CONVERSATIONS ON JEFFERSON AND JEFFERSONIAN POLITICS
Further DNA Testing
From the H-SHEAR, subject: "Jefferson-Hemings Redux":Matthew Warshauer:
I have what may be a very simple question, yet one that I have not seen raised. Jefferson's paternity could be solved once and for all if we had a sample of his hair with the follicle intact. We know that the National Archives has samples of Jefferson's hair, and Monticello most likely has some as well. Is there any possibility here?Originally posted on H-SHEAR, April 17, 2001.
John Weiss
As I understand it here in the UK, the latest thinking on using DNA for identification is that identity cannot "be solved once and for all " using DNA techniques, which offer statistical probabilities and not certainties.None of the abbreviated reports I have read suggest any of the "authorities" has said Jefferson's paternity is disproved, though this is what some people seem to think has been said. It reminds me of the conclusion to the Somersett case, when Mansfield went out of his way to avoid stating that slavery could not exist on English soil, upon which the people waiting outside the court broadcast to the nation that he had stated just that. The false news that slavery was ended in England spread around the world and had a beneficial effect; the current misunderstanding can only confuse important issues.
The collateral and circumstantial evidence for Jefferson's paternity gives probability and not certainty (if such a thing could ever exist) but is probably stronger than the DNA evidence. Historians, as an essential part of their work, as well as the public looking for enlightenment, want to know "what really happened", but we all know how elusive is this quest. I learned, on coming into this realm of endeavour late in life, that one can rely on neither the spoken word, the written word nor the printed word, nor even the word carved in stone; and the word written in DNA, while not likely to contain lies, does not have the certainty we would like.
Originally posted on H-SHEAR, April 17, 2001.
J. L. Bell:
Matt Warshauer wrote:"Jefferson's paternity could be solved once and for all if we had a sample of his hair with the follicle intact. We know that the National Archives has samples of Jefferson's hair, and Monticello most likely has some as well. Is there any possibility here?"
I recall reading that Mount Vernon's caretakers looked into having a lock of Washington's hair analyzed genetically, but that the DNA had degraded too much. Our bodies have to constantly repair those complex helical molecules, so they start breaking apart soon after death. Two centuries of imperfect preservation has probably wreaked havoc on what's inside those hairs.
Originally posted on H-SHEAR, April 19, 2001.
Matthew Warshauer:
My question regarding checking Jefferson's DNA was based on a discussion with one of CCSU's chemists. Not being a science type I asked how DNA analysis was done on hair. Her response was that the hair is not the issue. It is the tissue in the hair follicle. This tissue can be dead for a long time and still be viable for DNA testing. It is necessary to have more than one follicle.I'm a little surprised that I've received such a lack of response in regard to my inquiry. Does anyone really know whether these follicles are available? -- And as far as the earlier comment that there are no "certainties" when it comes to DNA analysis, I of course agree. O.J. Simpson told us that!! But testing Jefferson's hair follicles would give us far more certainty than we currently have.
Originally posted on H-SHEAR, April 20, 2001.
Eyler Coates
Jefferson's hair would probably be of no value whatsoever in determining whether Jefferson was the father of Sally's children or not. The hair shaft itself does not contain the complete DNA. Only the hair follicle can be used for performing a complete DNA test or even a testing of just the Y chromosome, and that provided only it has been preserved in reasonably good condition. Hair that was cut has no follicle, and consists only of the shaft. And since it is doubtful that the sample of Jefferson's hair in the National Archive was "pulled out by the roots," it is very doubtful it could be used for DNA testing to indicate paternity.
It must be borne in mind that even if it were possible to get a DNA sample of Thomas Jefferson, this would not give us any more information than we have now unless it were also possible to get DNA samples of the children (first generation) who were alleged to be his. In such a case, the comparison would be on the basis of the full spectrum of DNA, not on the Y chromosome alone, which forms a very small part of the complete DNA. That kind of full-spectrum DNA testing is the kind that yields results that are certain with a one-in-a-billion chance of error. Thus, it would do no good to get a DNA sample of Thomas Jefferson and then attempt to compare that to descendants of Sally Hemings living today. The only thing that could be compared to living descendants would be the Y chromosome, and Thomas Jefferson's Y chomosome would not differ from that of Field Jefferson and his descendants unless Thomas were illegitimate, which is an extremely unlikely possibility and one for which their is absolutely no collateral evidence whatsoever. Moreover, it is doubtful that the gravesite of Thomas Jefferson would yield any usable DNA. But even if it did, that would tell us nothing more than we know now unless we could also get usable DNA from the gravesites of Sally's children, Eston, Madison, Beverly, and Harriet.
