First off, it seems to have been kind of a rough couple of months for Unca Cece, what with the porphyria/vampirism debacle and now this. Though I hasten to add this shouldn’t be a mark on the record since we’ve had new evidence in the matter since the original column, as opposed to Cecil’s source dropping out of sight because said source realized what an unscientific rube said source had been.
Either way I guess the second shock to the system kinda flustered Cecil and I’m wondering if he hasn’t contradicted himself in this week’s column.
When he talks about the DNA testing, he says:
but at the end of the article he says:
At first I was thinking perhaps he meant that Thomas Woodson was the son of Madison Hemings (mentioned earlier in the article) but re-reading it seemed to make it clear that Thomas Woodson is Sally’s son.
So - am I misreading this or has Cecil unintentionally contradicted himself?
I just want to point out that Jefferson was in his 70’s when Eton was born. Since it’s unlikely that he would just suddenly decide to start an affair at that late age, the odds are that the other kids are Tom’s too.
By the way, I read that almost all of Sally’s children married white spouses and disappeared into white society. With the exception of the Thomas Woodson branch, does anybody know of black descendents of Sally Hemmings? Because if it turns out that ALL of her other kids blended into white society, then it would cast doubt on whether the Thomas Woodson family is really descended from Sally Hemmings.
“I’m not bad, I’m just drawn that way…”
–Jessica Rabbit,Who Framed Roger Rabbit
The Master maintains that things still don’t add up, but in the case of Tom J I fail to see that as an objection; here’s a fellow who wrote so eloquently about rights and freedom, but when all was said in done he bought into setting up a government that allowed slavery.
I guess I don’t like the tone of “when all was said and done,” BobK. Sounds like that’s the bottom line – a condemnation of li’l Tommy Jefferson and of everything else he did. Regardless of his other accomplishments, he was a product of his times on the slavery issue and therefore he is not an admirable person?
Sorry, I disagree. IMHO, Jefferson saw further and more profoundly than almost anyone of his era. He secured the liberties that Americans enjoy today, by insisting that the Bill of Rights be part of the Constitution… one could go on. He was far ahead of his time in many ways. But he was a human being, with human failings.
You’re saying that because he was unable rise above his time in other ways, that he’s ultimately condemned? Harsh judgement indeed. I suspect there’s not a human being thru history who could live up to that standard, who could be judged by the principles of two hundred years later. I suspect there’s not a human being alive today who, if judged by the standards of two hundred years from now, will be held to measure up.
We somehow want our heroes to all be Superman, godlike, with no human weaknesses, able to be judged by modern standards and still be perfect. It don’t work like that. If you’re going to pass judgements on historic figures, at least have the common sense to be balanced in those judgements.
Michael Fumento had an article about this subject in the Wall Street Journal a few months ago. I’ve not been able to find it on the internet. If anyone can find it and post the link, I’d be grateful. Fumento makes most of the same observations as Cecil, and also mentions TJ’s advanced age when Eton was born.
Fumento’s conclusion is that Eton was most likely sired by one of TJ’s younger relatives. EJ Cunningham suggests that since Eton is TJ’s, the other kids are his also. I would have thought that the DNA test CLEARED TJ of siring the all the other children. Does anyone know for sure if that is the case?
If the DNA test shows that TJ didn’t sire the older children, then it seems unlikely that he would have starting siring children with SH when he was in his 70’s. (This is EJC’s argument turned around.)
I wouldn’t want to impugn the motives of scientists (actually I would), but this study was quite political. It came out during the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The press release explicitly pointed out the “parallel”. It was used to support the “everybody does it” defense. Maybe the political import affected the scientists’ objectivity.
December, open your eyes. The only reason the other kids weren’t tested was either that the male descendent chain was broken or that they couldn’t find any other descendents period. From what I understand, the only Hemmings descendents tested were from the Thomas Woodson family or the Eton branch. I was questioning whether the Woodson family is really descended from Sally Hemmings, not whether Jefferson sired any of her children.
