Parrott family origin myths

Follow the generations: Overview ⮞ Gens 1& 2 ⮞ Northumberland branch: Gens 3 & 4 ⮞ Gen 5
Follow the generations: Overview ⮞ Gens 1& 2 ⮞ North Carolina branch: Gens 4 & 5
Follow the generations: Overview ⮞ Gens 1& 2 ⮞ Arkansas branch: Gen 5
Follow the generations: Overview ⮞ Gens 1& 2 ⮞ Louisiana branch: Gen 5

Last update = 26 Sep 2024
Comments? Corrections? Additions? Please write.
Background Image: A mapp of Virginia discovered to ye hills, and in it's latt. from 35 deg. & 1/2 neer Florida to 41 deg. bounds of New England,
by John Ferrar (published c. 1667; Library of Congress)

Revised and updated 23 Sep 2024. Genealogy can change rapidly, as new information is found, forcing reevaluations of previous information. Check back for updates before using any of this information. If you cite any of this work, please include the date of last revision.

White spacer

Myths and genealogy
There is a centuries-old habit, particularly for the upper class families in England, to embellish their genealogies and family histories as a way to gain prestige and justify their social standing. The ability to spread the misinformation has been exacerbated by false genealogies posted on the internet and the ability to copy them without assessing the facts presented.

The Lawrence Parrott family in the US is one of these, as it shares a surname [but most likely no relationship] with an old, prominent Perrott family in Wales and England. Today, there are 4 known branches of this family in the USA.

The incorrect information most commonly appearing on the internet about this family's ancestors & early generations in the USA is presented and explained here.

9 Myths & Misunderstandings:

This lineage traces back to King Henry VIII

Relevant to: All 4 branches

Many members from various of American Parrott families claim descent from King Henry VIII, though he never had any children with the surname of Perrott/Parrott. Nevertheless, it was widely believed that Sir John Perrot (1527-1592) was the bastard son of Henry VIII (for example, see Owen, 1902). As the story goes, Mary Berkeley (Sir John's mother) was mistress to King Henry VIII. When he started courting Ann Beleyn, Mary was married off to Thomas Perrot, and Sir John Perrot was their first child.

The main source for this belief was a 1653 account by Sir Robert Naunton (husband of Sir John's granddaughter, Penelope), who had never known Sir John Perrot and used second-hand accounts to make his case (Turvey 2005). The argument that Sir John was the son of Henry VIII falls further apart when one considers the fact that he was Mary Berkeley and Sir Thomas' third child, not their first, and that she and the King are not recorded to have been in the same place during the time period when Sir John would have been conceived.

Naunton, Robert (1653) Fragmentalia Regalia, ed Edward Arber, London, 1895.
Owen, Henry (1902) Old Pembroke Families in the Ancient County Palatine of Pembroke. p. 56. "Mary Berkeley was the mother of the most distinguished man of the name of Perrot, but he had little right to bear the name, for he was the son of King Henry VIII, whom he much resembled in person and character. [...] This was Sir John Perrot."
Turvey, Roger (2005) The treason and trial of Sir John Perrot. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. p. 208.
Turvey, Roger. (2010) Sir John Perrot: The man and the Myth. Separating fact from fiction in the life of this legendary figure. The P-rr-tt Society special publication.

This lineage traces back to Sir John Perrot, governor of Ireland

Relevant to: All 4 branches

To claim descent from King Henry VIII, it is first necessary to claim descent from Sir John Perrot (1528-1592).

The main way this connection is made is by invoking John "the Quaker" Parrott as son of Sir John and father of Lawrence. As discussed below, this connection is highly implausible.

Another route is via Dorothy Parrott and her husband, James Parrott of Wellington, whereby Dorothy was Sir John's granddaughter via his son, Sir Thomas Parrott. James was a member of the Herefordshire branch of the family. The trouble with this pedigree is that Barnwell (1867) is emphatic in his Perrot Notes --as are other historians-- that these two people are fictitious. If nothing else, Dorothy Perrot is never mentioned in her father's will, nor in that of her half-uncle, Sir James.

