On Sep 25, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Herbert Barger wrote:

> Beg pardon Lyle. TJ and RJ DO share the same DNA as did the five  
> tested
> Jeffersons whose DNA was tested. Four were IDENTICAL and one had one
> digit off.

We agree there because the test can not do otherwise as set up.

"Y" chromosome profiles will be the same for the male line, as in  
father, son, brother, uncle, etc. and cannot differentiate between  
them. It shows a common paternal ancestry. TJ & RJ had "Y" profiles  
because they share a common paternal ancestor. At that level, what you  
say is true, but it cannot be taken farther than that.

What the adherents to SH having children by TJ have clung to is that  
there was a Jefferson ancestor who had a child by an African-American  
woman. What the adherents to the TJ not fathering a child or children  
with SH have clung to is that the test cannot rule out another  
Jefferson as the father. What the DNA says is that there is a male  
Jefferson who fathered a child by an African-American, but cannot  
distinguish WHICH Jefferson contributed his DNA. For either side to  
claim TJ did or did not is not in the evidence. All it can claim is  
that some Jefferson did, but not which one.

BUT, there are other tests that can do that. Current 37-marker level  
DNA testing can apparently do the trick. You need to have material  
from all the groups to make it work and even then it sometimes isn't  
possible, given current capabilities to do so. but DNA testing is the  
only method that stands a snow-ball's chance on the Hinges of Hell's  
Furnace of doing that.


> And NONE were twins. Possibly you may be a geneticist, and
> you may wish to tell us if you are, until then I will continue to
> believe what the geneticists tell me.
I'm an archaeologist with a background in scientific methods. Google  
and evaluate the potential capability of DNA, read the literature.

> If there were no possibility of
> having a match.......why test anyone?
At some level that's reasonable, at other's its an absurd reductionism.

> Some New England male Jefferson
> DID NOT match those five tested.
"Y" testing allows for what might be termed clan (in the Scottish  
sense where there are large groups of McGregors who are different from  
large groups of McIntosh's, etc.) affinity to be established. It is a  
male line descent that one is establishing by it.
>
>
> NO, Lyle the secret of this study lies in a test of a known "uncle
> Jefferson", meaning Randolph,
That is absolutely correct. And with any other folks who claim  
relationship so that their claims may be validated.

> that the Eston descendant had always
> carried according to family oral history. That decision, made without
> notifying Nature and other researchers as I had suggested, reminds  
> me of
> the Monticello study where the sole aim was to find TJ guilty as
> charged. Read www.tjheritage.org for Dr. Wallenborn's revelation of  
> this
> dastardly act which would discredit TJ. Too many people have a vested
> interest in seeing that TJ is discredited
No doubt there are folks who want to see TJ tarnished, as there are  
who will not see tarnish no matter what. That's where scientific  
enquiry comes in as a dispassionate arbiter.

> and what I tell the reader is
> correct.
As far as you believe it which is fine. But it is not absolutely  
correct and at the stage of DNA testing cannot be morphed to do so.

So, are you willing to have DNA done for all of the parties?

