Good Evening, We have been talking about evidence this weekend, and we haven't said too much on this list about the recently released summary of the "Jeffersons Scholars Commission Report" examining the documentary evidence that might lend insights into whether or not Thomas Jefferson was the father of any or all of his slave Sally Hemmings' children -- and concluding with views from skepticism that he was to the conclusion that it was certainly untrue that he was the father of any of the children. For the "evidence" for the new report there are no documents, such as wills, deeds, bibles, etc., but there is a wealth of letters, "hearsay" documents, circumstantial evidence and observations on what is known about the individuals involved to be weighed. There IS an indication from a DNA study in 1999 that one of more than two score Jefferson men MIGHT have been the father of ONE of Sally's children. The summary of the new report available online I think is an extremely clearly written, easy to read analysis of the avilable evidence, and I encourage you all to read it. It is found here: http://www.tjheritage.org/scholars.html For me, with an illegitimate great grandfather ,proof of whose parentage some older cousins have made their life's quest -- cousins who have shown no real interest in either their prominent, upstanding nor their scandal-plagued ancestors in the 1600/1700s on the Eastern Shore-- the Scholars Commission Report has provided suggestions to more places we can look to add to OUR list of evidence and further the cause. (We have the same DNA problem as the Jeffersons...too many likely HILL men in Warren Co TN..to pin down for sure, but they all do probably descend from one "grandpa" in the county.) I wrote a synopsis of the earlier DNA study and the Scholars Commission Report, and posted it on the LVA's VA-Roots, and have been told that it is accurate, though the Thomas-as-father theory still has its fans, and some don't like the fact that I may have "fallen" under the spell of the our-President/Ancestor Thomas-can't -possibly-have-had-a-child-by-a-slave proponents (a slave albeit she was his late wife's half-sister). I'm simplifying a bit. Again, I urge you all to read the online summary, see what they did and how they analyzed it, and if so inclined draw your own conclusions on Jefferson. My slightly amended post to Va-Roots is pasted in below. I added for this, hopefully less high-strung list's purpose the info that (a) PBS had all "sides" of the story prior to production of the special and chose to ignore important "facts" such as Eston Hemming's family lore that they descended from an "uncle" Jefferson and not Thomas himself; (b) the fact that Madison's descendants declined testing; (c) the reference to Abigail Adam's letters re Sally, which I found to be quite remarkable; and (d) the argument that Thomas' brother Randolph's 16-18 year old boys were too young to bed Sally. My long-standing interest in this controversy stems from my CARR ancestry.(and there are some real interesting comments on the Carr boys' claims in the summary) Best Regards, Janet (Baugh) Hunter _________ Subj: Re: [VA-ROOTS] READ IT -- Jefferson Scholars Report Date: 4/17/01 3:38:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: jleehunt1 To: va-roots@listlva.lib.va.us << << What is so wrong with Jefferson falling in love with Sally, a beautiful woman who resembled his dead wife, it was interesting he did not remary, but showed faithfulness to Sally by staying single.>> >> Hello Everyone, There is nothing wrong with the sentiment, but evidence suggests that it just isn't true. I urge you all to read the summary of the Scholars Commission on the Jefferson-Hemmings controversy (link below). While it may seem like we are getting involved in an actual controversy that side tracks us from geneaology, the way the facts were gathered by the Scholars Commission and the analysis of them I feel DOES HAVE a broader application by way of example for all of us who have ancestor connections that we cannot prove via wills, deeds, etc., but have quite thick files of circumstantial arguments and data, as I do. I too shared the above quoted sentiment, which seemed to be a likely scenario after watching a PBS documentary about a year ago (with two of my children, with one of whom I am now in protracted discussions about the latest developments). And I am appalled to find out that even though PBS knew the evidence was lacking and had interviewed "all sides", the documentary still leaves the impression that Sally Hemmings basically gave Thomas Jefferson a second family in a loving, long-running, monogamous relationship that began in Paris, when our future President also inaugurated the truly incredible spending-way-beyond-his-means habits that extended throughout his lifetime. While Jim Self's statement(s) of Jefferson's own denial of the affair should be taken seriously, the combination of the earlier DNA study and the summary of the still -to-be-released full Scholars Commission report provide more objective support for Jefferson's denial, and I personally think together make a strong case that it is unlikely that he was the father of any of Sally's children. They seem to me anyway to also make a case that there well could have been at least three separate fathers involved, and there are other known Jefferson candidates for the honor of siring children by Sally. Background facts in brief: (1) Sally Hemmings had seven children: Thomas Woodson, Madison, Eston, Harriet1 (died young), Harriet2, Beverly and another daughter who died in infancy. (2) DNA studies, only applicable to male descendants, were done on descendants of only two sons: Thomas Woodson and Eston. Madison's descendants have so far declined