Robards–Donelson–Jackson relationship controversy
The Jackson campaign committee led by John Overton created and publicized an exculpatory narrative to paper over the irregular marriage that had occurred almost 40 years prior.
Overton's timeline and his characterization of the three parties to the "love triangle" was carried forward by later presidential biographers; in the late 20th century historians began to reassess the evidence and charge the Jackson campaign with a less-than-honest rendering of the facts.
Historians including Robert V. Remini and Ann Toplovich argue that the official Jackson version of their meeting and marriage, as presented during the election of 1828 was, for the most part, inauthentic.
The desertion and adultery approach was a well-planned stratagem for people living at such a distance from any state capital; it was the easiest (nearly the only nonviolent) justification for a formal divorce.
That Jackson's skirts were entirely clear in the circumstances which made this marriage desirable, it may not be easy to demonstrate; but that his conduct was that of a lawyer, or even of a person ordinarily considerate of consequences, it would be useless to maintain.
"[7] According to all available evidence, young Andrew Jackson and Rachel Donelson were "passionately in love with each other" in their youth and remained wholeheartedly devoted to one another for the rest of their lives.
"[9] In the words of Toplovich, despite diligent search by political allies, enemies, historians, and genealogists for the better part of 200 years, "No credible evidence of a marriage ceremony in Natchez has ever surfaced.
[13]: 329–330 Harriet Chappell Owsley argued that whatever marriage ritual happened took place in February or March 1791, or at least between October 1790 and April 1791, because over that period Rachel's last name changed from Donelson to Jackson in records of her father's estate.
Heiskell insisted that if the couple ever stayed together at Bruinsburg or environs, where Jackson traded in slaves and whiskey, it was definitely after they were properly introduced and married under the oversight of Southern gentlemen.
"[20] A 1985 genealogy of families related to the Greens mentions, "One article says that Rachel Robards had a brother, John, who owned some land near Natchez, who she came to visit.
Poindexter responded in a public letter, "If the assertion made by Mr. Jackson, was as true as it is ridiculously false that I induced my wife to marry me by a promise of twenty thousand dollars as her dower—I have at least the consolation to know that I did not steal her from the lawful owner!!
"[26] According to historian Donald B. Cole, increasing urbanization and changing social mores made room for the "romantic...view that such acts were private in nature and that love should be allowed to triumph over legalisms.
"[27] Historian Ann Toplovich, in her article about the love triangle, wrote about the impossible situation in which Rachel Stockley Donelson Robards found herself in 1789:[28] Unlike men, women did not have recourse to the divorce process as a means of recovering honor.
Gismondi argues that Lewis Robards' struggles with his personal finances, especially in a frontier economy where kinship networks were coequal with business relationships, were concerning to his in-laws.
