The Hemings apologists apparently subscribe to the theory that the status of the female is
proportional to the status of the male she can attract.
J South
a/k/a Jeffrey D. Southmayd
-----Original Message-----
From: Herbert Barger <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:57 am
Subject: Re: TJF re-asserting statistical science?
Mr. Corneliussen,
You asked two questions which I will be happy to reply to because as
Jefferson Family Historian who assisted Dr. Foster with the DNA Study and as
Founder of the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society (www.tjheritage.org), I
have the answers. I might bring it to the reader's attention that the Thomas
Jefferson Heritage Society was recently honored by the Virginia Commonwealth
Senate in a proclamation for our research.
A. Yes, Monticello does continue to cite biased information as explained by
Dr. Ken Wallenborn when his Minority Report was HIDDEN by Daniel Jordan,
Past President, Monticello. As recently as a week ago I exchanged research
and recommendations with Cinder Stanton, Senior Researcher there,
recommending that they conduct an UPDATE to their opinions and guesses. She
still maintains that they will maintain their presence stance. This is WRONG
and gives the public an INACCURATE assessment of the controversy. This topic
is such a closely held matter that the general public does not recognize
just what is going on. May I please suggest that readers place an order at
Amazon or other book dealers for a book exposing this twisted and biased
study, "In Defense of Thomas Jefferson, The Sally Hemings Sex Scandal" The
book may be advance ordered and will be available on June 9, 2009.
B. Yes, there was a Statistical Analysis done by a Washington, D.C. well
recognized Professional Group, as reported in the Washington Post shortly
after the DNA results were announced in 1998. They severely took the
Monticello IN-HOUSE research report to task for such biased reporting. Dr.
Foster, of whom I assisted, wrote me in an e-mail, that he was prepared to
write an identical article for the Wash. Post until he read the excellent
and revealing article.
Monticello does not seem to want to cite any study including the great
Scholars Commission Study (13 prominent professors who found NO proof that
TJ fathered slave children), or comment or book that opposes their agenda
based research.
A short synopsis is posted here for you and other serious researchers:
* Nothing proves TJ fathered slave children and this makes reference also to
Annette Gordon-Reed's latest book in which
she BOLDLY proclaims that 7 Hemings children were fathered by TJ. This is
OUTRAGEOUS unprofessional and UNFOUNDED accusations. In her first book
(which was one of two major sources for the Monticello Study), she
completely rearranged a letter meaning from a TJ granddaughter to her
husband and she also states that DNA did not prove that Eston's descendant
was a descendant of TJ. SO, what has she unearthed since that makes 7
correct? I asked Cinder Stanton of this "7 finding by AGR", since possibly I
had been asleep when this important, "Earth Shattering" research FIND had
occurred but wished not to comment on what her good friend had written. The
study "jumped the track" early in the study, Dr Foster (whose wife descends
from a man who had supposedly given James Callender misinformation that
placed Mr. Jefferson in a bad light that was proved by DNA to be a lie),
tested a KNOWN carrier of the Jefferson DNA whose family had always claimed
descent from "a Jefferson uncle or nephew" (I have a copy of a letter to
this affect). Eston NEVER claimed descent from TJ as Madison did in his
DEFECTIVE newspaper article. Of course this article, which was strictly
believed and followed by the Monticello Study, was greatly flawed when
Madison states that Dolley Madison named him on the occasion of his birth at
Monticello while she was visiting there in Jan 21, 1805. NO such meeting
occurred on this date (the Madisons NEVER traveled to Va. from Washington
during winter), so are we to believe that others of his statements are
LIES.....my research indicates....YES. This was a document relied on by the
Chairman of their study, an African-American oral history specialist hired
to head the Getting Word Project (recording the slave input there). Dr.
Wallenborn reports that the study was programmed with an pre-conceived
intention of finding Mr. Jefferson guilty. And this, Mr. Corneliussen, is
why you see this FALSE poster there.......just imagine their claim that
possibly ALL of Sally's children were fathered by TJ when only ONE was
tested and the Madison descendants REFUSE to DNA test their ancestor, thus
there is NO DNA proof that Eston and Madison had the same father.
A process has evolved at Monticello and elsewhere where Mr. Jefferson's
interests are not best served. The latest "real beginning" of the drive to
"get" TJ because he owned slaves, etc. was when the October 1992 symposium
was formed at the University of Virginia under the guidance of Prof. Peter
Onuf, a history professor sponsored by Monticello. This symposium, which
occurs annually and continues to this date, continues to believe the FALSE
DNA results and is closely tied to Monticello.
There is no level playing field for FULL research, they dropped the word,
MEMORIAL from their title and continue to receive input from the Getting
Word Project membership........even though they took down their web page
which gave a list of 10 prominent African-American personages.
Summary: There is NO proof that TJ fathered any slave child. Monticello and
certain favored authors are content to confuse the uninitiated public
confused by DNA and overwhelming public relations. In my opinion the public
should be concerned that their famous founding father is being maligned in
the name of political correctness and historical revisionism. I would
suggest that Monticello be advised of your discontent with inaccurate and
biased reporting which I am of the opinion that is damaging to their
attendance and donation efforts. They may own his home, HOWEVER, we, the
public, own his legacy and it is being trampled in a major agenda.
Herb Barger
www.jeffersondna.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of S. Corneliussen
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 7:41 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [VA-HIST] TJF re-asserting statistical science?
A friend who knows of my interest in the ways in which the authority of
science is invoked in the Hemings-TJ controversy was visiting a new Thomas
Jefferson Foundation exhibit and jotted down this caption: "Based on
documentary, scientific, and statistical studies and oral history, many
historians now believe that years after his wife's death Thomas Jefferson
was the father of Sally Hemings' children." The friend is pretty sure that
that's very close to verbatim.
Leaving aside the old discussion about oral history vs. oral tradition, and
concerning only the mention of statistics: It's possible that all that's
meant is, for example, Winthrop Jordan's often-recalled nonquantitative
observations about the qualitatively intriguing Hemings-TJ Monticello
conceptions coincidences. But in the past, the TJF has, I believe,
explicitly invoked the outright quantitative statistical study that appeared
in the William and Mary Quarterly nearly a decade ago. That study
confidently invoked the full authority of statistical science in professing
to have proven TJ's paternity of six Hemings children. That quantitative,
not just qualitative, study involved probability theory, Monte Carlo
simulations, and Bayes's theorem.
I would be grateful for answers or comments on three questions: Does anybody
know if the TJF still means deliberately to cite that study as legitimate
scientific evidence? Does anybody know if any other such _quantitative_
statistical study has appeared anwhere? If so, does anybody know if the TJF
is now citing any such study?
Thanks very much.
Steve Corneliussen
Poquoson, Virginia
______________________________________
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
|