Barnwell, E.L. 1867. Perrot notes, or some account of the various branches of the Perrott family, London: J. Russell Smith

white spacer

Connection to the Magna Charta

Relevant to: All 4 branches

The Dames and Barons of the Magna Charta have recognized a pedigree that claims there was a James Perrot of Wellington from the Herefordshire line of Perrots who married Dorothy, daughter of Sir Thomas and his wife, Dorothy Devereaux, despite the fact these two people were ficticious. Of the early settlers in the American Colonies, John, Francis, and Richard, despite not being related) have all been attributed to be descendants of Dorothy and James at some point.

Apparently, William Tucker Edwardes (1784 – 1858) of Sealyham, Sheriff for Pembrokeshire needed to beef up his family credentials, and genealogist Sir Thomas Phillipps (1792 – 1872) obliged by creating the necesary lineage. He had to have a way to connect the Edwards' lineage to the desired line of descent. Sheriff Edwards already had a Perrot ancestor, Damaris, from the Herefordshire branch. At the same time, Dorothy Devereaux, wife of Sir Thomas Perrot from the main family line in Pembrokeshire was descended from King Edward III and from Henry de Bohun, one of the 25 barons who signed the Magna Charta. So, Phillips simply invented a fictitious daughter for Dorothy Deveroux, and thus appeared Dorothy and James. This lineage was copied by other genealogists, including Burke's Peerage, thus receiving wide dissemination. The line of descent is shown in Harper (1916).

Lillie DuPuy VanCulin Harper, Colonial Men and Times: containing The Journal of Col. Daniel Trabue, the Huguenots, Genealogy, with Brief Sketches of the Allied Families, (Philadelphia, Innes & Sons; 1916), pp 87-88.

white spacer

Lawrence's parents

Relevant to: All 4 branches

Lawrence arrived in Baltimore in 1662, and settled in Virginia by 1678. Based on his appearance in the American record, Lawrence is estimated to have been born ca 1640, but no records of his birth or parents have been found. Had he been born in London, churches and their records were destroyed in the London fire of 1666. If born elsewhere in England, records could have fallen victim to the political instability of the day. The first English Civil War was from 1642 to 1651, during which many records were destroyed. Many other records were simply never recorded while the fighting was going on. Furthermore, the presence of non-conformist families during that era exacerbated the problem, as they did not enter births into parish registers.

In the absence of historical records, several hundred trees on Ancestry have picked 4 other more or less contemporary Parrotts in the Colonies and assigned them as Lawrence's father, in permutations with various women assigned as Lawrence's mother. These are listed here and discussed below.

Lawrence's parents as listed on Ancestry trees:

Francis Parrott & Elizabeth Thompson
Francis Parrott & Sarah Abraham
John Parrott & Elizabeth Marigold
John Parrott & Elizabeth Mary Berkeley
John Parrott & Elizabeth Thompson
Richard Parrott & Elizabeth Thompson
Richard Parrott & Sarah Elliott
Richard Parrott & Sarah Jason
Robert Parrott & Elizabeth Mary Berkeley
Robert Parrott & Elizabeth Thompson
Robert Parrott & Mary Cutting
Robert Parrott & Prunella

Mary Berkeley
Mary was the mother of of Sir John Perrot. Mary was born ca 1510, while Lawrence was born ca 1640. There is no way she could have been his mother.

Mary Cutting
Various trees list Mary as either Lawrence's mother or his spouse. For a full discussion on Mary Cutting, see her entry below.

Francis Parrott & Sarah Abraham
Francis was a a kinsman to the William Parrott family of Talbot Co., Maryland. He was married to Sarah Abraham, the sister of Anne Abraham, wife of William. Francis died in 1670, leaving his pregnant wife behind. There is no record of Francis having any other children. Mainly, the Y-DNA profile of this Maryland family does not match the profile of the Lawrence family Y-DNA, so it is possible to conclusively exclude Francis as Lawrence's father. For supporting documentation on Francis, see:

"Reksten, Harald and Wayne Parrott. 2009. A re-examination of the relationships among the Parrott families of the American Colonies in the 17th century. Magazine of Virginia Genealogy, 47(2):129-147

John "the Quaker" Parrott
John, a Quaker sectary, was reputedly born in Ireland, and is often said to be the 3rd son of Sir John Perrot. Sir John's son, John, was born ca 1565. John "the Quaker" married Elizabeth (surname unknown), and died in either 1665 or 1671 in Jamaica, leaving two minor daughters behind. Had John "the Quaker" been Sir John's son, he would have been close to 100 years old at the time of his death. Indications are that John the Quaker was not nearly that old when he died. Thus, it can be concluded that John "the Quaker" was not the son of Sir John.

