of his writings for you to see if YOU want to know more about his topic. The titles are fascinating and YOU can look up the items that interest YOU. I will not spoon feed you the blue lined documents unless I feel they are a new document worthy of joint examination. Let me ask you if you recall the conversations from 3 years ago? I didn't really learn how to cut and paste for a very long time and that put me at a disadvantage but the Critical Spirit gives me not an inch to have conversation....Especially where there is NO UPSIDE FOR ME. I am trying to VET find the story's True parts: Not give up and walk away as you and others want me to. Why be so onrnery to someone who wants to examine the story but simply holds onto the belief that it came from a place of Truth that you and other are not willing to see if it is. That's like a detective saying: There as lot of smoke around this topic but it can't be true so I will move on. And just so you get it right: John Perrot's mother, Margaret Mercer is the UNKNOWN daughter listed on the page for Sir John Perrot on Wickipedia. Her mother is Johanna Lovelace Mercer...the Solid RED portion of her shield on Margaret's Tomb. I brought you Perratt II 1565, his oxinesis at Grey's Inn, I brought his demise as a scoundrel to the very Sir John Perrot who gave hims shelter all his life....His son by biology is Perrot ap Rice by Margaret Mercer 1580. I brought all of that and the FAMILY is connected 5 lines from the Tudor Scions. I brought the conflicted story of Owen Tudor birth to OBE attention by the release of the Tudor Brothers at Conway Castle and his arrivial the next year carrying I-1 Haplogroup down to Henry VII and VIII through his son for examination finding that alleged sons all had the same I-1 M253 snps. I did that, not you.....so kindly give me a break as I try to frame this story in a comprehensiable way for the telling of the story. My own Father's Marsh line connects at Anne Steubbs, Codrington-Marsh to Whitehall marsh 3rd great grandmother which Is why I never accepted Geni's version that Hester Harrington DIED YOUNG as you and other blindly accepted. DCR

Dale: What part of > THERE. ARE. NO. LINKS. TO. THE. ACTUAL. WRITINGS! < did you fail to understand?

A neatly laid out chart of who wrote what is a *start*, but without links to the actual documents it's just a wall decoration and not all that useful.

Alumni Oxonienses (per https://www.british-history.ac.uk/alumni-oxon/1500-1714/pp1131-1154 ): Perrot, John of co. Hereford, militis fil. Broadgates Hall, matric. entry under date 28 April, 1580, aged 15; student of Gray's Inn 1583, as 3s. John, of Carew, co. Pembroke, kt.; brother of James 1586. See Foster's Gray's Inn Reg.

*** brother of James ***.

That would be Perrott, (Sir) James of co. Pembroke, equitis fil. Jesus Coll., matric. 8 July, 1586, aged 14; student of Middle Temple 1590, as 2s. John, of Carew, co. Pembroke, kt.; Wood says, "a natural son" (his father was lord deputy of Ireland), of Haroldstone, co. Pembroke, knighted in July, 1603, M.P. Haverfordwest 1597-8, 1604-11, 1614, 1621-2, 1628-9, co. Pembroke 1624-5, held office in Ireland; died s.p. 4 Feb., 1636; brother of John 1580. See Ath. ii. 605; & Foster's Inns of Court Reg.

Those are EXPLICIT statements that both John and James were the sons of Sir John Perrot, MP. Not "foster" sons, *actual* (and at least in James' case "natural", i.e. extramarital).

John Perrot II *was never heard from again* - not anywhere, not anyhow - after entering Gray's Inn, and was certainly dead without heirs by February 1594. Probably by 1590, possibly as soon as 1584, both times when Sir John Perrot attempted to get James - NOT John - acknowledged as his conditional heir (in case anything happened to his legitimate heir, Thomas, which in 1594 something did).

It's really too bad that you insist on piling on all this baggage and can't just discuss John Perrot the Quaker AS John Perrot the Quaker - not as the alleged son of an alleged son of an alleged union between the Earl of Leicester and an anonymous woman.

You get no "helpful verification" because all you do is post wild-eyed speculations and try to get them rammed through as fact. Your excuses are getting thinner and thinner and thinner. You "have no time" to do proper research, forsooth, because you are 71, forsooth.

There are people here *older than you are* who still do their due diligence without excuses.

As I recall, your concocted excuse for Owen Tudor being the alleged source of the alleged I1 haplogroup of the Royal Tudors was that he was the product of a rape by John of Gaunt. BUT - John of Gaunt belonged to either haplogroup R1b (as witnessed by his Somerset descendants) or G2 (as determined from the actual ancestral DNA of Richard III). There is no I1 in that picture, not anywhere.

You score a point for Hester Harington. Good for you. But that DOES NOT mean that everything else you say *HAS* to be accepted uncritically as True Fact.

Not John of Gaunt : Henry Bolling Broke IV 3rd son of John of Gaunt and he's speculative to the latest reading.

