CONVERSATIONS ON JEFFERSON AND JEFFERSONIAN POLITICS
Why Investigate the Jefferson-Hemings Question?
Todd
What do you think of the Jefferson- Hemmings affair? I look at it this way, does it take anything away from the man, make him less of a person? In the end I would say no. We might not like to think that it happened but it did. What are your thoughts?
July 10, 2001
Eyler Coates
There is no question in my own mind that there was no affair and no sexual relationship. What makes you so certain that it did happen? Have you looked at the Scholars Commission Report and the book I edited, "The Jefferson-Hemings Myth"?
July 10, 2001
Todd
Let me be honest. I never really cared if Jefferson fathered children with Sally Hemings or not. I take it from the point of, it takes nothing away from the man. I guess I am maybe too liberal that way but that's how I feel. All I know is that they have a lot of word of mouth and now DNA evidence. I heard that Monticello finally acknowledged the Hemings descendants as being heirs. Is this right?
I admit my ignorance on this subject and just went by the "if there's smoke there's fire" theory. Once the DNA evidence came out, I thought that settled it. I guess I was wrong. Maybe you can give me your point of view.
July 11, 2001
Eyler Coates
Thanks for your honest reply. I'm not trying to jump on you for assuming that the Jefferson-Hemings affair did happen. Truth is, I'd like to engage in an honest discussion with someone just like yourself -- reasonable, honest, and not emotionally committed one way or the other. Apparently, polls indicate that the vast majority of people feel just about like you do, so it is important for people like myself to understand your position, to examine my own position honestly for what you might have to show me, and possibly to explain my position so that people like yourself understand where we, the people who don't believe the story, are coming from.
I agree completely that even if Jefferson had had a relationship with a slave mistress, that would not alter his republican principles one iota. From a practical matter, however, it is not possible to say that "it takes nothing away from the man." What it does is raise him to a level of hypocrisy that would be, speaking frankly, disgusting. It would make everything he said suspect. Of course, what he said would be great coming from anyone's mouth.
But before getting into all that, I would like to address what is, I believe, the central problem. You state, "I admit my ignorance on this subject and just went by the 'if there's smoke there's fire' theory." There should be no shame in ignorance. We are all ignorant of tons of things. But that remark goes to the central point of the Jefferson-Hemings problem, in my opinion. In order to arrive at an informed opinion on this subject, you really have to examine a lot of detailed but ambiguous information -- information that can easily be distorted by careful selection and biased interpretation.
The fact is, there is NO definite, conclusive evidence that points to Jefferson's guilt. Most of what we have is pretty ambiguous and almost all of it on both sides of the issue has something about it that can cause a person to ask questions. The result is, you just cannot find a smoking gun. Nothing is absolutely and finally decisive. Therefore, people with an interest one way or the other can easily select evidence to support their position. The best assessment can only come from examining ALL the evidence and judging it carefully, weighing interpretations against one another and making a judgment on which pieces of evidence are likely to be closest to the truth.
Unfortunately, most people have neither the time nor the interest to do that. They are willing to go along with what seems to be the general consensus derived from the opinions of what appear to be established, well-recognized authorities. You expressed that sentiment yourself when you asked, "I heard the Monticello finally acknowledged them as being heirs. Is this right?" You are correct: they did indeed. But there are enormous problems with that, too.
What we see surrounding this issue is not just a matter-of-fact assessment of whether it happened or not. This issue is loaded with all kinds of racial, emotional, and even scholastic factors. The media have exploited the issue in what appears to be a carefully orchestrated campaign. And once you really get into it, you realize that it is all those extraneous factors that are driving this "indictment" of Jefferson. Hence, a proper examination of this question will involve all those extraneous factors also and their relationship to the central issue of paternity.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that a just position can be established on these questions without examining them minutely and carefully. There is no single authority that a person can turn to and say, "We'll trust whatever they decide." There is good evidence to indicate that the universally recognized authority, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, has itself violated its trust and denigrated Jefferson to appease those who have an interest in pulling him down.
But the most important question is the one that is implied by your own statement that it takes nothing away from the man. The truth is, this whole issue is being used to discredit Jefferson, his thoughts and ideas, and to belittle his role in the founding of this country. Is this part of a conspiracy to weaken this nation's republican spirit? I don't know. I don't like conspiracy theories, but it is the nature of conspiracies that they are conducted secretly and are not brandished before the public, even though the results are quite public. That takes quite a bit of artful manipulation, and we have certainly seen a lot of artful manipulation in the way this controversy has been handled.
The truth is, I once felt much as you do. I even characterized these accusations as "swill sampling," for which I have been criticized, but which I still think properly describes them. Nevertheless, they do threaten the image which Jefferson has in the American mind, and to that extent, they determine how seriously many Americans will consider what he had to say. There is no doubt, if these charges are true, then Jefferson lived his entire life saying one thing and doing another. The moral foundation upon which all his political principles were founded would be shown to be suspect, if not absurd. Jefferson's integrity would be in tatters, and no man can rise above the absence of integrity.
For these reasons, I believe the understanding of the Jefferson-Hemings question is important for our country, even if it may not be that important to those of us who admire and respect the man for his writings and his contributions to the founding of this nation.
