Rob,
The discussion about DNA is fine with me, but apparently it's scaring off some members of this list. Perhaps that's because we all tend to think of genealogy as the pastime of the blue rinse and Early Bird Special crowd, a place where we encounter our genteel ancestors who were somehow above the sins of the flesh. I'm an active Civil War living historian, and the topic of sex came up last week on a list I subscribe to. You'd be astonished how many were shocked that the 1850-60s is not some chaste, refined improvement on our own times. Nothing could be further from the truth; while they lacked Fox News and Monika Lewinsky, they turned a winking eye to child labor, and yes, child prostitution even. The notion that Victorians all thought of sex as dirty, shameful or otherwise to be avoided by proper women is simply not true, at least if one views the evidence and not the myth. A letter was recently auctioned on eBay from one young woman to her best friend with quite specific details of her wedding night with her husband, all showing no sense of shame.
The ambiguity of the Jefferson-Hemings DNA highlights the fact that genealogy and history are about facts, not preconceived notions, but that those facts are often ambiguous and open to interpretation. For generations, my family perpetuated the legend that we descended from a "cruel slaveholder with over 100 slaves." While my family almost certainly owned a few slaves, it has finally been determined that the farms and estates in VA that could support such numbers were few and far between. Most likely my Chapmans were tobacco farmers who worked the land until it wore out, then headed West to get some of that "free" government land (given the numerous land grants to one Walter Chapman, apparently that "free" land wasn't worth much more than its price). All of this has come about by a careful combing of the meager written records from a variety of sources.
I only wish DNA could uncover more about my family. Seems the Jeffersons don't appreciate the opportunity they have!
Bill Cross
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Yingst
To: Bill Cross ; [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: Are Martha Jefferson and Sally Hemings Half-Sisters?
Move on?
This discussion is on point with all of the issues with which we
genealogists wrestle. We have DNA proponents on our list who see DNA's
value to the quest for the definition of "family." These discussions help
us understand the meaning of family. We are people, not pure bred dogs.
History (oral and written), documents, DNA and context are critical.
Moving away from this discussion is not necessarily moving toward
genealogy. This discussion is the very essence of genealogy. Think about
it. When children are fathered outside of the "father's name" are they to
be cast off into some footnote in our writing and research? History and
context make them a part of a "family." Are we real genealogists if
ignore their importance and meaning to the following generations? Some
seem to be looking for a "legitimate" connection to a king or scoundrel.
Let the discussion on this subject take us where the evidence leads. Ideas
for finding the truth is a worthy endeavor and this discussion seems to
help genealogists think - inside and outside the box.
Rob
> [Original Message]
> From: Bill Cross <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 03/28/06 10:33:50 AM
> Subject: Re: Are Martha Jefferson and Sally Hemings Half-Sisters?
>
> Mr. Barger,
>
> I appreciate your passion in this matter, but I agree with the others
here on the list that it's time to move this topic back to genealogy.
>
> I remain unpersuaded by your evidence, so there's little point in your
listing it again and again. I would, however, point out (since this is a
genealogy forum) that DNA evidence is useful, though not always definitive,
in an age when the written record is often so sketchy, especially for the
non-persons of society (slaves, blacks, indentured servants, the poor in
general).
>
> In my own case, I have searched for years to connect the dots from my
Missouri Chapmans back to VA, and recently found them in Caroline County.
But because of the paucity of written records, I'm still unable to move
back even a generation from where I was 35 years ago. The president of the
Chapman Family Association once told me that there were more "problems"
with VA Chapmans than any other region.
>
> Bill Cross
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Herbert Barger
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 7:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Are Martha Jefferson and Sally Hemings Half-Sisters?
>
>
> Bill,
>
> Yes, we all deserve accurate and fair reporting of ALL known facts in
this
> case and in any research........not politically correct manipulation of
> known results for various agendas and the tainting of our children's
> textbooks. I am no authority on DNA either, however explaining this
case is
> simple and I am sure you will understand. I assisted Dr. Foster with the
> test. He gathered DNA from 19 sources. He took it to the University of
> Virginia Medical Department where some processing was made as I
understand
> it. He then delivered the DNA raw research to England and it was tested
> there and in two other locations. As early as June 1998 he had the
results
> back, however the Nature Journal article was not to appear until Nov. 5,
> 1998. His whole mission was to prove or disprove that the Carr brothers
were
> a match or not with anyone (the history books stated they were
suspects.)
> When there was NO match for them there was NO OTHER person left in the
> equation except Thomas Jefferson. All family genealogy I had given Dr.
