2022/01/11

Sir John Perrot - Wikipedia (1528-1592) Not Quaker

John Perrot - Wikipedia

John Perrot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Sir John Perrot
John Perrot.png
Painting by George Powle
Born7×11 November 1528
Died3 November 1592
Tower of London
Spouse(s)Anne Cheyne
Jane Prust
Issue
more...
Sir Thomas Perrot
Sir James Perrot
FatherThomas Perrot
MotherMary Berkeley

Sir John Perrot (7 November 1528[1] – 3 November 1592) served as lord deputy to Queen Elizabeth I of England during the Tudor conquest of Ireland. It was speculated that he was an illegitimate son of Henry VIII[2]

"Sir John Perrot, was a figure of unusual power and influence in Tudor Britain and Ireland. Born near Haverfordwest in 1528, he inherited wealth and power – the Perrots had been accumulating both in west Wales for centuries – and gained more ingratiating himself with the English court.

His own son described him as a ‘very cholericke’ man, who ‘could not brooke any crosses’. He had already gathered many offices by the time he was sent to Ireland in 1571 as President of Munster to suppress a rebellion. His methods were characteristically violent – he hanged over 800 of the rebels – but he resigned after two years, having failed in his mission.

Back in west Wales he contented himself with self-enrichment and self-glorification, rebuilding in grand style his two main homes, Carew Castle and Laugharne Castle. He returned to Ireland as 1584 as Lord Deputy, with the task of crushing the Irish and colonising their land. Again unsuccessful, he returned, was falsely accused of treason by his many enemies, and died in the Tower of London in 1592, possibly of poisoning."[3]

Early life[edit]

Perrot was born between 7 and 11 November 1528, probably at the family seat of Haroldston Manor near HaverfordwestPembrokeshire in Wales. He was the only son of Thomas Perrot (1504/5–1531) and Mary Berkeley (c.1511–c.1586), the daughter of James Berkeley (died c.1515) of Thornbury, Gloucestershire. He had two sisters: Jane, who married Sir John Philipps of Picton Castle; and Elizabeth, who married John Price of Gogerddan.[4][5]

Perrot resembled Henry VIII in temperament and physical appearance, and it was widely believed that he was the bastard son of the late King.[6] The main source for this belief was Sir Robert Naunton (husband of Perrot's granddaughter, Penelope), who had never known Perrot and used second-hand accounts to make his case.[7][8][9] The case is weakened by the fact that Perrot was Mary Berkeley's third child, not her first, and that she and the King are not recorded to have been in the same place at the crucial time.[8] Naunton claimed that Sir Owen Hopton, Lieutenant of the Tower of London, overheard Perrot say, "Will the Queen suffer her brother to be offered up as a sacrifice to the envy of his frisking adversaries?",[10] suggesting that Perrot himself asserted his royal paternity. However, Hopton had been removed from office by the Queen eighteen months prior to Perrot's imprisonment, so he could not have overheard Perrot make the claim there.[8]

The Achievement in Arms of Sir John Perrot, redrawn by the P-rr-tt Society from the description in The General Armory"Crest: A parrot vert holding in the dexter claw a pear or, leaved ppr. Supporters - Dexter, an Ancient Briton armed and blazoned ppr.; sinister, a dragon gu. Motto - Amo ut invenio [I love as I find]". [11]

Perrot joined the household of William Paulet, 1st Marquess of Winchester, and thereby gained his introduction to Henry VIII. His advancement faltered on the death of the King in January 1547, but in the following month he was knighted at the coronation of Henry's successor, Edward VI.

In 1551 Perrot was appointed High Sheriff of Pembrokeshire, and in June of the same year he visited France in the train of William Parr, 1st Marquess of Northampton, who had been sent to arrange Edward VI's betrothal to Elisabeth of Valois, the infant daughter of Henry II of France. Perrot's skill as a knight and in the hunt fascinated King Henry, who sought to retain him for reward. Perrot declined, but on his return to England his debts were paid by the French Crown.

During the reign of Mary I Perrot suffered a brief imprisonment in the Fleet with his uncle, Robert Perrot, on a charge of sheltering heretics at his house in Wales. Following his release he declined to assist the Earl of Pembroke in seeking out heretics in south Wales, but in 1557 was content to serve the same Earl at the capture of Saint-Quentin in France.