Lyle Browning


>
>
> Herb Barger
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lyle E. Browning
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Annette Gordon-Reed praised by Edmund Morgan
>
> Sorry, Herb, but no. TJ and RJ do not share the same DNA profile. That
> would only happen if TJ and RJ were identical twins. Otherwise, it can
> be differentiated. There have been huge advances in the last 5 years
> in the field such that what couldn't be done then is do-able now.
> Likewise, for 10 years ago, it's the relative dark ages compared to
> current capabilities.
>
> So, again, if you want to settle this, rather than bloviate about it,
> then the definitive answer will come from those chompers. On the other
> hand, maybe in a few years, re-testing the samples from the original
> test will provide the answers. Wouldn't that be just dandy? Both sides
> of the divide would be left gasping. The Eston descendants who seem
> desperately to want to validate their oral histories and the TJ
> sainthood types who cannot conceive (sorry;) that TJ might have
> committed miscegenation (gasp) will just have to go with what the
> science determines, as they should.
>
> Lyle Browning
>
>
> On Sep 24, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Herbert Barger wrote:
>
>> For those who think that DNA available from TJ personally or "his
>> choppers" would reveal the truth are unaware of the capabilities of
>> DNA.
>> IF available a Jefferson DNA match (Thomas and Randolph) would be the
>> same but NO distinction as to who fathered Eston. The male Jefferson
>> lines tested from TJ's uncle Field Jefferson are scientifically
>> suitable
>> and accepted for this test.........no need to did up Thomas.
>>
>> Herb Barger
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lyle E. Browning
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 11:36 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Annette Gordon-Reed praised by Edmund Morgan
>>
>> Before the fabled DNA tests, we had all sorts of discussion about who
>> did what, and with whom and when, ad nauseam for most of us. Now that
>> the DNA tests have been completed, we have the same round of
>> discussion with a little bit more conclusive but not definitive  
>> enough
>> information. None of it is able to demonstrate, or prove,  
>> conclusively
>> or otherwise that TJ did or did not father children with Sally  
>> Hemings
>> or anyone else for that matter. What we do have partisans of a
>> literary bent using the evidence for their own purposes when the
>> scientific evidence cannot be made to fit the proposition. The DNA
>> shows that someone in the male Jefferson line fathered one child with
>> a person of African-American heritage. The argument then moves to
>> which male Jefferson did so. One did so, that much is proven.
>>
>> The current thrust from the literary types has narrowed from the
>> broader did/didn't/wouldn't paradigm to which male Jefferson did the
>> deed(s). As is usual from people without a scientific background,  
>> they
>> have used the very same evidence to step off the proverbial
>> interpretative cliff. The DNA test does not say that TJ did so, nor
>> does it say, because neither position is provable from the evidence,
>> that he did not. The two positions are: that Saint TJ would not have
>> done this or that with the other side arguing that the only too human
>> (or exploitive or whatever pejorative) TJ did this or that. Partisans
>> on both sides have erected their artillery and are bombarding their
>> respective opposite sides. The noise and constant explosions are
>> tiresome.
>>
>> Verbiage is not going to change the argument. Drowning everyone in
>> verbiage is certainly not going to change the argument.
>>
>> If more definitive answers are sought, then TJ's teeth probably have
>> DNA that will suffice. Randolph's teeth will show whether his male
>> line was responsible but that will not stop the diehards on either
>> side of the actual TJ argument. So, it's time to decide whether more
>> bloviating is the name of the game or whether it is important enough
>> to go to the source to determine the actual answers. Arguments can be
>> made on both sides about whether TJ's chompers ought to be tested.
>>
>> But if you seek answers to the question of whether TJ and Sally
>> produced offspring, then test the chompers. TJ championed scientific
>> enquiry, enlightenment, reason, etc. after all.
>>
>> Lyle Browning
>>
>>
>> On Sep 24, 2008, at 10:05 AM, Herbert Barger wrote:
>>
>>> Professor Henriques I have not said that the three mentioned
>>> professors
>>> are not some of America's finest professors. All I know about these
>>> are
>>> that they and others, including Monticello, write unproven and
>>> accusatory statements on subjects (DNA Study) of which they are not
>>> proficient or qualified to comment on in such strong terms on.
>>>
>>> Herb Barger
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Henriques
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 11:57 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Annette Gordon-Reed praised by Edmund Morgan
>>>
>>> Edmund Morgan, Joseph Ellis, and Peter Onuf are three of America's
>>> finest
>>> historians. Mr. Barger, IMHO, has let his obsession with proving
>>> Jefferson did
>>> not father children by Sally Hemings make him into a poster child of
>>> how
>>> a
>>> strong predisposition to a certain view can keep a person from being
>>> objective.
>>>
>>> Peter Henriques, Professor of History, Emeritus, George Mason
>>> University
>>> and
>>> author of
>>> Realistic Visionary: A Portrait of George Washington.
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 9/23/2008 5:34:53 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> [log in to unmask] writes:
>>>
>>> We all  may remember that she wrote another book in which she
>>> "twisted"
>>> into  another meaning of an Ellen Randolph Coolidge letter to her
>>> husband. In  that same book she also said that the DNA test DID NOT
>>> prove