> Foster to use in considering results was NOT given Nature and THUS they
> issued (or negotiated) at false and misleading headline, "Jefferson
fathers
> slaves last child", a complete LIE........but that is what the media was
> awaiting. US News and World Report and other media supposedly jumped the
> Nature "embargo" on the story. Many charges and assumptions arose, like
why
> was it conveniently released one day prior to election, why was it used
to
> support the sitting president's position for non impeachment and other
> agendas evolved. DNA of unbroken male line surnames was required, but
only
> ONE Hemings was tested. The Hemings family will not give permission to
test
> another later found male...they are happy with their oral family
history.
>
> You mention that you are unpersuaded by my stance and state that
Monticello
> takes a neutral stance. I beg to differ and site a few things for you.
Do
> you consider a Monticello statement that not only one but possibly ALL
of
> Sally's children had the father, Thomas Jefferson is accurate? MY what a
> NON-scientific statement from the center of Jefferson research. Dan
Jordan,
> Monticello President, knows well what the DNA proved.....: NO DNA match
for
> the long held and MAJOR beliefs of the Woodson Family. He also knew well
> that ONLY ONE Hemings matched "some" Jefferson DNA.........NOTHING
proves
> that it came from Thomas. The DNA does not honor given names. He also
was
> informed of the existance of the Hemings male descendant, William
Hemings,
> months prior to his release of his Research Report. Not only did he not
> persue this lead but he told me to NOT pressure the Hemings and he made
no
> effort to suggest that they permit the test, what kind of selective
research
> is this? His above mentioned report was released with a Minority Report
from
> an employee member of this study group, Dr. Ken Wallenborn, MISSING.
Upon
> learning of this DENIAL of an important Minority Report I contacted the
> Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation and requested an investigation. Dr.
> Wallenborn was issued an apology by Dr. Jordan and his report may now be
> read on www.angelfire.com/va/TJTruth anmd www.tjheritage.org. The full
> Scholars Commission Report (13 prominent full professors) may also be
found
> here and they were critical of some of the Monticello assessments.
>
> Bill, I agree with your statements about whether Jefferson fathered
slave
> children or not......I also care less, HOWEVER, to me revelation of
accurate
> truth is important. That is why I and others founded the Thomas
Jefferson
> Heritage Society and that is why honest scholars volunteered their
> independant study of over a year to bring the truth of the findings to
the
> public. Just as in medicine.......ALWAYS ask for a second opinion.
no one
> has a strangle hold on Mr. Jefferson's legacy...we all own his legacy
and
> that angers some people. He is innocent of such charges.
>
> Herb Barger
> Jefferson Family Historian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Cross [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 6:29 PM
> To: Herbert Barger; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Are Martha Jefferson and Sally Hemings Half-Sisters?
>
>
> Mr. Berger,
>
> I would like to say that I support a truthful exploration of the facts
> concerning President Jefferson and his slave, Sally Hemings. I do not
have a
> full understanding of the DNA science involved, nor its conclusions, and
> freely admit so in advance. I am in this a lay person who has followed
the
> passionate debate with interest and curiosity. I have looked at
accounts on
> both sides of the issue, and am unpersuaded by your vehemence in the
matter.
> Even Monticello takes a neutral stance, given the paucity of evidence in
> this matter.
>
> However, I should like to state for the record that as a descendant
of the
> Old Dominion (via Missouri), and with ancestors who fought for the
> preservation of slavery, IT MAKES NOT ONE WHIT OF DIFFERENCE TO ME
WHETHER
> JEFFERSON FATHERED SLAVE CHILDREN OR NOT. Please forgive my use of
capitals,
> but I have detected in this discussion, and for years in other
discussions
> about the topic, a repugnance at the thought, as if it made any real
> difference, that Jefferson might have black descendents, and an
indignation
> at those who would advance the theory. If I misunderstand your
position, I
> apologize.
>
> While it would be interesting to know whether Sally Hemings was, in
fact,
> Jefferson's mistress, it would not take one scintilla of greatness away
from
> him, nor would it reduce in any way his standing as one of our greatest
> presidents. Those who decry the hypocrisy of the author of the
Declaration
> of Independence having carnal relations with his "property" fail to
note the
> deeper hypocrisy the Founding Fathers perpetrated on this country, when
they
> announced the birth of their new nation by stating that "all men are
created
> equal," then left the institution of slavery intact and for another
> generation to tackle. Divisions over slavery undermined the health of
the
> new country almost from the start, and led inexorably to the Civil War.
> While there are those who today try to minimize that importance of
slavery
> as the cause of that conflagration, any open-minded person who reads
widely
> in the literature of the period will see that nothing else so consumed
men
> and women on both sides. But I digress.
>
> Bill Cross
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/294 - Release Date: 3/27/06
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the
instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