Perrot inherited the castle and lordship of Carew. At the beginning of Elizabeth I's reign the naval defence of South Wales was entrusted to his care.[4] His advancement continued in 1562, when he was elected Knight of Pembrokeshire. He served as member of parliament for Carmarthenshire in 1547, Sandwich in 1553 and 1555, Wareham in 1559 (presumably through pressure exerted on the Rogers family by the 2nd Earl of Bedford, his former commander[12]), Pembrokeshire in 1563, and Haverfordwest in 1589.[13]

Munster[edit]

In 1570 Perrot reluctantly accepted the newly created post of Lord President of the Irish province of Munster, which was in the throes of the first of the Desmond Rebellions. He landed at Waterford in February of the following year and, in a vigorous and gruelling campaign, reduced the province to peace.[4]

The chief rebel, Fitzmaurice, eluded government forces for some time.[4] In one grisly incident, after fifty rebels had been slain, Perrot sought to awe his enemy by cutting off the heads of the corpses and fixing them to the market cross of Kilmallock. Fitzmaurice still refused to come in, and Perrot issued him with a challenge to single combat, which the rebel declined with the comment, "For if I should kill Sir John Perrot the Queen of England can send another president into this province; but if he do kill me there is none other to succeed me or to command as I do".[citation needed] Perrot's challenge provoked mutterings from the more level-headed servants of the Crown, and his reputation for rash judgment was confirmed when he was ambushed by the rebels, who outnumbered his force ten to one, only to be relieved when the rebels mistook a small cavalry company for the advance party of a larger Crown force. But in 1572, after a second and successful siege of the rebel stronghold of Castlemaine, he was vindicated on Fitzmaurice's submission.[citation needed]

During his presidency Perrot authorised over 800 hangings, most of them by martial law.[citation needed] After the rebellion he criticised the Crown's reinstatement of Fitzmaurice's superior, the Earl of Desmond, as chief nobleman of Munster. He requested his own recall, but this was in vain and in July 1573 he quit Ireland without leave. Upon presenting himself at court he was permitted to resign his office, and was succeeded by Sir William Drury.[4]

Wales[edit]

Perrot returned to Carew in Wales, where he intended, "to lead a countryman's life and to keep out of debt".[5] He was appointed vice-Admiral of the Welsh seas and member of the Council of the Marches,[4] and served as Mayor of Haverfordwest (1575–77). In his personal estates he converted several castles into mansions and improved his land, although there were continual complaints of his practice of rack-renting and enclosures.[citation needed]

In 1578 Perrot was accused by his deputy-Admiral, Richard Vaughan, of tyranny, subversion of justice, and dealing with pirates. The accusations may have been exaggerated, and Perrot retained the confidence of the Crown: in the same year he was appointed commissioner for piracy in Pembrokeshire, and in the following year was given command of a naval squadron charged with the interception of Spanish ships on the Irish coast.[4] In 1579, during a voyage to Ireland, he chased a pirate ship to the Flemish coast and captured the commander, Deryfold. On her approach to the Thames estuary Perrot's ship was struck by a storm, and while all on board prepared for death Perrot said to his son, Thomas, "Well Boy, God bless you and I give you my blessing. I wish to God that you were ashore and the Queen's ship safe then I should care the less about myself".[5] The ship was saved with the skill of the captive Deryfold, who was pardoned by the Queen on Perrot's petition.[citation needed]

In 1583 Thomas was married to Dorothy Devereux (daughter of Walter Devereux, 1st Earl of Essex, and step-daughter of the great royal favourite Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester). The match was no doubt intended to strengthen Perrot politically, but it had precisely the opposite effect: the Queen, whose consent to the marriage had not been sought, took grave offence, suspecting a conspiracy between Perrot and Leicester's wife, Lettice Knollys, whom she detested.[5]

Lord Deputy of Ireland[edit]

In 1584 Perrot was appointed Lord Deputy of Ireland, to replace Lord Grey de Wilton who had been recalled to England by the Queen two years earlier. His chief task was to establish the plantation of the southern province of Munster, a significant escalation of colonial policy. The Crown sought to parcel out lands at nominal rents from the confiscated estates of the lately defeated Earl of Desmond – some 600,000 acres (2,400 km2) — on condition that the undertakers plant English farmers and labourers to build towns and work the land.[4]

Before he had time to begin in the south, Perrot got wind of raids into the northern province of Ulster by the Highland clans of Maclean and MacDonnell at the invitation of Sorley Boy MacDonnell. He marched a contingent of the Royal Irish Army beyond the Pale to confront the invaders, but Sorley Boy escaped by crossing over to Scotland, only to return later with reinforcements. Elizabeth roundly abused her deputy for launching such an unadvised campaign, but by 1586 Perrot had brought Sorley Boy to a mutually beneficial submission.[4] At about this time he also sanctioned the kidnap of Hugh Roe O'Donnell (lured to a wine tasting on a merchant ship and then sealed in a cabin and brought to Dublin), a move which gave the crown some leverage in western Ulster. Perrot's northern strategy also secured the submission of Hugh Maguire, Lord of Fermanagh.[citation needed]