We know that the per son John Peratt II 1565 is listed as a son of Sir John Perrot knight of Pembrookshire....I am telling you that both Perrot and Peratt II do not have the R1b haplogroup of Sir Thomas Perrot. There are only 3 known families of Perrot with I-1 and the curator of the Perrot's family on line is one of them. I am simply saying that the records can lead be wrong, as John Peratt II was the son of Sir Robert Dudley and unknown woman. If you can't accept that fine. I'll go on from him to his son Perrot ap Rice by Margaret Lovelace-Mercer who did become John Perrot the Quaker / Pope Converter. Leave me alone with your doubt. Stick to the topic at hand which is John Perrot the writer of dozens of Phamplets whom I say and my father said is Perrot ap Rice which answers all the unknowns about him. Can't accept fine leave the discussion to those who are wanting to search with me, not against me. DCR

Kudo's to you have no trouble doing due diligence: I do and memory is not what it used to be. You continue to attack my person and my abilities. You are not helping me. STOP, STOP, STOP assaulting my lifetime of Public Service Work in helping others stay safe and solving crimes. MBH. You go whereever I ask for help and try to run people off. What is wrong with you?

John of Gaunt or his son Henry (IV), you still have the same problem. Wrong Y-haplotype(s). Neither one *could* have been I1.

I don't know who this John "Peratt" "II" you keep going on about was. I did find a John *Pratt* with the same birth year, but he's no help, having known ancestry and being localized to Essex (not Wales). Rev John Pratt

As long as you continue to post bad information as incontrovertible fact, the bad information will be refuted.

Perrot ap Rice same person as John Perrot the Quaker: bad information.

Perrot ap Rice son of anyone but Thomas ap Rice: bad information.

Sir Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester, *was* a notorious lecher and *did* have some acknowledged woods colts. None of them was a John Perrot or Peratt or Pratt.

Why don't YOU "Stick to the topic at hand which is John Perrot the writer of dozens of Phamplets"? As long as *you* keep making him over into somebody completely different, sticking to the alleged topic is impossible.

DNB article here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=tMOuCefwebEC&amp;lpg=PA28&amp;ots...

One of his pamphlets, described as “Crazy!” (As compared to another described as “seriously sexually crazy, no wonder declined to publish at first”)

https://books.google.com/books/about/To_the_suffering_seed_of_royal...

Thanks, Erica.

Hoo boy, no wonder his fellow Quakers had trouble with him (and vice versa)1

The MYSTERY is the person John Perrot the Quaker. Where did he learn to read and write in the style of Grey's Inn and theology? IF he is as I say the son of the John Pratt or Peratt as my father made me spell in 1978...then the combination of Sir Thomas Perrot's knights education and his priavate education in a nearby by Priory should be able to be found yes? The Records at Tenby are held in a Libary on the spit of land that juts out into the ocean there. Perhaps i can contact someone there to work on the records of Perrot ap Rice's education in and around Tenby. That should turn up something to link Perrot ap Rice and that style of very distinctive SPIRITUAL writing. DCR

Henry BOLLINGBROKE IV is indeed as suspected NPH for John of Gaunt. It's already been proved that Rollo the VIKING and William the Conquorer and Baldwin II of Flanders share that blood group. NOT G....I-1. Further: I looked at the leading families of England who descend from le Teuton de Sutton and the Herberts, ap Thomas, Blounts, Owen Tudor are all carriers of I-1 Haplogroup. Baskerville, The Suttons of Dudley descend from Baldwin II of Flanders cousins. and the too are I-1 as is Thomas Perrot son of Sir John Perrot down line and the Dudle's of dudley Castle which Print out I have as a reference for my family book. So you are wrong MS. Helms. Bollingbroke carried I-1 and so does Owen Tudor and all the Tudors down to the bastards. That's in my bailywick.

You might also look to opportunities for education in Ireland - the Irish were by no means warring tribes of illiterate savages. Trinity College at Dublin was founded in 1592 (under the Protestant Queen Elizabeth I and intended as higher education for Protestants). Their official alumni records are unfortunately spotty in places, so you might or might not find evidence that John Perrot the Quaker studied there.

NOTHING has been proved regarding Rollo/Robert I. Investigations into the remains of his descendants at Fecamp found that someone, at some time, had meddled with the sarcophagi and the contents thereof were pre-Rollonian.

They still haven't found out what became of the original remains.

This is a relatively subliterate link but gives the gist: http://www.ancientpages.com/2017/01/22/mystery-of-viking-ruler-roll...

Look you, if there *was* a Non-Parental Event splitting off John of Gaunt from the rest of the sons of Edward III, the intruder was *probably* R1b. Four out of five Somerset descendants tested R1b. (The fifth had a *known* Non-Parental Event only two or three generations back of him - and *he* was the only I1 found.)

There is absolutely no doubt that Henry Bolingbroke was the legitimate son of John of Gaunt, and shared whatever Y-haplotype he had (G2 if he was a genuine Plantagenet, R1b if he wasn't).

