Family tree & quick navigation links:
This is the largest Parrott family in the US-- accounting for at least 1 out of every 5 Parrotts.
The tree is so large it has been separated into branches for ease of handling:

Thomas >> Robert >> >> Nathaniel >?> Amos
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Richard III
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Robert
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Robert >> Elias
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Robert >> John
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Robert >> Daniel
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Robert >> William John
Thomas >> Richard >> Richard Jr. >> Curtis

o-line.jpg - 2773 Bytes

o-line.jpg - 2773 Bytes
 Last update = 29 Nov 2024
Comments? Corrections? Additions? Please write.
Background Image: Seal of the Order of Dames and Barons of the Magna Charta; Sir John Perrot; his Castle Pembroke, King Henry VIII; a fantasy coat of arms
with the seal of the Perrot family of Pembrokeshire.

Revised and updated 29 Nov 2024. Genealogy can change rapidly, as new information is found, forcing reevaluations of previous information. Check back for updat 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 incorrect and mistaken genealogies posted on the internet and the ability to copy them without assessing the facts presented.

The Richard Parrott/Parrett family in the US is one of the families with family trees infused by false genealogies, as it shares a surname [but no known relationship] with an old, prominent Perrot family in Wales and England.

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

7 Myths & Misunderstandings:

 This lineage traces back to King Henry VIII
 o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

Many members from various of American P-rr-tt families claim descent from King Henry VIII, though he never had any children with the surname of Perrott/Parrott/Parrett. 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 Boleyn, 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, 2010). The argument that Sir John was the son of Henry VIII falls 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.

    References cited:
  • Naunton, Robert (1653) Fragmentalia Regalia, ed Edward Arber, London, 1895, pp 27-32.
  • 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
 o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

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.

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

 Connection to the Magna Charta
 o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

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 fictitious. Of the early settlers in the American Colonies, John, Francis, and Richard, despite not being related to each other, 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 necessary 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. This fictitious line of descent is shown in Harper (1916).

Richard's parents
 o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

Based on historical records and matching names on both sides of the Atlantic, it can be ascertained that Richard's grandparents were John (~1560-1602) & Margaret Perrett, from Potton, in county Bedford. His parents were Thomas (~1590-1638/39) and Margaret (~1590-1634/35), also from Potton, but who is buried in St. Botolf, Boston, Lincolnshire.

Despite 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 Richard's mother. These are listed here and discussed below.

Richard's parents as listed on Ancestry trees:
  • John Parrott & Prunella
  • John Parrott & Dorothy
  • John Parrott & Margaret Cox
  • John the Quaker Parrott & Elizabeth
  • John the Quaker Parrott & Prunella
  • John the Quaker Parrott & Elizabeth Mary Berkeley
  • John the Quaker Parrott & Dorothy Prunella
  • James Parrott & Margaret Elizabeth Berkeley
  • James Parrott & Dorothy

Dorothy
See previous section on the Magna Charter. This appears to be a mixup, where Richard's putative grandmother or great-grandmother (Dorothy Devereaux and/or Dorothy Parrott) is being confused with his wife.

Dorothy Prunella
This is a portmanteau of Dorothy (see above) and Prunella (see below).

Elizabeth (Thompson)
Elizabeth She was purported to be the first wife of Richard Parrott. However, she was almost certainly a fictitious person, as she does not appear in any record of Richard's. There is no evidence at all that Richard was married before marrying Sarah Keye Dale. For supporting documentation on Richard's wives, see:

Reference cited:
  • 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

    • Elizabeth Mary Berkeley
    There never was a person of this name. It appears to be a portmanteau of Elizabeth Thompson (Richard's fictitious first wife) and Mary Berkeley (discussed above in the King Henry VIII section). Mary was the mother of of Sir John Perrot. Mary was born ca 1510, while Richard was baptized on 10 Feb 1621/22. There is no way she could have been his mother.

    James
    This appears to be a reference to the fictitious James Parrott of Wellington. See above section on Sir John.