We must remember, however, that the DNA tests, within the scope of the kind of information they are capable of supplying, are some of the most absolutely reliable tests available. When the DNA tests eliminated the possibility that any Jefferson, including Thomas, was the father of Thomas Woodson, those results were certain beyond any rational doubt. The test performed on Eston's descendant was just as positive in indicating that some Jefferson was almost surely the father of Eston, but the nature of the test did not allow it to be specific as to which member of the Jefferson family was the father. Therefore, "the word written in DNA," if the tests are properly performed, provides just as much certainty as we could possibly ask within the scope of the information the test is designed to furnish. The problem is, as in the Y chromosome tests, it cannot tell us who the exact father was if the test was not designed to furnish that information. In that particular test, it could only tell us the family to which the father belonged.
There is one DNA test that probably could be done and would likely yield valuable, possibly even extraordinarily valuable, information, but the Hemings descendants refuse to allow it to be performed. I am referring to the possibility of performing DNA testing on the exhumed body of the Madison Hemings's son William, who died in 1910, and who was buried in Leavenworth National Cemetery, Kansas. It is very likely that usable DNA could be found from his gravesite. This would be a test of the Y chromosome only, of course, and would only determine whether William -- and therefore Madison -- was descended from some Jefferson family member or not. It could not specifically identify Thomas Jefferson as the father, just like the test on Eston's descendant did not make that specific identification. Of course, if William was not fathered by a Jefferson family member, that would be earth-shattering news, because it would indicate beyond a rational doubt that Sally Hemings's son Madison was not fathered by Thomas Jefferson or any other Jefferson. It could possibly provide further scientific information to indicate for certain whether one of the Carr brothers was or was not the father of Madison.
It is unfortunate that the Hemings descendants will not allow this scientific test to be performed on William Hemings. Apparently, they have no interest in aiding the acquisition of additional scientific data, mainly because it could not significantly advance their own family interests, and might substantially wreck their present claims. If the tests indicated that William was fathered by a Jefferson, this would not conclusively demonstrate it was Thomas Jefferson, but it certainly would make the claim that Jefferson fathered ALL Sally's children a little more believable. But if the tests indicated some other father besides a Jefferson, that would have extraordinary relevance for all the allegations made against Thomas Jefferson.
This lack of interest in discovering additional scientific data, even if it might undermine the family's interests, could only be compared to a scientist like Einstein proposing a new scientific theory, and then having someone come up to him and describe a scientific experiment that might possibly prove his theory wrong. Even if it would be detrimental to his theory, it is inconceivable that a scientist like Einstein, dedicated all his life to the discovery of scientific truth, would say, "Oh no! Let's not do that experiment! We don't want to do any kind of scientific test that might prove my theory wrong!" It is unthinkable that a scientist would take such an attitude. Testing anything that might disprove a theory is every bit as essential to the discovery of new scientific information as the proposing of the theory itself. Yet, this is exactly what the Hemings descendants are doing in refusing to allow DNA testing on the body of William Hemings. It makes us wonder what it is they fear. Do they want to avoid anything that might provide scientific evidence that their claim of Thomas Jefferson's paternity of Madison Hemings has no foundation?
Another DNA test that would be of scientific value would be the testing of additional descendants of Eston Hemings. It must be remembered that when Dr. Eugene Foster performed his DNA tests that were announced in 1998, he tested FIVE descendants of Field Jefferson, FIVE descendants of Thomas Woodson, THREE descendants of John Carr, but only ONE descendant of Sally Hemings's son, Eston. This is very poor scientific methodology in the case of the descendants of Eston. Although the one match is very likely valid, additional tests would have made the results more scientifically certain, and would have provided some level of guarantee that there was no intrusion of illegitimacy along the line of descent, or no "bookkeeping error" that may have resulted in the single positive match. And since that single match was the most significant finding for the whole project, it was that much more advisable that it be confirmed with the testing of additional Eston descendants. But to date, that has not been done.
July 28, 2001