You keep reasoning from effect to cause - *you* are I1, therefore anyone and everyone you *think* were your direct male-line ancestors "must" also have been I1. This works as far back as John Rice of Dedham - BUT NO FARTHER.

John Rice of Dedham is a Brick Wall. Nothing to be ashamed of in that, everybody has them. But you can't break down Brick Walls with "family lore" or wishful thinking.

Head. Desk.

It is speculated that John the Quaker Perrot was in fact of English (not Welsh) (Irish-Anglican) origin.

That he was anyone’s illegitimate son has no evidence supporting it. A Birth date, however, circa 1620, is in line with what “is” known. Pushing it back 20-30 years is illogical.

https://sites.rootsweb.com/~parrott/john-quaker.shtml

https://archive.org/details/JohnPerrotEarlyQuakerSchismatic_201802

https://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A13248317

Erica, I think the reasoning goes like this: Sir John Perrot MP was Lord Deputy of Ireland, and he was somewhat known for tomcatting around. Ergo it's possible that John Perrot the Quaker was descended from a "woods colt" that Sir John *may* have left behind him in Ireland.

No evidence for, none against. The Quaker would have to be at least a grandson, maybe great-grandson, though.

Right, the “timeline” is what’s tripping Dale up.

In building trees we start with the most recent known event and work backwards from there. The Quaker had two minor daughters at Death in 1665 and widow Elizabeth. (I’m not even looking at the Geni tree which frankly is pretty good.). I mention the death event because there may be more data about it & Estate etc in archives; at this period in Jamaica they would be English. On the other hand, he’s well studied by Society of Friends, who are known for their good record keeping, and their archives are held at Swarthmore College.

So there’s two avenues for Dale to explore: what became of the daughters & widow; & what the Quakers believe is best practice for his origins [my thought is they would say, actually, conceivably part of a grouping that emigrated from England close to his birth].

At least one of his colleagues in missionary work for George Fox was North England origins.

Mary Crosse

Notice: this contemporary was born 1623. So the “missionary generation” looks like the 1620s.

“Two other Friends, Char1es Bayley and Jane Stokes, also unsuccessfully attempted it, Bayley being imprisoned at Bordeaux on the way out. Some account of his experiences he contributed to Perrot's 'Narrative,' 1661.”

Wonder if this Charles Bayley was related to Mary Fisher’s husband, also a Friend. This Bayley family was of Poole in Dorset.

https://gw.geneanet.org/cousinjeanne?lang=en&amp;pz=joan+marie&amp;...

So far Charles Bayley & William Bayley just seem like an another example of “Name coincidence.”

I would imagine because of the Barbados connections William Bayley & Mary Fisher knew / knew of John Perrot. But Perrot was schismatic, this Bayley family was not.

https://www.geni.com/path/Perrot-ap-Rice+is+related+to+John-Perrot-...

MBH: I did not work backward from me to Henry Bollingbroke IV. I worked back From Dr. John Pratt here on Geni I- haplogroup traces to legitimate son of Sir John Perrot 1528 and his son Thomas by wife Cheney of the Sinque Ports. Thomas Stuckley/ Anne Pollard my 3rd cousins 5th great grandmother who's father to son descended to Harry Storm Rice. Dr. Richard Edwardes father to son down to a Private Indiana University President still living and all on Family Tree DNA show I or I-1 Haplogroup most show M253. My line is not le Teuton de Sutton as theirs are...mine is Baldwin II strong arm Duke of Flanders and I am a 35th great grandson and robert Dudley is 25th. I reasoned that the only logical break for these I1 Haplogroups had to be at Conway Castle 1300 when Bollingbroke brokered the deal with the Tudor Bros. The myster is deep. yes?

https://www.geni.com/path/Perrot-ap-Rice+is+related+to+Mary-Crosse?...

https://www.geni.com/path/Dale-C-Rice+is+related+to+Mary-Crosse?fro...:
//William Bailey

Well hooray, you finally figured out how to post working links to paths! However, they are typical random winding Geni links of the sort that most of us users have, and they don't really prove all that much.

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.

You're still hopscotching all over the place without making any logical connections. You're still using bad technique and making unwarranted assumptions. And you're still using debunked data to "prove" connections.

The only reason there's a "mystery" is your tenacious insistence that the Royal Tudors MUST have been I1 because YOU are. But since your only known link to them is through a disputed (to say the least) bit of "family lore", it doesn't necessarily follow.

Something else that does not follow is the naive assumption that *all* members of a haplogroup *must* be closely related. Not true. G2 is a *far* rarer haplotype than I1, but Justin Swanstrom is not a close relative of Thomas Plummer of Anne Arundel is not a close relative of Richard III (to name three examples off the top of my head). If there's any connection between the three of them, it goes way way back - maybe as far as the building of the Pyramids, maybe farther.