https://www.geni.com/discussions/199304?msg=1494891&page=1
Richard Lee AKA The SHARMAN AKA SHEARMAN AKA “SHOEMAKER” ????
Maven B. Helms on7/21/2019 at 11:34 AM
“Entirely too much faith has been placed in the slender evidence of a single christening report from this parish, regarding connections to the Coton Hall Lees and the Famous American Lees.
Unfortunately the original record thoroughly destroys the former connection, and subsequent records indicate *very* strongly against the latter.
The Richard Lee who was christened at Shrewsbury St. Chad's on May 15, 1617, was the son of Richard Lee, "Sharman" (shear-man, a cloth-cutter, possibly a worker in figured napped fabrics, e.g. figured velvets).
Richard Lee the shear-man died in Shrewsbury and was buried Jan 14, 1621 (New Style). (Richard Lee, Gent., of Coton Hall, was recorded as having been buried *at* Coton Hall, and the remains later removed to Alveley.)
Richard Lee the son (a "corviser" or cordwainer = high-quality shoemaker) appears to have married someone named Mary or Marie, and to have produced a clutch of little Lees between 1642 and 1653:
642, July 7. Elizabeth, d. of Richard & Marie Lea ... bap.
1642/43, Feb. 2. Andrewe, s. of Richard & Mary Lea ... bap.
1645, Dec. 4. Richard, s. of Richard & Mary Lea ... bap.
1647, Sep. 8. Marie, d. of Richard Lea, corviser, & Marie ... bap.
1647, Dec. 25. Marie, d. of Richard Lea, corviser ... bur. [oh dear]
1653, Aug. 28. Daniell, s. of Richard Lea, corviser, & Marie ... bap.
1661, May 8. John Boodell, who died att Rich. Leas house ... bur. [had his own house?]
1662, July 26. Richard Lea, corviser, of Barker Street ... bur.
1675, May 8. Daniel, s. of Mary Lea, widd. ... bur.
1676/77, Jan. 1. Mary Lea, widd: ... bur.
In essence, this appears to have been the same class of error, with less excuse, as assuming that John Lyes and Jane Hancock of Worcester, England, were the parents of Col. Richard Lee of Virginia. (*That* one at least had some flimsy associations to lean on, and no contravening evidence.)”
Now – I know Maven has a vivid imagination and gifted ‘storytelling’ abilities so over the past few days I have spent hours searching for the exact records that would validate her assertions and argument about the UK Parish Record for Col Richard Lee as son of Richard Lee of Coton … since after many requests about this Maven has still yet to supply valid primary sources from valid primary parish records – not unverifiable archives but actual legal parish records from Shropshire/Shrewsbury UK.
For public access to reliable UK Parish records: https://www.findmypast.co.uk/sign-in?nextpage=%2faccount%2fpayments...
Anyone can search for free.
And how ironic it is Maven tries to project and turn around the facts regarding her statement
“In essence, this appears to have been the same class of error, with less excuse, as assuming that John Lyes and Jane Hancock of Worcester, England, were the parents of Col. Richard Lee of Virginia. (*That* one at least had some flimsy associations to lean on, and no contravening evidence.)”
When it was she who made the ‘assumptions’ and it was I who pointed out the “flimsy associations to lean on, and no contravening evidence” by Thorndale – see: https://www.geni.com/discussions/193270?authenticity_token=eklLQMpJ...
As in today’s argument it is Maven that has not given the valid associations and contravening evidence about her claims of Richard Lee the ‘Sharman” or “Sherman” or “Shoemaker” – Parish archive location records and transcripts … so it is she who is doing the storytelling in alignment to Thorndale.
Let me break down this argument so easy to follow with facts in regard to UK Parish Record for Col Richard Lee as son and Richard Lee of Coton father.
