Mr. Dixon:  There have been plenty of scholars who've been called out for "fudging" data:  The big flap over Michael Bellisiles's Arming America comes quickest to mind.   Of course, he was not simply selective in his use of quotations or other material, or cropping quotations, but appears to have fabricated evidence.   

Your concern is a reasonable one since, as you point out, the meaning of Coolidge's words is altered by the omission; it is not merely a tightening up of the language.  Where can we find the full text of the Coolidge letter that you cite?   

All of this, however, puts in focus the reason for Coolidge's letter-- she was addressing the persistent rumors about Jefferson and is female slaves and what she labled "yellow children.".  But her information that Jefferson's room was never visited by female slaves while he was in it must be second-hand at best.  Ellen Coolidge was only born in 1796.  It is understandable that she would want to defend her grandfather from what she considered unjust allegations, but as evidence that Jefferson was never visited by a female slave, well, I don't see her letter making for a very strong case.

Daid Kiracofe

  
David Kiracofe
History
Tidewater Community College
Chesapeake Campus
1428 Cedar Road
Chesapeake, Virginia 23322
757-822-5136
>>> Richard Dixon <[log in to unmask]> 10/27/06 5:15 PM >>>
The various comments on the obligation to provide complete and accurate quotations raise the more interesting issue of consequence. The rules seem to be understood, but when they are violated, what happens?.

In her letter of October 24, 1858 Ellen Coolidge wrote to her husband:
“His (Thomas Jefferson’s) apartment had no private entrance not perfectly accessible and visible to all the household. No female domestic ever entered his chambers except at hours when he was known not to be there and none could have entered without being exposed to the public gaze.”

In her "Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy," Annette Gordon-Reed  included as an appendix the letter of Ellen Coolidge, but altered it in this manner: “No female domestic ever entered his chambers except at hours when he was known not to be in the public gaze”

Gordon-Reed later brushed off the alteration, although it reversed the meaning of the sentence. The University Press of Virginia first published her book in 1997 and continues to publish it without correction or an errata insert.  Inexplicably, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation printed the original Coolidge hand-written letter in its Research Committee Report in 2000, but used the Gordon-Reed letter as the “printed version.” Today, Monticello continues to reference the Gordon-Reed version on its website with no explanation that it is in error.

No college student could commit such a distortion and escape censure. As always, the lower the violator is on the totem pole, the easier it is to pile on. Can anyone cite an instance of condemnation from academics when fellow academics are caught?

Richard E. Dixon
Editor, Jefferson Notes
Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society
703-691-0770
fax 703-691-0978

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html