The plantation of Munster got off to a slow start in the face of lawsuits brought by landowners associated with the Geraldine rebels. In the west Perrot did have success in 1585 by perfecting a composition of the province of Connaught, an unusually even-handed contract between Crown and landowners by which the Queen received certain rents in return for settling land titles and tenant dues. In the same year a parliament was convened at Dublin, the first since 1569, with great hopes expressed upon the attendance of the Gaelic lords. The sessions proved a disappointment: although the act for the attainder of Desmond (clearing the escheat of the rebel's estates to the Crown) was passed, the ambitious schedule of legislation ran into difficulty, particularly over the suspension of Poynings' Law. At the prorogation in 1587 Perrot was so frustrated with the influence of factions within both houses of parliament (orchestrated to a large degree by the Earl of Ormond) that he begged to be recalled to England.[citation needed]

Perrot's unsparing criticism of his associates in government made him numerous enemies. His plan for the conversion of the revenues of St. Patrick's Cathedral to fund two colleges led to a sustained quarrel with the Archbishop of Dublin, Adam Loftus, which Perrot wilfully aggravated by his interference with the prelate's secular authority as Lord Chancellor.[4] He also interfered with Bingham's government of Connaught; caused the council secretary Sir Geoffrey Fenton to be imprisoned for debt;[citation needed] and in May 1587 was accused of striking the elderly Knight Marshal, Sir Nicholas Bagenal, in the council chamber,[4] an incident his enemies blamed on his drunkenness.[citation needed] In January 1588 Elizabeth granted Perrot's request for recall. Six months later, at the height of the Armada emergency, he was succeeded by Sir William Fitzwilliam.[4]

Ruin[edit]

Upon Perrot's return to England he was elected Member of Parliament in 1589 for Haverfordwest and appointed to the Privy Council, where he maintained his interest in Irish affairs through correspondence with several members of the council in Dublin.[citation needed] However his enemies were working against him. In the heated politics following the defeat of the Spanish Armada he was accused of treason,[4] based on allegations made in Ireland by a former priest and condemned prisoner, Sir Dennis O'Roghan.[citation needed] The evidence was provided in letters allegedly addressed by Perrot as Lord Deputy (with his signature attached) to King Philip II of Spain and the Duke of Parma, in which certain treasonable promises were made on the future dominion of England, Wales and Ireland.[citation needed]

Fitzwilliam started an investigation into the charges in Dublin, but O'Roghan's record of forging documents was quickly produced, and for a time it seemed the allegations would fail for lack of credible evidence. Rather than let the matter lie, it was decided (perhaps at Perrot's urging) to inquire into the manner in which the allegations had been raised in the first place, a procedure likely to embarrass Fitzwilliam. The inquiry was held at Dublin by a commission that included several of Perrot's favourites on the Dublin councilNicholas White, (Master of the Rolls in Ireland), Charles Calthorpe (Attorney General), and Nicholas Walsh (former Speaker of the House of Commons).[citation needed]

O'Roghan alleged that he had been tortured by members of this commission, and Fitzwilliam was instantly directed on strict instruction from the Queen to resume his original investigation and forward the findings to the Privy Council in London. Perrot faced a moment of crisis when further allegations were made – most notably by his former secretary, Henry Bird – of his frequent use in private conversation of violent language against the Queen. He was also accused of having prior knowledge of the rebellion in 1589 of Sir Brian O'Rourke (later extradited from Scotland and hanged at London), which had occurred under the government of Bingham in Connaught.[citation needed]

Perrot ended up in the Tower of London and in 1592 stood trial before a special commission on charges of high treason.[14] O'Roghan's letters and the evidence concerning the O'Rourke rebellion played their part in the prosecution case, but the evidence most vividly presented was of Perrot's remarks about Queen Elizabeth: "God's wounds, this it is to serve a base bastard pissing kitchen woman, if I had served any prince in Christendom I have not been so dealt withal."[15] Further evidence showed he had disparaged her legitimacy on several occasions. Perrot protested his loyalty and, in reaction to a hectoring prosecution counsel, eloquently cried out, "You win men's lives away with words". But his defence descended into blustering, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty. Sentencing was put off for some months in the hope of a royal pardon, but Perrot died in the Tower in September that year. Whether Elizabeth actually intended to pardon him is uncertain, although there are grounds to believe he was poisoned in anticipation of his release from custody.[5]

Following Perrot's imprisonment some of his Irish favourites had been replaced in their council seats by English appointees, who fully equated the Protestant cause with the state and inclined to hard dealings with Gaelic Ireland. Fitzwilliam felt free to pursue a policy opposed in crucial aspects to Perrot's, and the lords of Ulster (including Hugh O'Neill) suffered increasing government encroachment on their territories until the outbreak of the Nine Years War (1595–1603).[citation needed]

Marriages and issue[edit]

Perrot married firstly Anne Cheyne (d.1553) (daughter of Sir Thomas Cheyne by his first wife, Frideswide Frowyk, daughter of Sir Thomas Frowyk), by whom he had a son and heir, Sir Thomas Perrot (d.1594).

