First of all, changing my name to "Jackson," given the hour, is quite all right. However, let us PLEASE not add that one to the mix!

I do understand the exercise and applaude your efforts!  However,  simply having a child live does not imply a full term pregnancy; I was a six month baby and am older than dirt now.  

I beg pardon for using the collective "you" in my question and and agree to your premise ( in theory).  However, I still assert that IF (and I am merely grabbing a name here ... no inference intended) Madison was a 6-7 month baby, then the possibilty exists that TJ was not present for the copulation that resulted in his birth.  

R Burnett Jenkins
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
  To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
  Sent: October 13, 2008 12:02 AM
  Subject: Re: What we know about Sally Hemings, first revision


  Mr. Jackson--

  You misunderstand the exercise here.  We are concerned here to identify the things we can all agree on.  What these facts mean is another matter entirely.  Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

  And this is NOT about *me*.  Its about *you* too, no?  The whole point is to figure out what basic facts we can agree about.  That means you too.  At the moment we are working to produce consensus about what we *can* agree about.

  So.  Of the children of Sally Hemings whom we know she carried to term--who lived--we know that TJ was at Monticello roughly 9 months earlier.  If I remember correctly, Sally Hemings had six children for whom this is true.

  Do you have reason to disagree with that claim?

  I don't see how your questions below matter, with regard to the very basic claim above I am suggesting you and I both can agree about.

  All best,
  Kevin


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