Well, this is just getting too good!  Will have to weigh in here.
There is "nothing new under the sun!"  There were plenty of unwed mothers,
VERY early babies, adultery--you name it--in past centuries.  You have to
laugh!  Sex was not invented in the 20th and 21st centuries (and neither
were devious and evil people.)

J. Watkins


At 12:01 PM 3/28/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>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; http://emembership.dar.org.
>  >     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
>

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