1. First – UK Parish records are written in Latin – and where the handwriting may be illegible for some is where the transcripts can clarify as these are transcribed exactly as the original records are written. Just like USA legal records are transcribed. Thus the transcription for the UK Parish Record image of the original record in question – verbatim:
Richard (Richardus) Lee; Present at baptism of Richard Lee:; County Shropshire; Register type Composite; Register date range 1616-1638; Archive reference P253/A/1/1; Page 2; Record set Shropshire Baptisms; Category Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers); Subcategory Parish Baptisms; Collections from United Kingdom, England; (source image attached)
Richard (Richardus) Lee listed as present (Father) at baptism of Col. Richard Lee; County Shropshire Register type Composite Register date range 1616-1638 Archive reference P253/A/1/1 Page 2 Record set Shropshire Baptisms Category Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers) Subcategory Parish Baptisms Collections from United Kingdom, England Note:source image attached - Primary Source:; First name(s) Richard; Last name Lee; Birth year -; Baptism year 1617; Baptism date 15 May 1617; Denomination Anglican; Place Shrewsbury, St Chad's; Father's first name(s) Richard; Mother's first name(s) -; Mother's last name -; Residence -; County Shropshire; Register type Composite; Register date range 1616-1638; Archive reference P253/A/1/1; Page 2; Record set Shropshire Baptisms; Category Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers); Subcategory Parish Baptisms; Collections from United Kingdom, England
2. Maven states that the illegible word she sees on record is for “Sharman” as a record of trade.
There is no Latin word “Sharman” that exists. See: http://www.genealogyintime.com/dictionaries/genealogy-latin-diction...
http://www.genproxy.co.uk/latin.htm
There are several Latin search engines in regard to use in genealogy. Check for yourself – no Sharman.
3. There was a surname “Sharman” or “Sherman” of that time in the UK – meaning “sheep-shearer” https://www.houseofnames.com/sherman-family-crest
But the record in question most definitely states LEE as both father/son surname.
4. UK Parish records also have a conformity in the format in which they were written as the were the legal documentation of a baptism/christening which did not include the listing of parental status or trade – to make my point:
“The baptism record has a set format - almost as if a form is being filled in.
It need to be thought of in that way …
1. The first section is the child's name
2. son of or daughter of
3. the fathers name
4. the mothers name
5. eius uxorus means his wife and there are numerous ways of spelling and abbreviating it
6. Natus means birth again there are variations of this
7. 8. 9.
The section with the most variability is this middle section describing when the event took place
Below you will see several options for this (this morning, this night, yesterday night etc) and then mention of the day of the week and then the hour of the day
10. the parish of - again there are lots of variations in how this is written
11. Baptised
12. the godparents. If not present then "pro eo " is put =represented by
13. the names of the godparents”…
https://www.ferranti.me/baptism-record-latin-translation.html
Again – feel free to research this truth on your own.
SO – again since it is Maven making the argument citing her research on Richard Lee “Sharman” … etc., she needs to provide the proof – not just a story or statements because saying something is so does not make it so.
And one must remember that during the periods between the mid-1500’s and 1600’s – Shrewsbury/Shropshire was hit hard by reoccurrences of the plague, and in the early 1600’s (from memory abt. 1604-1609) Shropshire lost around 1/3 of its occupants.
And it was the great plague pandemic in mid-1600’s that was the cause for the Constable family to send their oldest daughter on that fateful trip to the Virginia Colony where Anne was to meet and Marry Col Richard Lee … as we too are experiences a pandemic – but not as severe as the plague of 1640’s UK – it effects social economics and behaviors. Since the Constable family live in the family estate located in the London area they were affected quite tragically as they lost most of their children by the time of sending their daughter Anne to safety. They could not send their oldest surviving son as he was needed to run the estate – and sadly shortly after Anne’s arrival to the new colony her parents and brother succumbed to the plague – yet Richard made and kept his promise to Anne and sent for her two surviving sisters to come to America as well. Unfortunately, only one survived the voyage.
We Lee descendants of Col Richard Lee and Anne Constable can confirm our AU DNA matches to the surviving Constable descendants …
As well as other associated surnames to the descendants of Col Richard Lee and Anne Constable – including Heath, Allen, Bryant, Howard, Hancock … to name a few.
So – please provide proof not stories. Thank you.