to be tested, which they can do at any time; at least one said the family story was quite sufficient (see below). (3) No DNA work on others; (4) Madison Hemmings' descendants have a story that Thomas Jefferson was their ancestor: (5) Eston Hemmings' descendants have a story that an "uncle Jefferson" was their ancestor: and (6) two Carr brothers, Peter and Samuel, claimed to have fathered children by Hemmings. (Source: http://www.angelfire.com/va/TJTruth/background.html) QUICK SUMMARY OF THE NOVEMBER 1999 DNA STUDY, designed to test for BOTH Jefferson and Carr genetic markers: (1) Thomas Woodson's descendant tested DOES NOT have the JEFFERSON genetic marker; (2) Eston Hemmings' descendant tested DOES have the JEFFERSON genetic marker; (3) NEITHER of the tested descendants have the CARR genetic Marker. Conclusion: Eston likely has Jefferson ancestry; Thomas Woodson likely does not; neither likely have Carr ancestry. Even though Eston's Jefferson ancestry could have been any one of many Jefferson men, the test results were interpreted by many of Sally Hemmings' descendants (plus other interested parties and the media) to mean that Thomas Jefferson was likely the father of her children Thus the controversy and need for further study and analysis. For more information on the DNA study: http://www.angelfire.com/va/TJTruth/background.html (There are some other sites). Observation re Thomas and Sally having long-term monogamous relationship. Based on the assumption that the Carr brothers weren't just boasting about bedding one of the best looking slaves at Monticello but actually did "sleep" with her and sired some of her children, it looks like Sally MIGHT well have had children by at least THREE or FOUR different men: Peter and/or Samuel Carr; a Jefferson man; and a non Carr/non Jefferson man. But DNA testing is in the early stages and is complicated, and the verdict is still out on that (Jefferson Scholars Commission report below, which indicates no clan OR individual, including Thomas Jefferson, is "off the hook" for ANY of the children). MY QUICK TAKE ON SUMMARY OF JEFFERSON SCHOLARS COMMISSION REPORT found here: http://www.tjheritage.org/scholars.html : The Scholars Commission concludes it "is by no means proven" that Thomas Jefferson fathered one or more of Sally Hemmings children, and the views of the 12 scholars agreeing with this range from the skeptical to those who feel it is certainly untrue that Jefferson was the father. One of the scholars dissented. The reason there is at the least skepticism among the twelve that Thomas Jefferson is the father of any of Sally Hemming's children centers (in my reading) on their analysis that the evidence suggests that while he was in the right "time and place" to have done so, it is questionable whether he would have had either the "motive" to bed Sally or "opportunity" to do so without detection. They find no evidence that Thomas Jefferson had sexual relations with Sally Hemmings, while there is evidence she had other liaisons, and further: (a) a number of factors would argue against such a liaison in any event -- no motive -- (her age and personality, his age and personality, etc. -- read especially reference to First Lady (later) Abigail Adams' letter from London regarding Sally right before she went across the Channel with Jefferson's daughter to Paris, saying Sally was less mature than the 9 year old daughter); and (b) while Thomas Jefferson was in the vicinity of Sally Hemmings when all of her pregnancies were conceived ("time and place"), he had virtually no privacy when he was at Monticello (no opportunity to do so without detection). They argue that if there had been an ongoing relationship it would have been known and recorded by someone, somewhere -- and there were observations that Thomas' brother Randolph spent the night with Sally Hemmings on many occasions. They also further point to the fact that Sally's children do not seem to receive treatment in the Jefferson household any better than those of Sally's siblings also there. Monticello was, it seems, the scene of a giant "house party" whenever Thomas Jefferson was in residence, with "alert" servants and guests everywhere. The report goes on to indicate that among the more likely candidates for the Jefferson genetic marker for Eston are Thomas' brother Randolph, or one of his sons. (I have been told that advocates of the Thomas-as-father theory have argued that Randolph's 16-18 year old boys were too young to have bedded Sally..!!*#$@!! You've got to read about Randolph to fully appreciate this.) Ann Avery Hunter just wrote: "Men who don't talk about their love/sex lives are not called liars in Virginia. They are called gentlemen." I urge everyone to go and read the excellent, clear summary of the report, which is unfortunately in PDF form, which means you need to download Acrobat Reader. The summary is fairly lengthy and describes in a very forthright manner the facts the scholars chose as key and the reasons for their interpretations. We have had quite a to-do on the issue on the VA-HIST list, companion to Va-Roots. The orientation there is different. I recommend that you look at the summary, pretend that Thomas Jefferson was just another rich plantation owner, who'd never done a day of public service beyond jury duty, and that your family lore has a story such as this, and ask yourself what your "tentative" conclusions (preponderance of evidence, etc.) might be -- "tentative" as there is a book coming out shortly with all the details on the specifics of the evidence. I am pretty sure I've made some horrible faux pas in here somewhere, so I ask your forgiveness in advance, Best Regards, Janet (Baugh) Hunter...a descendant of a cousin of Peter and Samuel Carr.

