Rather than proposing names why not first develop a few objective criteria
for the selection of these "great" figures?  The criteria can then be
applied to the pool of candidates.

Would Woodrow Wilson be excluded for endorsing Birth of a Nation?  Or for
opinions appearing in History of the American People?  Or would all
segregationists be excluded as racists?  Of course, that would take us back
to the discussion that swirled around James Madison (and other Founding
Fathers) a month ago:  do we judge the protagonists of yesterday by the
mores of today?  Many opinions were voiced, but I don't recall a concensus.
(Compare, for example, the posts of Paul Heinegg and Doug Deal).

Or simply duck the issue as it pertains to Woodrow Wilson:  born in Staunton
to non-Virgnina parents, he only spent his first year in Virginia . . .
before his family moved to Augusta, Georgia.  I don't believe he ever lived
in Virginia again.  Besides, in addition to being a "racist", he was a
"calvinist" and a "naïve optimist" and a person of suspect character:  as a
student at Davidson College, he was reportedly fined twenty-five cents for
spitting out of the window of his literary society.

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Heinegg
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 20:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Woodrow Wilson

The problem with including Woodrow Wilson is that Virginia has a sizeable 
African American population and Wilson was a "great" racist.
Paul