Mr. Dixon,
Precisely whom among free people would you expect to record
that the author of the Declaration of Independence and 3rd
President of the United States was having sex with a female
servant, half-sister to his late wife? Jefferson was a public figure
and he would certainly have been careful about his reputation, as
would his friends, family, and visitors. How many people at
Monticello were literate besides TJ and his daughters? Whom
among the enslaved, for example the descendants of Sally
Hemings who claim to be TJ's offspring, would you believe?
I know this is tedious to many of this list, but the level of denial is
also tedious to those of us who have assumed that slaves were
acquired to satisfy their "masters'" appetites. To assume that
those appetites extended only to good food, fine wines, and
excessive and innovative building and garden design, to assume
that a leader who never took a vow of chastity nonetheless lived
celibate for 34 years though he owned a number of attractive
women, belies what can be learned about human nature. (See, for
example, the many sexual histories of English middle class men,
published anonymously in Havelock Ellis, The Psychology of Sex,
4 vols. 1900 circa.)
Historians don't use legal methodology because we cannot
compel testimony, nor punish perjury. We work, as Winthrop
Jordan has noted in passing in the latest issue of the William &
Mary Quarterly, using probability. This may not satisfy the lawyers
on the list, but that cannot be helped.
Date sent: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 18:13:43 -0500 (EST)
From: "Richard E. Dixon" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: "high crimes and misdemeanors"
To: [log in to unmask]
Send reply to: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
<[log in to unmask]>
> In a message dated 3/28/2002 12:44:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > What "direct evidence" would survive such a real, but now quite
> > anachronistic property relationship? Marriage certificate? Civil suit
> > for child support? Rape charges? Challenge to the filing of Thomas
> > Jefferson's will, in the interest of his offspring?
>
> Mr. Forsythe:
> The lack of any evidence that Sally Hemings was even in the consciousness
> of anyone at Monticello effectively rules out that her sex life was under
> Jefferson's scrutiny, whoever she might choose to have impregnate her. I
> know it is a popular argument with those who come to their decision
> through some power of perception which doesn't require evidence to pose
> the query, "Well, what do you want-"Marriage certificate? Civil suit for
> child support? Rape charges? Challenge to the filing of Thomas
> Jefferson's will, in the interest of his offspring?" No, but something
> would be helpful. Why don't you start with a witness to them touching in
> some way? No, that's too difficult. How about laughing or talking to each
> other? Still too tough. Let's make it easy. Describe a time where they
> just looked at each other. That shouldn't be too hard. They must have
> looked at other once during 35 years if they had four (five, six?)
> children together. You have many people for possible witnesses who would
> have observed a look, the grandchildren of Jefferson who lived at
> Monticello, the daughters, the brother, sister and nephews, not to mention
> the hundreds of visitors, and of course, the family of Sally Hemings.
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Richard E. Dixon Attorney at Law 4122 Leonard Drive Fairfax, VA 22030
> 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
Harold S. Forsythe
Assistant Professor History
Director: Black Studies
Fairfield University
Fairfield, CT 06430-5195
(203) 254-4000 x2379
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