With no offense intended to my cousin, this is not the proper forum for discussion of this. Bob Juch http://www.Juch.org -----Original Message----- From: jleehunt1@aol.com [mailto:jleehunt1@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 10:35 PM To: VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Analysis of Evidence -- Jefferson Scholars Report <snip>

Thank you, Janet (Baugh) Hunter, for your impeccable and unbiased review of this very sensitive subject. All the Jeffersons, black or white, descendents or not, are genuinely interested in the truth. Your analysis and analytical opinions are appreciated...and long overdue. Best regards, Hugh S. Jefferson

In the discussion of Sally and Thomas Jefferson these words caught my attention, "having a motive or Opportunity to bed Sally without being detected" another interesting group of words were "privacy" and "alert servants." First, we are not talking about servants we are talking about slaves. Who were these slaves? A race of black people who were considered sub human only to be treated like animals. Now why would any rich slave owner care for the opinion of a sub human in his rich culture of slave ownership? I expect owners of slaves acted like slaves were not in the same room as they themselves were therefore said and did whatever they pleased without any thought to the sensitivity of the slave. I feel Thomas might of bedded Sally even knowing slaves were just outside of the door within hearing distance. If Thomas Jefferson was a sensitive man toward slaves would he of owned slaves? Since slave owners treated their slaves on the same level as animals or the family pet I expect the black people knew exactly who the father of Sally's children were. So my vote goes to the opinion of the family of Sally. These people shared in the suffering of their women when taken advantage of by rich slave owners. I expect the slaves in the household all knew the truth, therefore I believe what they have to say. Slaves were the people who knew all of the plantation owners secrets. If the slaves could of written their stories theirs would be the only stories worth reading. Jo Ann ----- Original Message ----- From: <jleehunt1@aol.com> To: <VA-SOUTHSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2001 9:34 PM Subject: [VA-SOUTHSIDE-L] Analysis of Evidence -- Jefferson Scholars Report > Good Evening, > > We have been talking about evidence this weekend, and we haven't said too > much on this list about the recently released summary of the "Jeffersons > Scholars Commission Report" examining the documentary evidence that might > lend insights into whether or not Thomas Jefferson was the father of any or > all of his slave Sally Hemmings' children -- and concluding with views from > skepticism that he was to the conclusion that it was certainly untrue that he > was the father of any of the children. > > For the "evidence" for the new report there are no documents, such as wills, > deeds, bibles, etc., but there is a wealth of letters, "hearsay" documents, > circumstantial evidence and observations on what is known about the > individuals involved to be weighed. There IS an indication from a DNA study > in 1999 that one of more than two score Jefferson men MIGHT have been the > father of ONE of Sally's children. > > The summary of the new report available online I think is an extremely > clearly written, easy to read analysis of the avilable evidence, and I > encourage you all to read it. It is found here: > http://www.tjheritage.org/scholars.html > > For me, with an illegitimate great grandfather ,proof of whose parentage some > older cousins have made their life's quest -- cousins who have shown no real > interest in either their prominent, upstanding nor their scandal-plagued > ancestors in the 1600/1700s on the Eastern Shore-- the Scholars Commission > Report has provided suggestions to more places we can look to add to OUR list > of evidence and further the cause. (We have the same DNA problem as the > Jeffersons...too many likely HILL men in Warren Co TN..to pin down for sure, > but they all do probably descend from one "grandpa" in the county.) > > I wrote a synopsis of the earlier DNA study and the Scholars Commission > Report, and posted it on the LVA's VA-Roots, and have been told that it is > accurate, though the Thomas-as-father theory still has its fans, and some > don't like the fact that I may have "fallen" under the spell of the > our-President/Ancestor Thomas-can't -possibly-have-had-a-child-by-a-slave > proponents (a slave albeit she was his late wife's half-sister). I'm > simplifying a bit. > > Again, I urge you all to read the online summary, see what they did and how > they analyzed it, and if so inclined draw your own conclusions on Jefferson. > My slightly amended post to Va-Roots is pasted in below. I added for this, > hopefully less high-strung list's purpose the info that (a) PBS had all > "sides" of the story prior to production of the special and chose to ignore > important "facts" such as Eston Hemming's family lore that they descended > from an "uncle" Jefferson and not Thomas himself; (b) the fact that Madison's > descendants declined testing; (c) the reference to Abigail Adam's letters re > Sally, which I found to be quite remarkable; and (d) the argument that > Thomas' brother Randolph's 16-18 year old boys were too young to bed Sally. > > My long-standing interest in this controversy stems from my CARR > ancestry.