>>> that TJ was  the father of the Eston Hemings descendant. Keeping
>>> this in
>>> mind let's move  to her present book as reviewed by a friend and
>>> frequent
>>> forum associate,  Edmund S. Morgan and for good measure she calls
>>> upon
>>> another writer and  self stated LIAR, as exposed by the Boston  
>>> Globe,
>>> Professor Joseph J.  Ellis, to write a blurb for her book cover. Let
>>> us
>>> not overlook Peter  Onuf,(book cover statement: "Jefferson's
>>> Virginia---and Jefferson  himself---will never look the same." The
>>> public
>>> could rightly reply: not if  you had your way! These people, who are
>>> sponsored and supported by certain  foundations, and above all
>>> Monticello, where many readers probably think  their donations and
>>> gifts
>>> are used to honor Mr. Jefferson. They did remove,  MEMORIAL from
>>> their
>>> title, who are they now memorializing? "Forget it",  these and other
>>> like
>>> authors (one being the bearer of the news of Prof.  Morgan's NYT
>>> article), and a few others discussed on these pages weeks  earlier,
>>> use
>>> their classrooms and books to "badmouth" a founding father who  DID
>>> NOT
>>> father slave children that my long research reveals. They all DO
>>> have a
>>> deep and resounding agenda. Mrs Gordon-Reed's book is FULL  of
>>> misstatements and outright distortions of the truth. One example:   
>>> On
>>> dust cover: "....Sally, who bore seven children by Jefferson over
>>> the
>>> course of their thirty-eight year liaison." WHY hasn't she  made
>>> headlines when she found this to be truth....Monticello, myself and
>>> the
>>> world have been waiting for this factual evidence, where did you  
>>> find
>>> it
>>> Annette under a rock on Fawn Brodie's property? The author is
>>> pulling
>>> out all stops to convince all readers to political correctness  and
>>> historical revisionism. Is this the work of a responsible
>>> professional
>>> professor or does it fit the mold of Prof. Joseph Ellis who  was
>>> relieved
>>> from teaching assignments for one year for lying to his  students,  
>>> as
>>> exposed in the Boston Globe? Let the reader  decide!
>>>
>>> Herbert Barger
>>> Jefferson Family  Historian
>>> www.tjheritage.org
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Discussion of research and writing  about Virginia history
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jon  Kukla
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 7:49 AM
>>> To:  [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: [VA-HIST] Annette Gordon-Reed praised by  Edmund Morgan
>>>
>>> Posted at History News Network, Monday, September 22,  2008 Annette
>>> Gordon-Reed : Edmund Morgan calls her one of the best  historians of
>>> her
>>> generation  <http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/54782.html>
>>>
>>> Source: *Marie Morgan  and Edmund S. Morgan in the New York Review  
>>> of
>>> Books
>>> in the course of a  review of Annette Gordon-Reed's new book,  The
>>> Hemingses
>>> of
>>>
>>
> Monticello*<http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21855?utm_medium=email&utm_s
>>> ource=Campaign+Monitor&utm_content=91964597&utm_campaign=Joseph
>>> +Lelyveld
>>> +on+John+%26+Sarah%2c+Michael+Chabon+on+Obama&utm_term=Jefferson
>>> %26%2382
>>> 17%3bs+Concubine>(10-9-08)
>>>
>>> The  Hemingses of Monticello is a brilliant book. It marks the  
>>> author
>>> as
>>> one
>>> of the most astute, insightful, and forthright historians of  this
>>> generation. Not least of Annette Gordon-Reed's achievements is  her
>>> ability
>>> to bring fresh perspectives to the life of a man whose  personality
>>> and
>>> character have been scrutinized, explained, and justified  by a host
>>> of
>>> historians and biographers. They have struggled to illuminate,  and
>>> sometimes
>>> to gloss over, the dark places in his life. Like many  upright  
>>> public
>>> figures
>>> who know they are pure and their enemies vile, he  was capable of
>>> deviousness
>>> and treachery. He instigated the savage  attacks by the anti-
>>> Federalist
>>> National Gazette editor Philip Freneau on  John Adams, once his fast
>>> friend,
>>> and was flummoxed rather than ashamed  at being caught out paying
>>> Freneau
>>> to
>>> be his mouthpiece. Such actions  gave rise in Jefferson biographies
>>> to
>>> characterizations like "enigma" and  "sphinx."
>>>
>>> The full review is at  http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21855?email
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jon  Kukla
>>> www.JonKukla.com
>>>
>>> ______________________________________
>>> To  subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>>> instructions
>>> at
>>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>>
>>> ______________________________________
>>> To  subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>>> instructions  at
>>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> **************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life
>>> financial
>>> challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news and  
>>> information,
>>> tips and
>>> calculators.      (http://www.walletpop.com/?
>>> NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
>>>
>>> ______________________________________
>>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>>> instructions
>>> at
>>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>>
>>> ______________________________________
>>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>>> instructions at
>>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________
>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>> instructions
>> at
>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>>
>> ______________________________________
>> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
>> instructions at
>> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the  
> instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the  
> instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

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