However, it is not possible to completely exclude John "the Quaker" as the father of Lawrence, however unlikely this parentage may be. Lawrence was not a Quaker, and there is no record of Lawrence and John ever associating with each other - in fact, Lawrence moved to Virginia and John to Barbados, and then Jamaica.

Richard Parrott
Richard was christened on 10 Feb 1621/22 in Potton, Bedfordshire, England, and settled in Christ Church, Middlesex Co., which is the county adjacent to Gloucester Co., where Lawrence settled. Lawrence is never mentioned in any of Richard's documents, but mainly, the Y-DNA profile of Richard's family does not match the profile of the Lawrence family Y-DNA, so we can conclusively exclude Richard and his relatives as Lawrence's father.

Robert Parrott
Robert, the brother of Richard, was born in 1610 in Potton, Bedfordshire, England. There is no evidence Robert ever moved to the Colonies, though one of his sons did move and left issue. Robert can be excluded as Lawrence's father for the same reasons that Richard is excluded. For supporting documentation on Robert, see:

Reksten, Harald and Wayne Parrott. 2009. A re-examination of the relationships among the Parrott families of the American Colonies in the 17th century. Magazine of Virginia Genealogy 47(1):21-43

Prunella
Prunella was the wife of a John Parrott who settled in Nansemond Co., Virginia, in 1622/3, meaning he would have been born ca 1600. John and Prunella disappear from the record after 1657. There is no documentation that would either refute or support John and Prunella as being Lawrence's parents.

Elizabeth Thompson
Elizabeth is almost certainly a fictitious person. She was purported to be the first wife of Richard Parrott. However, there is no evidence at all that Richard was married before marrying Sarah Keye Dale. For supporting documentation on Richard's wives, see:

Reksten, Harald and Wayne Parrott. 2009. A re-examination of the relationships among the Parrott families of the American Colonies in the 17th century. Magazine of Virginia Genealogy 47(1):21-43

white spacer

This family can use the Perrot 3-pear coat of arms

Relevant to: All 4 branches

At this point in time, it is not known if the Lawrence Parrott family is descended from the Perrott family of Pembrokeshire or one of its branches. Given that there are dozens of Parrott families that are unrelated to each other, and that only one of these, if any, are related to the Perrotts of Pembrokeshire, the odds that the Lawrence Parrott family is related are very slim. Ultimately, arms belong to individuals or specific families-- they never go along with a surname. In other words, sharing a surname with an unrelated family does not entitle the first family to use their arms. Even if the Lawrence Parrott family eventually turns out to be related, individuals cannot assume the use of arms without approval from the College of Arms.

white spacer

Lawrence married Mary Sandra Cutting

Relevant to: All 4 branches

There are 100's of trees on Ancestry that list Lawrence's wife as some version of Mary Minnie Sandra Cutting. To be clear, not a single document exists that mentions Lawrence's wife, mainly due to the destruction of all Gloucester County records during a fire in 1820; the church records for his parish are also missing. Instead, the identification of Mary Minnie Sarah as Lawrence's wife rests on some sloppy genealogy.

The original culprit posted a tree (Fig 1) on Ancestry, without explaining how someone in Vermont married someone in Virginia (not easy in the 1600s!), or how someone born in 1859 managed to marry someone born in 1670. Once someone provided a more believable birth year (e.g., Fig 2), the tree got widely copied:

Figure 1, left: Screen caps from Ancestry trees showing the origin and evolution of Miss Cutting, Lawrence's contrived spouse (Figure 2, right).

