Her Geni profile shows her as the daughter of John Rolfe. On werelate.com I found the following:Origin and Parentage
The first proven record of Ruth, the wife of Thomas Whittier, is a Salisbury record of the birth of a child named Mary, daughter of Tho and Ruth Whittier, on 9: 8m: 1647 [October 9, 1647]. The Haverhill birth records for Thomas Whittier's later-born children indicate that Ruth's maiden name was Green, and her identity as Ruth Green has been accepted by the secondary sources. The origin and parentage of Ruth Green has, however, remained a mystery.
Rolfe Connection Debunked
A brief 1882 NEHGR article about Henry and John Rolfe caused great mischief when it stated that:
The sister of Henry and John Rolfe, as we learn from their wills, married Thomas Whittier of Haverhill, but as the records of that town call his wife's name "Ruth Green," she must have been either a half sister to Rolfe, or a widow (Green) when she married Whittier. John Rolfe in his will expressly names two of Whittier's sons as my "sisters sons."
This theory was then borrowed and repeated in the entry for Thomas Whittier in the 1897 "Old Families of Salisbury and Amesbury," and the 1907 "Descendants of Chase Whitcher," and, as a result, has found its way into many family trees.
A 1912 NEHGR article, however, disclosed records in England that convincingly established that a sister of Henry and John Rolfe named Mary married Richard Whittier (Thomas's father) and was Thomas's mother. With this new evidence, it became clear that the author of the 1882 NEHGR article about Henry and John Rolfe had misinterpreted the language in their wills. The bequests by John Rolfe to "Richard whittyr my sisters sonn" and "her [or his, depending on the transcription] sonn John whityr" were not bequests to Thomas Whittier's children but to Thomas's brothers (or, brother and nephew under the "his" transcription), and Henry's will referred to Thomas Whittier as a "my Kinsman" not because Thomas had married Henry's sister, but because Thomas was the son of Henry's sister. It thus turns out that, contrary to the claim in the 1882 NEHGR article, there is nothing in Henry and John Rolfe's wills that suggests that Ruth Green was related to the Rolfes. The updated interpretation of the wills of Henry and John Rolfe was acknowledged and adopted by the author of the 1937 "Descendants of Thomas Whittier and Ruth Green," which, given the absence of any evidence connecting her to the Rolfes, simply stated that "nothing is known of [Ruth Green's] parentage."
Thomas Greene of Malden Connection Debunked
Some have suggested that Ruth was the daughter of Thomas Green of Malden. However, there is no evidence that positively connects Ruth to Thomas. Moveover, there are reasons to believe that she was not a daughter of Thomas. First, Thomas lived in Malden, which is on the outskirts of Boston, a fairly long way (in the framework of the 1600s) from Salisbury where Thomas lived and where Thomas and Ruth originally settled. Second, the book "A Genealogical Sketch of the Descendants of Thomas Greene of Malden" does not list Ruth as a child of Thomas Green of Malden. Third, and most convincingly, the will of Thomas Greene of Malden includes bequests to 10 children but does not mention Ruth.
The Search for Plausible Parentage
With the Rolfes and Thomas Greene of Malden eliminated as plausible parents of Ruth, we are left to search for alternative candidates.
From the fact that Ruth had her first child in 1647 and her last child in 1669, we can assume that she was probably born sometime before 1629 (so that she would have been at least 18 at the birth of his first child) and sometime after 1626 (so she would not have been older than 43 at the birth of her last child). Based on a presumed birth in 1626-1629, Ruth could have been born in New England to parents who immigrated between 1620-1629, have immigrated with her parents anytime between 1627 and 1646, or, like Thomas, immigrated by herself as a servant sometime between, say, 1642 and 1646.
Unfortunately, while there were a number of other Greenes and Green in New England in the 1600s, no evidence has been found that connects Ruth to any of them. And no passenger list has been found that lists a Ruth Green or Greene as a passenger.
Since, more likely than not, Ruth would have been born in England, records of her birth are mostly likely to be found there. A search in familysearch.org, ancestry.com and findmypast.com for Ruth Green (or variants thereof) born in England between 1626 and 1629 finds only two matches: a Ruth Greene baptized in Sheffield, York on September 21, 1628 and a Ruthe Greene baptized in Great Bedwyn, Wiltshire on July 24, 1628. Of the two, Ruth from Great Bedwyn is clearly the more plausible. It is more likely that immigrants from the same area in England would end up in the same area in New England and marry, and Salisbury, Wiltshire is much closer to Great Bedwyn, WIltshire (30 miles) than it is to Sheffield, York (210 miles). Moreover, there is a record of the death of a Ruth Greene in Sheffield, York on March 31, 1634, which suggests that it is likely that Ruth from Sheffield died young.
Most Plausible Origin and Parentage
Based on the evidence above, (i) it is reasonably plausible that Ruth Green who married Thomas Whittier was the Ruthe Greene who was baptized in Great Bedwyn, Wiltshire on July 24, 1628 and was the daughter of a man named Thomas Greene, and (ii) there is currently no other candidate or theory that is more plausible.
It appears that we really don't know who her parents were.
Any thoughts?
Phil Gibbs