After the death of his first wife Perrot remained unmarried for a decade. In 1563 or 1564 he married Jane Prust (d.1593), widow of Lewis Pollard (d.1563) of Oakford, Devon, and daughter of Hugh Prust (d.1559) of Thorry, Devonshire. She had a son and two daughters by Perrot:[5][16]

On appointment as Lord Deputy of Ireland, Perrot had made a deed of settlement entailing his estates on his sons and their male descendants, and in default on his cousin Thomas Perrott of Broke Co. Carmarthen.[11] The settlement may have been a precaution against the hazards of office in Ireland.

Perrot's first son, Thomas, was imprisoned after his marriage to Dorothy Devereux, and she was banished from Court. In March 1593, four months after Perrot's death, Thomas was restored in blood. [5] Dorothy was not restored to favour until after her husband's death in 1594.[19]

Perrot fathered at least four illegitimate children, Sir James Perrot, John Perrot (born c.1565), Elizabeth Perrot, and another daughter whose name is unknown.[5] Sir James Perrot authored the manuscript The life, deedes and death of Sir John Perrott, knight, published in 1728. John Perrot's name appears in the Inner Temple Register in an entry dated 5 June 1583: "John Perot, of Haryve, Co. Pembroke, 3rd son of John Perot, Knight".[20] Elizabeth, who married Hugh Butler of Pembroke, was the granddaughter of Sir Christopher Hatton, a favourite of Elizabeth I and enemy of Sir John (the source of their hostility being Sir John's relationship with Sir Christopher's unmarried illegitimate daughter, also named Elizabeth).[21]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Alison Weir (2012). Mary Boleyn: 'The Great and Infamous Whore'. Vintage. p. 203. ISBN 978-0-09-954648-1.
  2. ^ Sir John Perrot; Henry VIII's Bastard? The Destruction of A Myth by Roger Turvey, Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion. 1992
  3. ^ Sir John Perrot Memorial by Andrew Green 2019 >
  4. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m Chisholm 1911, p. 184.
  5. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h Turvey 2009.
  6. ^ Owen, Henry (2009) [1902]. Old Pembroke Families in the Ancient County Palatine of PembrokeBiblioBazaar. p. 56. ISBN 978-1-110-91492-0. Retrieved 10 September 2009Mary 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.
  7. ^ Turvey, Roger (2005). The treason and trial of Sir John Perrot. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. p. 208. ISBN 0-7083-1912-2.
  8. Jump up to:a b c Turvey, Roger (2010). Sir John Perrot: The man and the Myth. Separating fact from fiction in the life of this legendary figure. London, England: The P-rr-tt Society special publication.
  9. ^ Naunton, Robert, 1653. "Fragmentalia Regalia", ed Edward Arber, London, 1895.
  10. ^ Levin, Carole (2006), "Sister-Subject/Sister-Queen: Elizabeth I among her Siblings", in Miller, Naomi J.; Yavneh, Naomi (eds.), Sibling Relations and Gender in the Early Modern World: Sisters, Brothers and Others, Aldershot: Ashgate, p. 238, ISBN 0-7546-4010-8Sir John Perrot did claim to be the son of Henry VIII, though Henry never formally acknowledged him so. Perrot, born sometime between 1527 and 1530, was the son of Mary Berkely, whose husband Sir Thomas Perrot was a courtier and wealthy landowner. John's physical resemblance to Henry VIII fueled rumors that he was the king's son, a belief that Sir John strongly encouraged. [...] Perrot was lodged in the Tower but Elizabeth was reluctant to have him executed. 'God's death! Will the Queen suffer her brother to be offered up as a sacrifice to the envy of his frisking adversaries?' Perrot exclaimed.
  11. Jump up to:a b The General Armory
  12. ^ "PERROT, Sir John (1528/9-92), of Haroldston and Carew Castle, Pemb. | History of Parliament Online"www.historyofparliamentonline.org. Retrieved 17 February 2020.
  13. ^ Perrot (Parret), John (1528/29-92), of Haroldston and Carew Castle, Pembrokeshire, History of Parliament Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  14. ^ Account of the trial in Complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes1. 1730. p. 181.
  15. ^ Bodl. Oxf., MS Tanner 299, fol. 477 - cited in Turvey 2009
  16. ^ Vivian, Heralds' Visitations of Devon, 1895, p.629, pedigree of Prust
  17. ^ Philipps, John (d.1629), of Picton, Pembrokeshire and Clog y fran, Carmarthenshire, History of Parliament Retrieved 18 August 2013.
  18. ^ McCavitt 2004.
  19. ^ Weir p.347
  20. ^ N.M. Nugent. Cavaliers and Pioneers : Abstracts of Virginia Land Patents and Grants 1623–1666. Vol 1, p 197.
  21. ^ Jones 2009, p. 161.

References[edit]

Attribution:

Further reading[edit]

  • A Critical Edition of Sir James Perrot's The Life, Deedes and Death of Sir John Perrott, Knight by Roger Turvey (2002)
  • Sir John Perrot, Knight of Bath, 1527–1591 by G. Douglas James (1962)
  • Sir John Perrot and the Irish Parliament of 1585–6 by V. Treadwell (1985)
  • Richard Bagwell, Ireland under the Tudors 3 vols. (London, 1885–1890).
  • John O'Donovan (ed.) Annals of Ireland by the Four Masters (1851).
  • Calendar of State Papers: Carew MSS. 6 vols (London, 1867–1873).
  • Calendar of State Papers: Ireland (London)
  • Colm Lennon Sixteenth Century Ireland – The Incomplete Conquest (Dublin, 1995) ISBN 0-312-12462-7.
  • Nicholas P. Canny Making Ireland British, 1580–1650 (Oxford University Press, 2001) ISBN 0-19-820091-9.
  • Steven G. Ellis Tudor Ireland (London, 1985) ISBN 0-582-49341-2.
  • Hiram Morgan Tyrone's Rebellion (1995).
  • Cyril Falls Elizabeth's Irish Wars (1950; reprint London, 1996) ISBN 0-09-477220-7.
  • Gerard Anthony Hayes McCoy Irish Battles (Belfast, 1989) ISBN 0-86281-212-7.
  • Dictionary of National Biography 22 vols. (London, 1921–1922).
  • The Prust Papers, at the North Devon Record Office, supplied by Hartland Digital Archive 2007
  • Biography of John Perrot at the History of Parliament Online.

External links[edit]

Preceded byCustos Rotulorum of Pembrokeshire
bef. 1562–1592
Succeeded by
Preceded byLord Deputy of Ireland
1584–1588
Succeeded by

Perrot against the pope, or, A true copy of John Perrot the Quakers letter and challenge to the pope with His Holiness's answer thereto : and an account of the Quakers proceedings and entertainment at Rome.

Perrot against the pope, or, A true copy of John Perrot the Quakers letter and challenge to the pope with His Holiness's answer thereto : and an account of the Quakers proceedings and entertainment at Rome.



Author: J. P. (John Perrot), d. 1671?
Title: Perrot against the pope, or, A true copy of John Perrot the Quakers letter and challenge to the pope with His Holiness's answer thereto : and an account of the Quakers proceedings and entertainment at Rome.
Print source: Perrot against the pope, or, A true copy of John Perrot the Quakers letter and challenge to the pope with His Holiness's answer thereto : and an account of the Quakers proceedings and entertainment at Rome.

J. P. (John Perrot), d. 1671?
London: Printed the 9th. day of the 4th. moneth called June, 1662.
Notes:
Reproduction of original in the University of Illinois Library.
Subject terms:
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature.
Anti-Catholicism.
URL: http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A54458.0001.001
How to cite: For suggestions on citing this text, please see Citing the TCP on the Text Creation Partnership website.




Contents
View entire text

title page
THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER.
PROPOSITIONS TO THE POPE, FOR THE Proving his Power of Remitting Sins, and other Do¦ctrines of his Church, as Principles destroying Souls in Darkness, and undeter∣minable Death.
FABIUS GHISIUS POPE of ROME TO JOHN PERROT QUAKER of LONDON.


===

Perrot against the pope, or, A true copy of John Perrot the Quakers letter and challenge to the pope with His Holiness's answer thereto : and an account of the Quakers proceedings and entertainment at Rome.J. P. (John Perrot), d. 1671?
Table of contents | Add to bookbag | How to cite
<< Previous section Next section >>
Page 1


PROPOSITIONS TO THE POPE, FOR THE Proving his Power of Remitting Sins, and other Do¦ctrines of his Church, as Principles destroying Souls in Darkness, and undeter∣minable Death.

To Fabius Guisius, Pope, at his Pallace in Monte Cavallo in Roma.

POPE of ROME 

It is not unknown, that for the space of three years, wanting lesse than seven dayes, I was held in most cruel Bonds under thy Hands; where by the mighty power of God I was borne, and car∣ried through ignominious and oppro∣brious scoffs and mocks, threats of Death divers wayes, and of perpetual Slavery of∣tentimes: Besides other times most cruelly and inhumanely tortured, bruised, and exceedingly wounded in my fleshly Body; for none other cause (the God of Righteousnesse knoweth, and that of God in all mens Consciences in that City of Rome can bear me witnesse, which saw my Conversation from the first to the last of my imprisonment) but honestly, simply, and purely, 


for Righteousness sake, viz. because I Exhorted All men to Re∣pentance; and warned them in Season, to take heed to their wayes, lest a sore Evil should come upon them; I say, for this love of my tender Soul, towards Thine, and their Souls and Bo∣dies, was I so inhumanely requited both by Thee and Them, which the Righteous LORD of Heaven knoweth, and Thou in thy Conscience knowest it; as many others of the Heads, Ru∣lers, Priests, Doctors, Fryars, Jesuits, and People of Rome do know the same thing; and after many Wrongs which I bare, and bruises and wounds that I suffered, shut up in a Room, where there was scarce a Breathing place, chained in Irons, mocked of the Wicked, because my natural eyes could see neither visible Sun nor Moon; where moreover, I was tempted with the World, and proffered all the Pleasures which ever my Heart could desire, so that I would be, but as thy Priests were, which dayly tempted me unto Idolatry. (I say) all which I suffered, until at length my Innocent patient Soul had worn out, and overcome, all the Cruelty towards me, which was Exercised upon me, by the Ʋnreasonable Hands of Sinners: and that the Lord arose to plead my Cause for me, and stirred up such, as I neither desired, nay, nor in the least outwardly knew, to appear in my Behalf; and made some of his Servants to offer up their lives for my Redemption, which were known to be freely sacrificed in Rome; for whose Live unto me, they were also Imprisoned by Thy power, who, below the Law of Heathens, stood not openly to shew us any cause of our Sufferings.

Yet, after all this, (though I am a man wholly given unto my God, having given all things else unto Him who made them) if it were the will of my Father, commanding me unto Silence, and to sit down as him that is Dumb, and never to open my mouth, nor lead on my Pen on Paper, to Remonstrate the things that are past, concerning my Suffering dayes, verily, I should Obey, and say Good is the Will of my God, who teacheth me Sub∣jection. But being commanded unto this thing, I can of a pure heart, in the sight of my Almighty God, say, that I write not to take a Revenge of my Cause, having committed Vengeance unto him that repayeth in Righteousnesse. (Whom, I pray for mercy, to be manifested unto you All, having a long time stood in the Gap for Rome; with many Tears, offering my Life for the In∣habitants of that City, which the God of Heaven knoweth, and 


that I can at 〈…〉 to serve them all in the way wherein my Father leadeth me But O Pope for thy •ouls sake, and the peoples Souls sakes which have a dependance upon thy Power, I am contrained to write this time unto thee in this manner, shewing that in the Name and holy Fear of the Lord God of Hea∣ven and Earth, who hath led me in my Pilgrimage, by his Right Hand of Power, and pleaded my Cause with my Enemies, by reigning down fire from Heaven upon them, and by diverse Judgements in Rome, whilest there the people oppressed my Inno∣cent Soul with Cruelty; which may as is needful hereafter) be more at large spoken of. I proptmd it unto Thee, (as being the HEAD of that people, which are called the Roman Catho∣lick Church) to Constitute, Order, and appoint one hundred of thy Chiefest and Propoundest Iesuits or Doctors of Divinity, (so called by thee) to give me a fair, open and publick Meet∣ing, in England, Germany, France, Italy or Turkey, (viz.) in the most expedient place, for the advantage of the Glory of God (who Created the whole earth for that end as a way may be made to attain a Licence from the Powers of the said Nations, to effect the said Meeting. I say, chuse thee thy hundred or more persons for thy defence, and in the Name of the Lord God and in his Councel, I shall stand in the face of a Nation, or many Nations, to prove to that of God in every Conscience upon the face of the Earth, That thy pretended power of Remission of Sins, is of the old Serpent the Devil, drowning Souls in the Lake of Hell and Perdition.
1st. By the time of the comming in of Popes.
2dly. By the manner of chusing Popes.
3dly. By the matter of the precepts of Popes. viz.

First, That the Doctrine of teaching people to pray unto the Virgin Mary is damnable, drowning the Soul in the pit Hell.

Secondly, That the Doctrine of teaching of the people to call on more Advocates, Mediators, and Intercessors, Than looking upon the One MEDIATOR JESUS, is of the pit of 〈…〉 blinding and binding souls in the blackness of the night of death.

Thirdly, That the Invention of Pictures and Images in 


your Worships, is of the destroying Spirit, of the power of Darkness, chaining Souls in the Pit.

Fourthly, That your manner of Consecrating Waffers, Wine, and Water, praying upon Beads, worshipping in Idols Temples, your divers Fryars Garments, and Titled Orders, your observations of Dayes, and Meats, your Penance and Pro∣cessions, are not of God; but contrariwise of the Spirit of Delusion, Heresie, Deceit, and Iniquity, which drowneth Souls in perdition.

For which Cause, if thou lovest the Salvation of Souls, more than their Damnation, through a Covetous end of an Earthly Kingdom in thy Heart, then I am sure Thou wilt not scruple, to send such persons as Thou mayest appoint, to Meet me accor∣ding to this Proposal; which else, All Nations will see thy Cloak to be Rent a sunder, and no longer able to cover and hide the Abominations which are concealed under Thy Skirts: for ex∣cept Thou sendest me an Answer, or causest an Answer to be sent unto me, in the space of Four Months after the Date of this, then must I Manifest it unto All Nations, as far as it can be conveniently Spread, even unto the ends of the Earth; which, until then, I may not do, that Thou mayest Know, that my End, is not to Infamize Thee, and Thy Authority, but Righ∣teously to Glorifie the Lord God Almighty, my Holy Father of Life.


LONDON,the 20th. day of the 7th Month called September 1661.

Who am called the English Qua∣ker, that was Prisoner in Bed∣lam of Rome, and also out∣wardly named JOHN PERROT.
===
Page  5

FABIUS GHISIUS POPE of ROME TO JOHN PERROT QUAKER of LONDON.

John Quaker!

THy Letter and Propositions (bearing date the 20th. day of the 7th. month) came not to my hands till the 10th. day of this, therefore I hope thou wilt not proscribe me, for elapsing the time limited in thy Letter, which was not through my fault; And because I know thou hast a per∣verse unbelieving Spirit in thee, I forbear in usual form to salute thee with Apostolical Benediction, but without fur∣ther Ceremony apply my self to answer thy Letter.

1. 'Tis true thou wast detained in the Pazzarella here, a place most fit for thee, and thy mad Brethren, where had both thou and they been timely put, as you might have been in Justice, and should have been in Prudence, all the late miseries and abominable wickednesses of England, had in all likelyhood been prevented; Nor was it without evi∣dent reason, That my Officers shut thee up in Bedlam; Thou cam'st out of a Rebellious Countrey, (where thou and thy Fanatick Brethren committed a Wonderful and Hor∣rible thing,* Murther'd your lawful King) to devise mischief and give wicked Councel in this City; Thou didst pretend a Spiritual Call, and I know not what Revelation, which Page  6 prov'd a false vision and divination,*a thing of naught, and th deceit of thy heart, far surpassing the frenzy of the more ancient Enthusiasts; When thou wast soberly admonished to abandon that deluding Spirit (which leads thee and thy Brethren into so many exorhitancies) and set thy face to∣ward London,* thou didst ost pertinaciously contemn that good Councel, and persist in thy ways of Abomination, refusing to depart out of my City, Rome; forgetting those words,* thou hast so often misinterpreted, Go out of her my people, lest thou partake of her sins, and receive of her punish∣ments. Why could'st thou not take heed and more warily understand a Text so plainly fore warning thee to flye from her,* left she should punish thee? Thus saith the Lord God, woe unto the foolish Prophets that follow their own Spirit and have seen nothing. While thou wert kept in the Roman Bedlam, was not the Discipline of the place, exactly obser∣ved to thee,* aswell as to the rest of thy fellow Bedlams, didst thou want any thing there, but thine own wire? Thus therefore it came to passe that thy way and thy doings pro∣cured these things unto thee; it being just that thou shouldst bear the punishment of thine iniquity.

2. Thou sayst my Priests did daily with all the pleasures thy heart could desire, tempt thee to be as they were▪ And were they not very courteous to make thee so kind an of∣fer? were they not very patient to treat with thee thus daily? Ingrateful John! why dost thou complain of those who us'd thee so civilly? and all this, only to make thee be as they were; Verily, verily, John, thou wert shrewdly hurt, dost thou not usually (though falsly) charge them to lead lives of ease and honor, and canst thou take it ill, they should offer thee a share with themselves, to be as they were.

Moreover I say unto thee, thou dost me and my people very great wrong, by affirming in thy Letter, that my Priests did daily tempt thee to Idolatry; yet I commend thee John, for hating that, which I abominate with all my Soul; Do'st thou think I adore a carved stone, as my God, or a painted canvas, as my Saviour? or is any thing Idolatry,Page  7 but the adoring a Creature, as our Creator; and the ma∣king to our selves a God of a graven Image? which if I did I were as mad as thou. No, John, I worship only one God, I acknowledge onely one Mediator betwixt God and Man, the God-and-Man JESUS CHRIST; though I believe it both lawful and profitable to desire the Prayers of his Holy Saints, who raign with him, and continually assist at his holy Throne; and the Charity of his glorious Angels,*who be∣hold his face and are sent forth as ministring Spirits for the good of the Elect.

As for Pictures, I believe neither any Divinity nor Sancti∣ty to be in them, but I consider them as fit Instruments to help the memory, to recollect the fancy, and stir up the af∣fection; giving them such respect as thy soberer Neigh∣bour Protestants do to their Communion Table, whom I hope thou art not so bold to charge with Idolatry, or if thou do'st, convert them first, and then come again to me. Thou know'st 'tis one of the great Commands,*Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy Neighbour.* And 'tis written, woe be to you that rb the just man of his justice, for as fire devoureth the stubble, so shall the root of these men be ashes.