(and there are some real interesting comments on the Carr boys' > claims in the summary) > > Best Regards, > Janet (Baugh) Hunter > _________ > Subj: Re: [VA-ROOTS] READ IT -- Jefferson Scholars Report > Date: 4/17/01 3:38:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time > From: jleehunt1 > To: va-roots@listlva.lib.va.us > > > << << > What is so wrong with Jefferson falling in love with Sally, a > beautiful woman who resembled his dead wife, it was interesting he did > not remary, but showed faithfulness to Sally by staying single.>> > >> > > Hello Everyone, > > There is nothing wrong with the sentiment, but evidence suggests that it just > isn't true. I urge you all to read the summary of the Scholars Commission on > the Jefferson-Hemmings controversy (link below). While it may seem like we > are getting involved in an actual controversy that side tracks us from > geneaology, the way the facts were gathered by the Scholars Commission and > the analysis of them I feel DOES HAVE a broader application by way of example > for all of us who have ancestor connections that we cannot prove via wills, > deeds, etc., but have quite thick files of circumstantial arguments and data, > as I do. > > I too shared the above quoted sentiment, which seemed to be a likely scenario > after watching a PBS documentary about a year ago (with two of my children, > with one of whom I am now in protracted discussions about the latest > developments). And I am appalled to find out that even though PBS knew the > evidence was lacking and had interviewed "all sides", the documentary still > leaves the impression that Sally Hemmings basically gave Thomas Jefferson a > second family in a loving, long-running, monogamous relationship that began > in Paris, when our future President also inaugurated the truly incredible > spending-way-beyond-his-means habits that extended throughout his lifetime. > > While Jim Self's statement(s) of Jefferson's own denial of the affair should > be taken seriously, the combination of the earlier DNA study and the summary > of the still -to-be-released full Scholars Commission report provide more > objective support for Jefferson's denial, and I personally think together > make a strong case that it is unlikely that he was the father of any of > Sally's children. They seem to me anyway to also make a case that there well > could have been at least three separate fathers involved, and there are other > known Jefferson candidates for the honor of siring children by Sally. > > Background facts in brief: > (1) Sally Hemmings had seven children: Thomas Woodson, Madison, Eston, > Harriet1 (died young), Harriet2, Beverly and another daughter who died in > infancy. > (2) DNA studies, only applicable to male descendants, were done on > descendants of only two sons: Thomas Woodson and Eston. Madison's > descendants have so far declined to be tested, which they can do at any time; > at least one said the family story was quite sufficient (see below). > (3) No DNA work on others; > (4) Madison Hemmings' descendants have a story that Thomas Jefferson was > their ancestor: > (5) Eston Hemmings' descendants have a story that an "uncle Jefferson" was > their ancestor: and > (6) two Carr brothers, Peter and Samuel, claimed to have fathered children > by Hemmings. > (Source: http://www.angelfire.com/va/TJTruth/background.html) > > QUICK SUMMARY OF THE NOVEMBER 1999 DNA STUDY, designed to test for BOTH > Jefferson and Carr genetic markers: > (1) Thomas Woodson's descendant tested DOES NOT have the JEFFERSON genetic > marker; > (2) Eston Hemmings' descendant tested DOES have the JEFFERSON genetic marker; > (3) NEITHER of the tested descendants have the CARR genetic Marker. > > Conclusion: Eston likely has Jefferson ancestry; Thomas Woodson likely does > not; neither likely have Carr ancestry. Even though Eston's Jefferson > ancestry could have been any one of many Jefferson men, the test results were > interpreted by many of Sally Hemmings' descendants (plus other interested > parties and the media) to mean that Thomas Jefferson was likely the father of > her children Thus the controversy and need for further study and analysis. > For more information on the DNA study: > http://www.angelfire.com/va/TJTruth/background.html (There are some other > sites). > > Observation re Thomas and Sally having long-term monogamous relationship. > Based on the assumption that the Carr brothers weren't just boasting about > bedding one of the best looking slaves at Monticello but actually did > "sleep" with her and sired some of her children, it looks like Sally MIGHT > well have had children by at least THREE or FOUR different men: Peter and/or > Samuel Carr; a Jefferson man; and a non Carr/non Jefferson man. But DNA > testing is in the early stages and is complicated, and the verdict is still > out on that (Jefferson Scholars Commission report below, which indicates no > clan OR individual, including Thomas Jefferson, is "off the hook" for ANY of > the children). > > MY QUICK TAKE ON SUMMARY OF JEFFERSON SCHOLARS COMMISSION REPORT found here: > http://www.tjheritage.org/scholars.html : > > The Scholars Commission concludes it "is by no means proven" that Thomas > Jefferson fathered one or more of Sally Hemmings children, and the views of > the 12 scholars agreeing with this range from the skeptical to those who feel > it is certainly untrue that Jefferson was the father. One of the scholars > dissented. The reason there is at the least skepticism among the twelve that > Thomas Jefferson is the father of any of Sally Hemming's children centers (in > my reading) on their analysis that the evidence suggests that while he was in > the right "time and place" to have done so, it is questionable whether he > would have had either the "motive" to bed Sally or "opportunity" to do so > without detection. > > They find no evidence that Thomas Jefferson had sexual relations with Sally > Hemmings, while there is evidence she had other liaisons, and further: > > (a) a number of factors would argue against such a liaison in any event -- no > motive -- (her age and personality, his age and personality, etc. -- read > especially reference to First Lady (later) Abigail Adams' letter from London > regarding Sally right before she went across the Channel with Jefferson's > daughter to Paris, saying Sally was less mature than the 9 year old > daughter); and > > (b) while Thomas Jefferson was in the vicinity of Sally Hemmings when all of > her pregnancies were conceived ("time and place"), he had virtually no > privacy when he was at Monticello (no opportunity to do so without > detection). > > They argue that if there had been an ongoing relationship it would have been > known and recorded by someone, somewhere -- and there were observations that > Thomas' brother Randolph spent the night with Sally Hemmings on many > occasions. They also further point to the fact that Sally's children do not > seem to receive treatment in the Jefferson household any better than those of > Sally's siblings also there. Monticello was, it seems, the scene of a giant > "house party" whenever Thomas Jefferson was in residence, with "alert" > servants and guests everywhere. The report goes on to indicate that among > the more likely candidates for the Jefferson genetic marker for Eston are > Thomas' brother Randolph, or one of his sons. (I have been told that > advocates of the Thomas-as-father theory have argued that Randolph's 16-18 > year old boys were too young to have bedded Sally..!!*#$@!! You've got to > read about Randolph to fully appreciate this.) > > Ann Avery Hunter just wrote: "Men who don't talk about their love/sex lives > are not called liars in Virginia. They are called gentlemen." > > I urge everyone to go and read the excellent, clear summary of the report, > which is unfortunately in PDF form, which means you need to download Acrobat > Reader. The summary is fairly lengthy and describes in a very forthright > manner the facts the scholars chose as key and the reasons for their > interpretations. > > We have had quite a to-do on the issue on the VA-HIST list, companion to > Va-Roots. The orientation there is different. I recommend that you look at > the summary, pretend that Thomas Jefferson was just another rich plantation > owner, who'd never done a day of public service beyond jury duty, and that > your family lore has a story such as this, and ask yourself what your > "tentative" conclusions (preponderance of evidence, etc.) might be -- > "tentative" as there is a book coming out shortly with all the details on the > specifics of the evidence. > > I am pretty sure I've made some horrible faux pas in here somewhere, so I ask > your forgiveness in advance, > > Best Regards, > > Janet (Baugh) Hunter...a descendant of a cousin of Peter and Samuel Carr. > > > > > > ==== VA-SOUTHSIDE Mailing List ==== > The USGenWeb Project http://www.usgenweb.org > > > ============================== > Shop Ancestry - Everything you need to Discover, Preserve & Celebrate > your heritage! > http://shop.myfamily.com/ancestrycatalog > >