Prior to the DNA tests, historians had claimed that Hemmings’ kids were the sons of Peter or Samuel Carr. Since the DNA tests have shown they COULDN’T have been the fathers, who ELSE could have been banging Sally? Thomas Jefferson was with Sally Hemmings nine months before each of her kids were born. When you take into account the preferential treatment TJ gave Sally and her children, there can be only one reasonable conclusion–Thomas Jefferson was the father. It isn’t so unthinkable when you consider that Hemmings only had one-quarter African blood, probably looked as white as I do, and maybe even resembled her half-sister, Martha Wayles Skelton–Jefferson’s wife.
Still, it is probably a greater sin that Jefferson owned slaves than that he had a slave mistress. From his writings, it seems clear that Jefferson thought slavery was wrong, but also thought Africans were inferior and could not imagine a practical way of emancipation. For all of Jefferson’s faults, blacks (as well as everyone else) owe a great debt to Jefferson. The words “all men are created equal” in his Declaration of Independence helped inspire the abolition movement and became a time-bomb that would eventually explode in slaveholders’ faces. Lincoln quoted Jefferson often in his speeches, including the Gettysburg Adress. When all is said and done, I would still rather have Thomas Jefferson, a slaveholder whose ideals eventually would help set slaves free, as a role model than Robert E. Lee, a man who set his own slaves free but fought to keep thousands more in captivity–including several free blacks he captured during his Pennsylvania campaign.
“I’m not bad, I’m just drawn that way…”
–Jessica Rabbit,Who Framed Roger Rabbit
EJC, you may be right . However, the likelihood looks different depending on how you present the facts. We know that:
The rumors that TJ sired Thomas Woodson were disproved by the DNA.
There were no rumors about TJ and Eston.
DNA showed that Eston was sired by one of the five Jefferson brothers or their father or their aged uncle (a man in his seventies) or some other close relative.
TJ gave Sally Hemmings special treatment.
The first three points seem like weak evidence indeed against TJ. Regarding #4, you say, “When you take into account the preferential treatment TJ gave Sally and her children, there can be only one reasonable conclusion–Thomas Jefferson was the father.”
I disagree with your logic There are any number of reasons that might account for the preferential treatment. One obvious possibility is that SH could have been the mother of TJ’s great nephew. Also, TJ and SH had a long-term, personal relationship that could account for the special treatment, regardless of paternity.
Re your measurement of TJ’s sins:
It’s nice to be a liberal today, because you can feel morally superior without any effort, cost or sacrifice. Jefferson’s work inspired the eventual end of slavery. It also created and preserved the democracy and Free Speech rights that allow us to send these missives. By comparison, how will future generations judge the morals of you and me? In a world where slavery still exists in certain countries, we sit on our duffs and trade juvenile e-mails.
If you read the end of my last post carefully, you will see that I have great respect for the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, despite his flaws. There are some people who would say that Jefferson’s gifts to America are outweighed by the fact that he owned slaves. I disagree. Even though Jefferson thought freeing slaves would be like letting go of “a wolf by the ears”, his words paved the way for the ending of slavery. (And I’m not going to get into The Virginia Charter of Religious Freedom or The Louisiana Purchase.) The difference between the two of us is that I can accept that Jefferson had an affair with Sally Hemmings, while you apparently can not.
As far as Thomas Woodson’s family goes, Cecil pointed out in his column that questions have been raised about whether Woodson really was who he claimed to be. Maybe Thomas Jefferson wasn’t his father, but I’m not sure that Sally Hemmings was his mother.
If you think that I am jumping to conclusions, Joseph J. Ellis–the author of American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson–has said on TV that if Jefferson fathered a child in his 70’s, it was more likely to be the result of a long-term liasion than a one-night stand. Before the DNA tests, Ellis was disinclined to believe that Jefferson had an affair with Sally Hemmings. Now he says that it’s all but certain that Thomas Jefferson fathered Sally Hemmings kids. This is coming from a historians who has spent years studying the life of Thomas Jefferson. Aside from a belief that Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t do this sort of thing, what grounds are there for believing that TJ isn’t the father in light of this evidence? If another Jefferson was having an affair with Sally, who? Remember, Thomas was with Sally nine months before every one of her kids were born. That fact combined with TJ’s preferential treatment of Hemmings’ kids may be circumstantial evidence, but together with the DNA tests, it is damning evidence nonetheless. Thomas Jefferson was a genious, but he was a human being and a flawed human being at that. It doesn’t change his legacy as a founding father, or the debt that Americans of all races owe him.