July 11, 2001
Todd
After researching some more, my eyes have been opened a bit to the alleged affair of Jefferson and Hemmings. All I ask is a search for the TRUTH, not some half baked theory. All these years I just took it for granted that the so-called experts knew what they were talking about when they said they had DNA evidence linking Jefferson to Hemmings children, hence "Where there is smoke there is fire." Or so I thought.
To me it really didn't matter if he did or didn't have the affair, I still respected Mr. Jefferson because of his achievements in history which are too numerous to mention. But if I may, after putting some thought into the matter here is why I don't think he would have fathered any children. He was quite simply, a Virginia gentleman and everything I know about him and the upper class of Virginia society tells me that he would not have had that kind of a relationship with Sally Hemings.
Now let me say this, I am not ready to say 100% he did not have the affair but reasonable doubt has entered my mind. Why do you feel people are so quick to link Jefferson and Sally? It sounds like what evidence they do have is circumstantial at best. I always was under the impression that the DNA evidence they had was solid, but now I don't know.
July 12, 2001
Eyler Coates
Your desire for "the truth" rather than some half-baked theory is commendable. Unfortunately, for those who choose to believe that Thomas Jefferson did indeed have an affair with Sally Hemings, there just is no solid evidence upon which to base such a belief, and therefore it is necessary to do so on the basis of a "half-baked theory." Otherwise, one must conclude that the evidence is inconclusive, and that the evidence against such a possibility is just as good -- and perhaps much better! -- than the evidence for it. But it takes quite a bit of investigation into all the evidence surrounding this controversy in order to arrive at even that conclusion. With only a superficial look and without delving deeply into the facts, one is inclined to accept whatever seems to be the general consensus on the question, or, perhaps, the conclusions of some other investigator who has carefully manipulated the evidence, such as I believe Annette Gordon-Reed has done. But the person who seeks a rightful opinion about the matter is compelled to look deeply. Otherwise, it is better to just remain an agnostic.
The first thing that throws up warning flags against the acceptance of Jefferson's guilt is when one sees how this view was foisted upon the public through such manipulations as a false headline in the journal Nature, the deliberate exclusion of alternative explanations, the false assertion about the significance of the DNA made by Professor Joseph Ellis, the suppression of dissenting views when the report was formulated by the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, and other similar actions that indicate to an objective observer that the case against Jefferson was being handled like a propaganda campaign, not like a scholarly or scientific investigation trying to discover the underlying truth.
The suggestion that Jefferson would not have fathered children by a slave mistress because he was a Virginia gentleman and such gentlemen did not do that sort of thing, is not a "politically correct" comment, but it has a certain validity to it, after all. It also introduces an idea of the extent to which the phenomenon of "presentism" -- the judgment of the past with values derived from the present -- has entered into this controversy. In our present day society, the act of miscegenation and interracial marriage is not viewed with the same social opprobrium that it was much earlier in my own lifetime, and almost surely in Jefferson's time as well. But now, we struggle to equate black with white in our present society, and thus this idea that Jefferson 'wouldn't have done that sort of thing' becomes something that should not even be mentioned. Or if you do mention it, you are looked upon with contempt as a racist bigot. And this, it appears, is one of the things that is driving this whole assemblage of accusations: the idea that sex between black and white is, and always has been at some level, acceptable, that it is really "OK," and that even a national icon like Thomas Jefferson "did it." And that, in turn, becomes a means for eradicating the very idea that blacks are not equal to whites in our social consciousness. Such are some of the explosive racial undertones that buttress this whole controversy, that, as they say, "give it legs."
July 13, 2001
by TjSh44
I beleave that Mr.Jefferson did keep Mrs.Hemmings as his slave mistress as i am very southren and know that many southren gental men did keep slave mistresses. Why is it so hard to beleave it is not as if he where the frist public offical to keep a slave mistress did not one of the frist suprem court justice, Marshal have a slave mistress . I have read many book on Mr.Jefferson and there is no doubt in my mind that he was a great man but he was still a man. Besides that I have read that he prmissed his wife on he4r death bed that he would never marrie agian and he did keep his promis. Also I read that Mrs.Hemmings was his wifes half sister ,he loved his wife there was no reason why he shouldnt have loved her sister .Isnt true that when he frist wrote the decloration of independce that he put something in there about ending slavery? Not that it matters but if the problem was that she was black even thought she was 75%white .
November 13, 2001
Jefferson has been maligned. His personal integrity has been called into question, thus chipping away at the worth of his political and religious philosophies.
In my opinion the "case" against him regarding the Sally Hemings controversy is just as strong as a ridiculous charge of murder brought against any man or woman who was related to Lee Harvey Oswald and in November of 1963 also lived in the U.S. When have opportunity and not exact DNA, but related DNA been a cause for a guilty verdict?
I have heard of guilt by association, but fatherhood by association is a new one!
Perhaps in the future all male relatives carrying the same Y chromosome as that of a man involved in a paternity suit should be regarded as the "fathers" of the issue in question!
That is what has been done to Jefferson!
December 3, 2001