Henry,
Why can you not believe the "uncle Jefferson" oral claim of the Eston
Hemings family? And I do agree that it is a vexing mess but very easy to
understand IF all facts are known and "nuts & bolts" research be done.
It is a mess when the media sensationalizes it, when Samuel Wetmore adds
the confusing unproved statements attributed to Madison, when Dr.
Foster, without informing Nature, the media, etc., tests a known carrier
of the Jefferson (Randolph) DNA.......SURE there would be a match, when
Dr. Jordan assigns his Monticello Study to an "oral slave family
specialist" who uses two controversial "road maps" for research, and who
can come up with a completely unacceptable and laughable and biased
claim that possibly all of Sally's children were fathered by Thomas
Jefferson. How can a dedicated historian such as Dr. Jordan explain this
when only ONE Hemings was tested. He would not even suggest the Hemings
test a known son of Madison. Their report also suggested that during
three of Sally's conceptions that some of Randolph's sons were present
at Monticello but concluded that their ages of 14-20 would be 'TOO
YOUNG" to consider. Yes, I have a copy of the Monticello Report which is
well highlighted. What do you think of Dr. Ken Wallenborn's Minority
Report being completely DELETED from the original release of their
report?
We know that Callender got it wrong in his Campaign Lies article of
1802......DNA proved him a liar....NO Jefferson-Woodson match. As you
know, this was the "original" lie for many years before Brodie, and has
been perpetuated since by persons, some foundations and some in academia
to further their agendas.
Edmund Bacon, TJ's overseerer, and before that, a young man who lived
nearby and frequented there often BEFORE being officially hired as
overseer, stated that he saw someone OTHER than TJ exiting Sally's
quarters early in the morning. In Rev. Pearson's account, the name of a
father for Harriet II was DELETED to protect the individual.
I do not find the Woodson claim to being descended from Thomas Jefferson
a mystery at all. Dr. Foster and I frequently discussed the fact that we
didn't consider their claim as viable at all. In fact, I did much
research of TJ in France and elsewhere and pretty well pinned down who a
"POSSIBLE" father for ANY RUMORED child conceived in France would be. It
was NOT TJ! We even discussed finding descendants of those we suspected,
but when the DNA results were returned we dropped all such research. Our
suspicions were confirmed.....there being NO Jefferson-Woodson match.
If historians, book authors, certain foundation officials would not
approach the controversy that "he's guilty" and approach it from a
"level playing field" then we would be hearing a much different story.
The public has been fooled, lied to and manipulated long
enough...........Dr. Dan Jordan.....will YOU conduct another study,
using ALL available research from any source??
The Fossett claims are not worthy of even a discussion but just shows
how some people "jump on the bandwagon" for recognition after the
subject has become deceased. The Waverly Watchman newspaper, an
opposition paper to Samuel Wetmore's paper, pretty well reported the
willingness of people to want to upgrade their image at the expense of
others.
Speaking of the need to collect the William Hemings DNA, let it be known
that Shay Banks-Young, a descendant of Madison Hemings, and 7 other
cousins oppose this and she told me that they will NEVER permit this and
are "HAPPY" with their oral history.........are we?
I have faith in the McMurry's book which tackles the rumor of Sally and
Martha Jefferson being half-sisters. They expended much time, money and
effort in arriving at their conclusions......a rumor only.
Herb Barger
I also don't think the "Jefferson uncle" oral history in Eston's line
proves
anything one way or the other. In general, the historical testimony on
all
sides of this issue is a vexing mess--Madison Hemings, the Randolphs,
Callender, and Edmund Bacon all got some things wrong and some things
right.
The Woodsons are a mystery. And then we have the Fossetts--but that's
for
another time.
As Herb mentions, the McMurrys have tried to knock down the story of
Sally
being the half-sister of Martha Jefferson, but I do not find their
argument
persuasive at all. If that story had originated as a political smear and
was
baseless, as the McMurrys suggest, I think Ellen or Jeff Randolph would
have
brought it up to deny it.
Herb raises an excellent point -- we should try to extract DNA from the
remains of Madison's son. History would be served, but the family
doesn't
want it done. A pity. It could answer a couple of big questions.
Henry Wiencek
______________________________________
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
|