Incidentally, a Mary Cutting, born ca 1650 in Massachusetts, did marry a John Parrott. This John would have belonged to one of the Massachusetts Parrott families, not one of the Virginia Parrott families. (Gen. Column of the " Boston Transcript". 1906-1941.( the Greatest Single Source of Material For Gen. Data For the N.e. Area and For the Period 1600-1800. Completely Indexed in the Index.): 27 Sep 1911, 2174; 6 Jan 1915, 4356; 20 Dec 1915, 5159) 39:142.

PS. Several trees on Ancestry list Lawrence's name as 'Robert Lawrence.' Not a single document exists to support such an assertion.

William married Mary Howson

Relevant to: Branch 1: Lawrence branch

Lawrence Parrott, probably the grandson of the original Lawrence, moved to Northumberland County in Virginia and married Mary. Her name is known from her will, but not a single record has been found that documents her surname.

Neal F. Mears, a genealogist from Chicago, was commissioned in 1959 to do the genealogy of Rhodam Yarrott McElroy, a descendant of Lawrence & Mary via their grandson Rhodam, on the occassion of his promotion to Rear Admiral. Mears deduced that Mary's maiden name was Howson, based on a 1736 land division that took place between Richard Howson and Lawrence Parrott (Mears, Neal F. 1959. Rhodam Yarrott McElroy genealogy. Chicago.)

Mears provides strong circumstantial evidence that Mary's surname was indeed Howson. While the evidence still falls short of proof, it probably meets the Genealogical Proof Standard.

white spacer

George, son of William and Hannah, married Lucy Longest

Relevant to: Branches 3 & 4: Robert & George branches

On 17 May 1772, George Parrott married Lucy Longest in Kingston Parish, Gloucester Co., Virginia (KINGSTON PARISH VESTRY BOOK 1679 - 1796, compiled by C.G. Chamberlayne). Some trees on Ancestry consider this George to be the son of William and Hannah Hughlett Parrott of Northumberland Co.

William and Hannah did have a son George in Northumberland County, who is mentioned in his father's will and then disappears from the record. George's age can be estimated given he and his siblings are listed in birth order in the will, and the birthdays of his immediate siblings are known. Accordingly, George was born ca 1760. He would have been about 12 years old when Lucy Longest got married. Thus, Lucy Longest must have married another George Parrott. Nevertheless, George, son of William & Hannah, might be the Branch 4 George who later appeared in South Carolina. He was the right age and the right type of Y-DNA to be the son of William and Hannah. More evidence is needed before any conclusions can be reached.

The identity of George, Lucy's husband, remains unknown, given the destruction of all Gloucester County records during a fire in 1820. Given the time period and location, this George must have been a great-grandson of the original Lawrence who originally settled in Kingston Parish. For George's possible parentage, see the early family reconstruction.

PS- Some trees list the name of William and Hannah's son as George Washington Parrott. Aside from the complete lack of records supporting this name, note that George Washington had not risen to prominence in 1760, so there would have been no reason to name anyone after him. 'George Washington' did not become a popular boy's name until the 1800's.

white spacer

Mixup of the 2 Roberts who married a Sarah

Relevant to: Branch 3: Robert branch

Robert, whose descendants eventually ended up in Arkansas, was born ca 1770, almost certainly in Kingston Parish, Gloucester Co. He married Sarah, and they moved to Madison Co., Tennessee, where they lived out their lives. This Robert was 81 years old in the 1850 census for Madison Co., Tennessee, where he is living with his grandchildren, who later appear in Tuckerman Co., Arkansas. One grandson is named 'Norflet,' making him easy to trace.

At the same time, a second Robert Parrott was born in Gloucester Co., ca 1772, and eventually reached the rank of colonel. He married Sarah Reade in Virginia in 1799, and Robert and Sarah lived out their lives in Virginia.

Needless to say, having two contemporaneous Roberts originating in the same place has led to much confusion, particularly since they both married women named Sarah/Sally. However, this second Robert died in 1833, making it clear these 2 Roberts were separate people.

Photo: Obituary for Col. Robert Parrott, 1833, long-time resident of Fredericksburg, VA, and for his wife, who died 1826 in Fredericksburg.

Return to top

Unique visitors since page launch on 30 Sep 24:

Total page visits since launch on 30 Sep 24: