General (CSA), Robert Edward Lee, Sr. - General Robert Edward Lee and The Lost Lees of Stratford

This reminds me of my recent find of a "Wade Hampton" marriage in my county in 1866, right after the end of the Civil War. As the name itself is closely associated historically with a famous raid/battle in same county, it immediately caught my interest.

But then I eventually realized he and his bride were designated "Col." (colored) on the record. I had overlooked that, because prior to about 1866 marriages of persons of color in this county were kept on separate books. It just goes to show that names alone aren't enough to identify kinship.

Keep in mind that there are as many as ten records per page in 1866, as previously unmarried couples (many with children) were rushing the courthouse in order to legitimize their marriages. And there were no separate pages or books at this time in my county, for persons of color.

So genealogy can be a great introduction to the study of History.

I have to correct myself: marriages of persons of color were essentially illegal prior to the end of the War, although some were allowed with special permission.

And so it wasn't until much later that the records often became segregated.

They descendants are very much wanting to be recognize, as there are several other family trees of the same line from R E Lee on ancestry.com, but they wish to make their lineage from Robert E Lee and Nancy Ruffin public now as DNA has confirmed

I would hope instead of creating feeble arguments that Geni would take the lead and do the right thing not the racial thing.

Thank you... J

An act of the state legislature in 1866 allowed couples who had been living together prior to the end of the war, to have their marriages legitimized and recorded with no requirements for licenses or ceremonies. So the courthouse became very busy for awhile.

https://www.geni.com/discussions/245980?msg=1558891

Alex Moes and curators:

Please add Nancy Ruffin (Lewis-Ruffin) Nancy Ruffin as partner of General (CSA), Robert Edward Lee, Sr. when you complete this merge: https://www.geni.com/merge/compare/6000000003089506774?return=dupli... that I had requested that had been removed. ;)

Please when you add Nancy Lewis-Ruffin as partner to Gen Robert E Lee that this includes her children and descendants as they wish to be publicly recognized regardless of how uncomfortable this may make some feel or the debate as the DNA and documentation does confirm the relationships.

I would think that Geni would want to overcome the past and do the right thing for the descendants. There ARE many private trees of this line on ancestry.com but they wish to have their line recognized publicly as it should.

Robert E Lee had a slave named Nancy Ruffin and they had relations that resulted in illegitimate children and 2 of those 3 children - Peter Lee and Mack Lee have descendants that have proven DNA to Robert E Lee. That cannot be denied or debated and if it is it will not be looked upon kindly. The line from Robert E Lee and Nancy Ruffin is well sourced with primary documents. Knit picking only creates a view of even more prejudices, even if the individuals here are uncomfortable with the truth. I think my Lee cousins from this line of descent have suffered enough shame.

2nd request.

I responded to your comments on the other thread as well as I feel my request is reasonable and should not be treated otherwise. Thank you.

I am posting for others may see the conversation:

https://www.geni.com/discussions/245980?msg=1558906

Ashley Odell C
Today at 8:59 AM
Report
Jacqueli, we can't help with edits and merges where genealogical discussion is needed first. Keep using the dedicated thread you've started and convince the community of your argument. Right now, it looks like at least one curator is working through the argument you've laid out and has been asking genealogical questions, so I'd keep working at that.

In the meantime, I will decline this merge request because the discussion is ongoing. Please don't resubmit it unless/until you reach a consensus in that discussion thread. Thanks!

Jacqueli Charlene Finley PRO
Today at 9:10 AM
Report | Delete
Ashley Odell I think the obvious DNA evidence and documentation - some that has been removed but can be seen on my article - should be beyond convincing - as for my request of the merges pending curator debates or consensus seems a bit suspect as I did so in earnest as the facts have been proven although through the discussion the arguments being worked through or presented by the ones 'working' the facts through seem more to discredit than to give credit.

So far the focus has been on Nancy and George's children and descendants not Nancy and Robert's children and descendants.

Again I say that I would think Geni would want to do the right thing here and take the first step in righting this wrong as the world is watching. :)

Ashley Odell C
Today at 9:17 AM
Report
Jacqueli Charlene Finley -- I can totally understand why you feel the facts have been proven, because you've been the one working through the information for a long time. But the information you're presenting is new to everyone else, so you need to give everyone a chance to read it and think about it. As you know, some people are likely going to disagree with your findings, so just be prepared for that and answer the questions as they come up.

If you disagree with the decision by me (and apparently another curator prior) to dismiss the merge at this point, you can e-mail misconduct@geni.com to appeal to higher authorities. I will also not reply further in this thread, as it's a genealogical question and not a curating one, as Alex previously noted.

Jacqueli Charlene Finley PRO
Today at 9:31 AM
Report | Delete
Ashley Odell I am sorry that you are not familiar with the information and facts that are not actual new as many have known of these descendants since the late 1800's as this is only partial of what still has to become acknowledge.

The statement you made "As you know, some people are likely going to disagree with your findings" ... why is that, Ashley? Because they descent from a black slave and a white Lee family member? I truly find that statement questionable and very telling at the same time.

Do what you all do best and again I request that be mindful of those who this is very dear to as they have been ignore, shamed, and denied their rightful heritage for too long now and I have only asked for the right thing to be done and them given the recognition of who they are and from where their ancestry comes from.

Private User agreed. Let me just delete the post I added here with that link and repost with the relevant one(s).

https://medium.com/k%C3%BChner-kommentar/the-southern-mythology-of-...

https://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/leewilliam/lee.html

I was actually looking for a DNA article since there surely is one. I know it is not a "new" discussion in general.

Thank you

Private User we were typing at the same time, I think.
Sorry.

Cynthia Curtis, A183502, US7875087 thank you for the links as they show the push back about the possibilities and the uncomfortable relationships that DNA has now proven.

It is Mack Wesley Lee that is the son of Robert E Lee and Nancy Ruffin. ;)

But the controversy and prejudices continue even today as we can vouch for, which is becoming quite obvious.

Ashley Odell C
Today at 9:38 AM
Report
I guess you don't know my ancestry and immediate family if you think I have a problem with mixed relationships, Jacqueli. Let's not get into personal attacks and instead focus on the topic at hand.

I think my responses were also completely reasonable, and I appreciate you sharing them here so people can see them.

Ashley - I simply responded to your statement as a reasonable person would and it was not a personal attack - unfortunately the only ones I feel are being personally attacked are the descendants of Nancy and Robert.

We all know IF you state I or anyone is personally attacking you - that is cause for removal or censorship. I would appreciate it if you do not try that tactic on this sensitive subject as I am all too familiar with the drama created here unnecessary to have important topics dismissed over 'personal attacks'. We are all grown-ups here I should hope. So just to clarify an observation on a comment or statement is not a personal attack. And I do not know you personally and do not make assumptions I took the statement you made that I commented on wholly on face value. Thank you

Those are DNA MRCA Matches of the Lee UK Ancestry to one of the Ruffin descendants, but there are also MRCA matches to the Stratford lineage on that report as well as far reaching ancestry .... including Robert Edward Lee for example and Ann Hill Carter, so let's start by not taking the whole picture out of context and not looking at the obvious ... just to clarify since there are no 'tactics' used to discredit the DNA confirmations ... usually it is only a couple of DNA matches that can confirm, I went to thr trouble in listing over 20 DNA Lee Descendants to help the issue along.

All of these DNA matches can be publicly verified on GEDMatch with a free membership.

Here are links to something more comprehensible possibly to you to avoid any misunderstandings of the DNA relationships to Lee Descendants of US Lee Lineages - including publicly verifiable GEDCOMs of the Lee descendant DNA donors on GEDMatch:

https://media.geni.com/p13/3a/b8/0e/4c/53444860e2f88f9a/dna_of_nanc...

https://media.geni.com/p13/bf/ea/81/bd/53444860e26ea5f1/relee_and_n...

This one added the 3rd DNA of donor Katie Hendrix as a descendant of Nancy and Robert:
https://media.geni.com/p13/65/28/bc/53/53444860e2713a18/lee_dna_plu...

And for good measure for all public viewing to see the DNA MRCA report for James Harpe, another Lee descendant from Nancy and Robert, the link to which Ashley Odell is questioning under scrutiny for the distance of the MRCA matches which BTW is because of a DNA match to another who shares the same ancestors per DNA plus GEDCOM regardless of the generations, but I share the link so others can see the whole picture on the matches:

https://media.geni.com/p13/80/55/95/bb/53444860e2713a31/james_harpe...

This link is to the GEDMatch tool showing the use of DNA kits of over 30 Lee descendant donors:

https://media.geni.com/p13/28/6b/24/1a/53444860e2f7f6d6/web_capture...

FYI - why I mentioned the 'personal attack' comment and being censored - I was reported and so my comments hidden.

Unfortunately, I know this routine regardless of the feigning innocence.
This really is doing the objectivity in doing the right thing a disservice.

And is being seen publicly I might add.

From: https://www.geni.com/discussions/245980?msg=1558941

Today at 8:59 AM
Report
Jacqueli, we can't help with edits and merges where genealogical discussion is needed first. Keep using the dedicated thread you've started and convince the community of your argument. Right now, it looks like at least one curator is working through the argument you've laid out and has been asking genealogical questions, so I'd keep working at that.

In the meantime, I will decline this merge request because the discussion is ongoing. Please don't resubmit it unless/until you reach a consensus in that discussion thread. Thanks!

Jacqueli Charlene Finley PRO
Today at 9:10 AM
Report | Delete
Ashley Odell I think the obvious DNA evidence and documentation - some that has been removed but can be seen on my article - should be beyond convincing - as for my request of the merges pending curator debates or consensus seems a bit suspect as I did so in earnest as the facts have been proven although through the discussion the arguments being worked through or presented by the ones 'working' the facts through seem more to discredit than to give credit.

So far the focus has been on Nancy and George's children and descendants not Nancy and Robert's children and descendants.

Again I say that I would think Geni would want to do the right thing here and take the first step in righting this wrong as the world is watching. :)

Ashley Odell C
Today at 9:17 AM
Report
Jacqueli Charlene Finley -- I can totally understand why you feel the facts have been proven, because you've been the one working through the information for a long time. But the information you're presenting is new to everyone else, so you need to give everyone a chance to read it and think about it. As you know, some people are likely going to disagree with your findings, so just be prepared for that and answer the questions as they come up.

If you disagree with the decision by me (and apparently another curator prior) to dismiss the merge at this point, you can e-mail misconduct@geni.com to appeal to higher authorities. I will also not reply further in this thread, as it's a genealogical question and not a curating one, as Alex previously noted.

Jacqueli Charlene Finley PRO
Today at 9:31 AM
Report | Delete
[This message has been hidden until it can be reviewed by an administrator.]

Jacqueli Charlene Finley PRO
Today at 12:14 PM
Report | Delete
Obviously, no censorship tactics are being used as I note the hidden benign comment above. Thank goodness for screen shots as this was bound to happen.

Erica Howton I received notice of this message tag that does not show on here:

Dear Jacqueli,

Erica Howton tagged you in the public discussion "General (CSA), Robert Edward Lee, Sr. - General Robert Edward Lee and The Lost Lees of Stratford"

Jacqueli Charlene Finley - I’m going to separate “your” Nancy Ruffin from the “Lee” Nancy Ruffin. As far as I can tell, they are distinct people, with separate histories, and this does not impact your Lee argument. If it can be shown they are indeed the same person, they can be merged. I’ll post back when down.

My REPLY:

Please do not do this as the Nancy Ruffin profile I added with her children and descendants is the 'Lee" Nacy Ruffin - I think YOU have mistaken or confused the two.

Thank you as this is quite out of ordinary and not okay to do - as there are the descendants and DNA proving who they are watching what is to be done publicly - I am stressing this again to do the right thing by them please. They are who I am trying to get this acknowledgement for.

It is my research of the matter, and I would appreciate the respect to keep it intact regardless. Thank you.

Erica Howton

"Did any descendants of George W. Ruffin (c 1800 - 1863) participate in the DNA study?"

Why would they" That DNA has no relevance - only Lee DNA has any value for confirmation - if you are suggesting that without their DNA that the Lee line descendants are invalid than that is ridiculous as then that would pertain to any other family with mixed marriages and children from different parents .... not even an argument just IMO a way to deflect from the validity of the truth in the presented DNA.

It is becoming apparent the resistance to accept this as fact by the irrelevant arguments to cause confusion perhaps that have nothing to do with the facts.

Asking for the RIGHT thing to be done for the families involved. The world is bigger than what occurs here on Geni - I just though maybe Geni wanting to be 'Gold Standard" would want to be first to take the step in this healing process for the families and descendants of Robert E Lee and Nancy Ruffin. Maybe I had too much faith in the people on here. My bad.