Just a sec, Edward J! You say, “if it turns out that ALL of her other kids blended into white society, then it would cast doubt on whether the Thomas Woodson family is really descended from Sally Hemmings.”
How do you figure? I’ve read that Sally Hemmings could have easily “passed” because her skin was quite fair, her hair was smooth and she had “caucasian” features.
EJ – I don’t understand Mr. Ellis’s logic. The DNA proved that the youngest Hemmings child was fathered by one of many Jefferson males in a large household, but Thomas Woodson was not fathered by a Jefferson. There is no information on the paternity of SH’s other children, so I see no significance in TJ’s proximity at the time of their conception. By Ellis’s reasoning, I could be convicted of having fathered all the choldren born to all the women in my office during the last 13 years.
The evidence simply shows that Thomas Jefferson might have been the father of Eston, and at least 6 other men also might have been Eston’s father.
I would recommend Annette Gordon-Reeds’s ‘Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy’ to Cecil and anyone else as an excellent investigation into the Jefferson-Hemings scandals.
I do have one big bone to pick with Cecil on this one: giving the paternity claims of Tom Woodson equal credence with the claims of Beverly, Harriet, Madison and Eston Hemings is dubious at best. Why? Because the claims of Tom Woodson and the Hemings come from different sources.
It was James Callender, the hack journalist who turned against Jefferson, who claimed that Jefferson sired a son by Hemings. Callender flogged the story of ‘Yellow Tom’ during the election of 1802. Callender did not claim that Tom Woodson was ‘Yellow Tom’ nor was he interested in documenting history, only in retailing politically damaging gossip.
Cecil is right in pointing out that the historical evidence of the paternity of Thomas Woodson besides the DNA tests is weak but what he fails to note is that is drawn from different sources than the Hemings’s claims. In short, there is nothing to link the claims of Thomas Woodson with the claims of the Hemings other than James Callender.
What is the effect of the conflation of Woodson and Hemings? Discrediting Woodson discredits the Hemings, in spite of fact that the Hemings’s claims are based on different historical evidence. Historians hostile to the much better grounded claims of the Hemings were able to dismiss them by association by attacking the much weaker claims of Thomas Woodson.
Thank you, Andrew, and by listing the names of the Hemings children you adress of the claims made by December–that the DNA test cleared TJ of siring the other children. For starters, the descendents of Beverly and Harriet Hemings couldn’t be tested because they are women, and the chromosome they are looking for is passed only on the Y chromosomes. The male-descendent chain was broken in the Madison line, so only the Eston line could be tested.
I could argue more with December but I won’t because it isn’t any use. He cannot believe that Thomas Jefferson could father children with a slave mistress, so he closes his eyes to the strong circumstantial evidence as well as the DNA tests. As far as “other” Jeffersons go–what other candidates other than Thomas had the OPPORTUNITY to do so? I occasionally visit relatives in New Jersey, but I’m only there for a week or two. What other visiting relatives who carried the chromosome trait was with Sally Hemmings when the children were conceived. Each time it gets back to the same thing–Sally was with Thomas nine months before EVERY child was conceived. That Jefferson fathered slave children does not change the importance of his ideals and gifts to the nation, but apparently it does for December since he still thinks that another Jefferson could have done it. May I remind December that the other women in his office do not live in his household, are married to other men or have boyfriends, did not receive preferential treatment at his hands, and their sons do not not carry the Y-chromosome link that runs in December’s bloodline. I will have to read Gordon-Reed’s book, since I am positive that it will provide more evidence about the Jefferson-Hemings affair that most people, if not December, can accept.
EJ – We seem to have a misunderstanding. You wrote:
“I could argue more with December but I won’t because it isn’t any use. He cannot believe that Thomas Jefferson could father children with a slave mistress…”
I had actually written:
“The evidence simply shows that Thomas Jefferson might have been the father of Eston, and at least 6 other men also might have been Eston’s father.”
We are debating the likelihood, rather than the possibility, that TJ fathered Eston as well as SH’s other children. You say it’s “all but certain.” I say there is reasonable doubt regarding Eston. For the others, the proof of paternity doesn’t come close to meeting the civil litigation standard of “preponderance of the evidence.”
