Posted on 08/31/2017 7:28:58 AM PDT by 11th_VA
...In late 1998, the prestigious scientific journal Nature announced that it had conducted DNA testings which proved that Thomas Jefferson had fathered a child with Sally Hemings. According to Nature:
Almost two hundred years ago, Thomas Jefferson was alleged to have fathered children by his slave Sally Hemings. The charges have remained controversial. Now, DNA analysis confirms that Jefferson was indeed the father of at least one of Hemings’ children.1
(snip)
These authors, however, deliberately ignored the non-paternity results of the DNA testing. In fact, the original Nature article had reported that Thomas Woodson–the child that oral traditions claim was born of Sally when she was fifteen or so–the child born shortly after her return from France–was not sired by Jefferson
(snip)
Yet, only eight weeks after releasing this story, Nature issued a retraction, admitting, “The title assigned to our study was misleading.” 7Why? Because after proving that Jefferson had not fathered Woodson, it was revealed that their paternity conclusions about Jefferson fathering Eston were based on inaccurate and incomplete information, both scientifically and historically.
While the researchers did find Jefferson genes present in the descendants of Eston Hemings, the researchers could not say that they were the genes of Thomas Jefferson, for they had not tested the DNA of any of Thomas’ descendants. They tested only the genes of the descendants of Thomas’ uncle, Field Jefferson, and of his nephews, Samuel and Peter Carr! Significantly, there were twenty-six Jefferson males living in the central Virginia vicinity at that time. Quite simply, the researchers failed to eliminate the other lines. As one report accurately observed, “Experts have noted the total absence of accurate Jefferson ancestry charts in the study.” 8
(Excerpt) Read more at wallbuilders.com ...
1873 - Memoirs of Madison Hemming
It was on the basis of this newspaper interview of one of Sally Hemming’s sons that archaeologists at Montecello found her bedroom last year.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/cron/1873march.html
They are talking about the Jefferson Y chromosome appearing in a male line of descent from Sally Hemings (her son’s son’s son, etc) Whether it was Thomas Jefferson, president to be, who contributed that Y chromosome can not be proved or disproved - but a Jefferson was the father of that line.
What if is was mutual? You know, like Bill and Monica.
That was all covered in the book I read about Napoleon’s (possible) murder. I have also read that high arsenic levels were found in hair from lots of people from that time, and that the amount of arsenic in locks of Napoleon’s hair at the time of his death, while much higher than what we’d see in people today was not that unusual among people of the First Empire period. Again, I believe he may have been murdered, but I do not believe this can be conclusively proved.
Founding Father ping?
To add to the intrigue — I’ve read that Sally Hemings was actually Martha Jefferson’s HALF SISTER. (Jefferson’s late wife.) Jefferson had inherited Hemings (along with many other slaves) from his father-in-law upon his wife’s death.
I don’t know how you could disprove that Jefferson fathered Eston unless you had Eston’s remains to test.
You could only prove that at some point the supposed line of descent was incorrect, falsely ascribed paternity for example.
It would not matter if it was mutual in a master/slave relationship. It would be sort of like statutory rape, because the slave cannot be said to have a free choice in the matter because, well, slavery.
Well, no, read the article again, they were attributing it to the Carr nephews and the only way they’d have a different surname would be due to their mother being the Jefferson, not their father. Unless, that is, they actually were fathered by a Jefferson male but adopted by a male of a different surname, and that would have been highly unlikely in such a prominent Virginia family.
Nothing personal here I assume you’re going with what the source gave you.
BUT
The article caption could have used the conclusion made in the source which was: Questionable DNA Sources Were Used To Prove Claim Thomas Jefferson Sally Hemmings Hanky Panky.
Instead that headline left that open for endless speculation particularly by casual readers.
Jefferson’s only brother to survive infancy was Randolph.
as much misinformation that I see today being taken as the truth I tend to take what ever historians say about history with a grain of salt if it is salacious in nature. rumors are just what they are not historical fact and every historian has there pet theory that a lot of times is based on what intrigues them not fact.
My personnel belief is that Sally hemming’s was actually Thomas Jefferson’s wife’s half sister and that because of that in private she was treated as a family member because she was family.
Thomas Jefferson’s political enemies picked up on the fact that she was being treated by Jefferson better then a mere slave and tried to use a whisper campaign to discredit him as being an adulterer and a mixer of the races.
history can be real ugly when dealing with the politics of the history because the truth is that we just can’t be sure of what the relationship of sally hemming’s and the Jefferson family was.
Don’t have to re-read it....we’re living it.
“Jefferson and sally had an ongoing sexual relationship”
I don’t recall seeing any proof of that, is there any other than accusations by those who wanted to destroy Thomas Jefferson?
Ambrose also said that Thomas did not respond to the lie because he was a gentleman and would not out his relative in any way. And, that Thomas figured that at some point history would out the truth.
The 1998 Nature story was FAKE NEWS™.
Garbage.
These allegations were addressed by Jefferson during his life time. Unfortunately for Jefferson he had to be away from his beloved Monticello for years at a time in the service of his country. During this time away from his large estate he allowed his brother and uncle to manage his affairs there.
It was well known by his contemporaries that his brother was having sex with more than one of Thomas Jeffersons slaves. Thomas Jefferson admonished his brother on more than one occasion. Thomas rebuked Randolph in writing for this nastiness.
It is most unfortunate that today the reputation of perhaps one of the very greatest Americans to have ever lived would have his reputation sullied by irresponsible do gooders.
Yes, there is DNA from Jefferson’s family in Sally Hemmings but it is not from Thomas, it is from Randolph.
since Jefferson and sally had an ongoing sexual relationship there is little to prove that he was not the father...
________________________________________________________
This statement is poppy cock, a plain and simple lie. Jefferson never had sex with any of his slaves.
It is awful how modern day ignorant people can spread a lie and people will think it the truth.
There is a book published that contains all of Jeffersons letters from his own hand. The letters are interesting and put this shameful accusation to bed. Randolph was diddling with the slaves and Jefferson threw him off the estate because of it. People of the day knew it, it took idiots of 200 years later to perpetuate a lie that was never believed in Jeffersons lifetime althogh it was hinted at by some newspapers during Jeffersons first run for Presidency.
There are numerous publications who claim that Thomas Jefferson sired Sally Hemmings children because of a DNA report that found that there was a “Y” chromozone in the Hemmings line that came from the Jefferson line. The report however states that it could have come nearly any Jefferson but the reporters all leave that out and conclude it came from Thomas Jefferson. Shameful.
People of today just don’t understand the strength of a mans reputation 200 years ago. Jefferson was all about his.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.