3. For the power of remitting Sins, which thy serpen∣tine spirit so much stumbles at, what more plain in Scri∣pture? where our Saviour sayes expresly to his disciples; Whatever yee shall bind on Earth, shall be bound in Heaven,*and whatever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven; And again. Whose sins ye shall forgive they are forgiven; and whose ye retain, they are retained. What can be said more clear and plain? doest not thou thy self hold many doctrines lesse evidently in Scripture than this? tell me thy thoughts of this point in thy next Letter. But thou hast chosen three strange Mediums to disprove this Power.

  • 1. By the time of the coming in of Popes.
  • 2. By the manner of choosing Popes.
  • 3. By the matter of the Precepts of Popes.

Page  8Truly John, thou deserv'st, for these three lines of nonsence, at least three moneths more of the Pazzarella, Too little Learning I see hath made thee mad.*

The other Points, when thou and my Champion meet, shall be at large discussed.

4. Now to thy Challenge of mee, to send a hundred of my profoundest Jesuites, or Doctors, to meet thee at any place of Christendom or Turky; since thou art so civil to leave the nomination of the place to me, I do, for thy ease, appoint AMSTERDAM, an indifferent place, to all Profes∣sions, where thou shalt have as fair play as I, and any body else, as either of us. And since thou hast presum'd thus proudly to defie the Armies of the living God, and, confiding in thy weavers beam, provokest us to Battel, I promise to send one onely Jesuit, the youngest of my Children, to meet thee there on the 20th. day of the sixth moneth, vulgarly called August;* Despise not his little stature, for know, he has slain the Lion and the Bear, and the unbaptized Quaker shall be as one of them. He shall come down to thee with the light armour of a sling and a few smooth stones and smite thee on thy fore∣head, and thou shalt fall on thy face to the earth; he shall be arm'd with the dreadful weapons of Excommunication, and with Bell,*Book and Candle, deliver thee to the Devil, for the destruction of thy fleshly body, that thy Spirit may be sav'd in the day of the Lord JESUS. The hearty wish of him—

Given under the Seal-ring of the Fisherman, at our Pa∣lace of Monte Cavallo,in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ, 1662/1. Indiction the 15th March the 4th. and in the seventh year of our Pontificat.

Who, according to the Flesh, is named, FABIƲS GHISIƲS, But in a Spiri∣tual way, Alexander the seventh POPE of ROME, and Servant of the Ser∣vants of God.

FINIS.



===




===




===





John Perrot, Early Quaker Schismatic (review)

Project MUSE - <i>John Perrot, Early Quaker Schismatic</i> (review)

John Perrot, Early Quaker Schismatic (review)
Henry J. Cadbury
Quaker History
Friends Historical Association
Volume 61, Number 2, Autumn 1972
p. 124
10.1353/qkh.1972.0002
Review

===
John Perrot, Early Quaker Schismatic. 
By Kenneth L. Garroll. 

Supplement No. 33 to 
the Journal of the Friends' Historical Society. London, 1971. 116 pages. 
-----
This substantial monograph is a natural by-product of the author's interests in Quaker history in early America, since John Perrot, an Irish Friend, endured die vicissitudes of his later life in the American colonies, besides his original career in the British Isles and in the trek of Friends towards Italy and the Middle East in the second decade of Quakerism.

 Like other Friends of the period John Perrot was a deviationist from mainline Quakerism, differing chiefly in minor matters of Friends practice— the best known of his nonconformity to the usual practice being in the small matter of not removing his hat during vocal prayer. 

His aberrations followed those of James Nayler and preceded those of Wilkinson and Story. 
His long imprisonment by the Inquisition of Rome was part of his pride and perhaps of his undoing. 
For a time many leading Friends accepted his leadership. 
Kenneth Carroll has made full use of the abundant but difficult printed and manuscript material from Perrot's pen. 

It permits us to think of him as partly the victim of uncharitable attitudes of some censorious Friends and even of his own understandable independence of thought.

 His very method of writing rather puts a modem reader off. 
Though this study of him does not commend his views it was high time that a full dress account should be made available of him, and of the gradual decline of his considerable influence in the American colonies. 

He died in Jamaica in September, 1665. 

Haverford, Pennsylvania
Henry J. Cadbury 

===

Jordans: The Making of a Community. 
A history of the early years. By Arthur L. Hayward. 

With an introduction by John Macmurray. 
London, Friends Home Service Committee, 1969. £1.00. 

The occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the establishment of Jordans village community is the cause for the publication of this interesting volume. 

The book itself suffers somewhat from a lack of unity despite its stated intention of giving an account of the first two decades of an English intentional community with Quaker roots. Arthur Hayward and his family moved to Jordans village some years after the initial years of establishnient and became keenly interested in the background of Quaker history in the area as well as in the current struggles of the community to establish itself. He made a very thorough examination of the many accounts and journals which exist in order to bring together a consistent account of the development of Quakerism in Buckinghamshire from the earliest times into the twentieth century. This he writes with clarity and directness and considerable charm. The account of the origin, founding, ...