You point out that TJ was nearby when Eston was conceived. Where were the other 5 Jefferson men? How much contact did they have with SH at that time? Your case would be strengthened if you showed that they were not around. I continue to give weight to the age factor. Sure, some men in their 70’s have sired children, but younger men are more likely, all other things being equal. And the mere existence of 5 other suspects lessens the probability of TJ being the guilty party.
You seems to be assuming that the same man fathered all of SH’s children (except for Thomas Woodson, who was shown by the DNA to have had a different father.) Can you explain why this is a reasonable assumption, especially since we know that SH’s children had at least two different fathers? That assumption helps you conclude that TJ fathered all the others, simply because he was nearby. But, dozens or hundreds of men were nearby when each of those children was conceived. Even if we were certain that TJ fathered Eston, there would be limited evidence for the others.
Finally, you wrote, “May I remind December that the other women in his office do not live in his household.” Sadly, sex in the office, with women in subordinate positions, is now all too acceptable, thanks to you-know-who …
Can you explain why this is a reasonable assumption, especially since we know that SH’s children had at least two different fathers?
How do we know that Sally Hemings’s children had at least two different fathers? Are you basing that on the passing remark about Tom Woodson in Nature made by Eric Lander and Joseph Ellis in a companion article to Foster’s DNA results?
If so, the evidence linking Tom Woodson to Sally Hemings is extremely tenuous. It is based only on Woodson family tradition and the claims of Fawn Brodey.
Here is the Woodson claim: in 1789 when Jefferson and Sally Hemings returned from Paris, Hemings was preganant with Tom. Tom was born in 1790 but Jefferson made no mention of the birth of Tom and made no record of Tom in order to conceal his paternity in any of his documents relating to life at Monticello.
In 1802, when James Callender made public his accusations of a Jefferson-Hemings liason, Jefferson sent Tom Hemings to the Woodson family plantation nearby to avoid publicity. Tom Hemings also changed his name to Tom Woodson.
But this just doesn’t add up. Why would Jefferson exile Tom Hemings and not Sally Hemings eldest son, Beverly (born 1789), or Harriet (born 1801), as well as two daughters born before 1802 but did not survive to adulthood? Why would Jefferson avoid recording the existence of Tom Hemings but document lives of other Hemings children? Why would Madison Hemings fail to claim Tom Hemings/Woodson as a brother when he acknowledged his other siblings? Why would Jefferson conceal Tom since 1790 when public accusations were made 12 years later?
December also wrote:
For the others, the proof of paternity doesn’t come close to meeting the civil litigation standard of “preponderance of the evidence.”
Strawman 0, December 1. Little history meets the standards of civil litigation. Why should histories about Jefferson be held to a higher standard?
[[Finally, you wrote, “May I remind December that the other women in his office do not live in his household.” Sadly, sex in the office, with women in subordinate positions, is now all too acceptable, thanks to you-know-who … ]] December
That’s sure not the impression I get.
<<There are lots of candidates for the dubious honor of having
fathered Sally Hemming’s children and mightly little evidence. DNA testing
proved that TJ could not have fathered the first of Sally’s children. The
paternity of the middle children is unknown. The fact that they were all
born eight or nine months after times that TJ and Sally were in the same area is
wholly irrelevant as there is no proof that they shared a common father or
that that father was TJ.
This leaves Eston Hemmings. There is good evidence that he was
fathered by someone in the Jefferson line, but no evidence (other than
family bragging) that TJ was the someone.
There is an excellent bit of evidence that he wasn't. Jefferson was
born in 1743. Eston Hemmings was born in 1808, when TJ was in his
mid-sixties. Mid-sixties was a lot older in 1808 than it is now and a man
said to have fathered a child at that age might reasonably be suspected of
having had some help
I just did a little reading on the subject to remind myself of what I’d read before reading The Master’s retraction. The DNA evidence involved testing known descendents of Jefferson against the male descendents of one of Hemings kids. Sooo… that proved that there was a DNA connection. It was not a comparison between two of Hemings’ kids; it was a comparison between known and suspected descendents. Check out Time.com’s archives for the story. Sorry, December… Has anyone seen any other information on this?