    John & Prunella Parrott
    John Parrott settled in Nansemond Co., Virginia, in 1622/3 (a year after Richard's baptism), meaning John would have been born ca 1600. In 1635, he received headrights for transporting Prunella his wife. If John and Prunella were Richard's parents, headrights would have been claimed on him when his parents got transported, but there is no mention of any headrights being claimed for him. John and Prunella disappear from the record after 1657.

    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 did have a son, John, who was born 1565, too early to be one and the same with John "the Quaker". 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, and would have fathered his daughters while in his 80s. 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. Furthermore, Richard was not a Quaker, and there is no record of Richard and John ever associating with each other - in fact, Richard moved to Virginia and John to Barbados, and then Jamaica.

    Margaret Cox
    This appears to be a confusion between Richard's second wife (Margaret Haywood) and his mother. It is not clear where the surname, Cox, is coming from.

    Margaret Elizabeth Berkeley
    This is another portmanteau of Richard's second wife (Margaret Haywood), his fictitious first wife (Elizabeth Thompson), and and Mary Berkeley (discussed above in the King Henry VIII section).

    white spacer

    This family can use the Perrot 3-pear coat of arms
     o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

    This coat was made famous and by the Perrot family of Pembrokeshire and its branches. Beginning in the late 1800's, several reports (e.g., Tyler, 1896/7) circulated that Richard used the seal of the 3 pears, thus identifying him as a member of the Perrot family of Pembrokeshire. It is now clear that those who made the claims never saw his actual seal.

    In 2007, documents with Richard's actual seals and those of his son were found. They do not have the 3 pears on them:

    Ultimately, arms belong to individuals or specific families-- they never go along with a surname. In other words, just because one Parrott family has rights to a given arms, other, unrelated Parrott families are not entitled to use the same arms. Even if they were, individuals cannot assume the use of arms without approval from the College of Arms.

      References cited:
    • 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 Feb 47(1):21-43


    • 1896/7. Tyler, Lyon G. Historical and Genealogical Notes, William and Mary Quarterly Historical Papers, Vol IV p 135.
    • - first to claim seal had 3 pears on it.

    Richard married Elizabeth Thompson
     o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

    Richard married 1)the widow Sarah Keye Dale and 2) the widow Margaret Haywood Dedman.

    Richards biographers claim he was in Barbados prior to arriving in Virginia. As the story goes, he married Elizabeth Thompson in Barbados, and she bore him a daughter, Elizabeth, who later married John Buford in 1662. While there were Richard Parrotts in Barbados, none were the right age to be the Richard who later appears in Virginia.

    There are 100's of trees on Ancestry that list Richard's wife as some version of Elizabeth Thompson. To be clear, daughter Elizabeth is never mentioned in any document of Richard's or of his wives'. Hence, there is no evidence to support the existence of a first wife, Elizabeth, or of a daughter, Elizabeth. Instead, the identification of Elizabeth Thompson as Richard's wife rests on some sloppy genealogy.

      References cited:
    • 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 Feb 47(1):21-43


    Richard's brothers in the colonies
     o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes

    As is evident from his father's will, Richard had several brothers, though, except for his sister, Mary Harding, there is no evidence any of them moved to the Colonies. Nevertheless, Links that Bind popularized the notion that the early (i.e., 1600s) Parrott families in the Southern Colonies were all related. To this day, there are 100s of trees on Ancestry that list one or more of the early Parrott settlers as brothers, cousins, or other relatives. These especially include:

    The advent of Y-DNA studies has made it clear that Richard and the 3 families listed above are not at all related to each other. Richard's family has a distinct Y-DNA signature. Based on Y-DNA, another of the early Parrott colonists, Nathaniel (1700-1742) belongs to the Richard group of families. As there is no obvious family connection in the USA, Nathaniel is thought to be Richard's grandnephew, and grandson of Robert, one of Richard's brothers mentioned in his will.

    white spacer

    Return to top

    Unique visitors since page launch on 29 Nov 24:

    Total page visits since launch on 29 Nov 24:

    o-line.jpg - 1958 Bytes