Customer Reviews

The Jefferson-Hemings Myth : An American Travesty

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

....it's OK for Bill to ***** Monica??

I knew there were flaws in the Tom and Sally story, but I never realized how bad it was. When the Thomas Jefferson Memorial foundation issued a report in 1998 that stated as "fact" that Thomas Jefferson had an ongoing sexual relationship with his slave, Sally Hemings, and fathered all six of her children, most people accepted it as gospel. That report is a lie; the only things the DNA testing proved are:

[1] The Woodson line, descended from a child Sally got pregnant with in Paris, are NOT related to anybody named Jefferson.

[2] ONE descendent of the Hemings line carries a Jefferson Y-chromosome. Easton Hemings was conceived when Jefferson was 64; possible, BUT there were seven other men named Jefferson easily available, all younger, all with much less to lose.

The TJMF accepted as fact everything that indicated Tom MIGHT have had sex with Sally, and ignored other possibilities. There is no PROOF that Tom is innocent, but there is also NONE that he is guilty. Sally had kids with one, or more, white men. One was named Jefferson, but there is no proof, scientific or documentary, that the Jefferson was named Thomas.

Thomas Callender's drunken fable, spun in 1802 because Jefferson wouldn't make him Postmaster of Richmond, goes on, and will, alas, be eternal. Tom Woodson was NOT Jefferson's child; that is proven. The rest is speculation....speculation isn't history, and it dern sure isn't evidence.

The authors of this great book suggest three possible motives for the TJMF report, and the timing thereof...all are worth thinking about, and none is a legitimate reason to state historical conjecture as established fact:

[a] To provide a lead-off for Black History Month.

[b] To give a ratings push to an upcoming CBS miniseries.

[c] To resurrect a character witness for an embattled President. See my title.

I shall disagree with the authors about one point; they state that Mr. Jefferson's horrible financial situation was caused by his honorable attempt to settle his father-in law's debts...that may have been a small part of the start, but Mr. Jefferson liked good food, wine, and books. And he spent far too much on Monticello. Mr. Jefferson may be innocent of the Sally charges, but, he could not manage money, and his debts were his OWN fault. Still,to write good history, one must prove facts by hard evidence. For the Tom and Sally story, there is none. It remains just a story. Maybe it happened, but there are plenty of other stories even more plausible to explain things. You need to read this book before you decide.

This is a truly remarkable book. Roughly half of the reviewers have given it the highest possible rating, and the other half the lowest rating. With controversy like this, I had to buy the book. I found it very persuasive. But I'm no expert, and I would urge others who are intersted in the issue to buy and read the book and form your own conclusions. There is one point about which I feel very strongly, and which I think any intelligent person can judge without having to be an expert on Thomas Jefferson. To suggest (as one reviewer does) that the changes made to the transcript of Ellen Randolph's letter that appears in Annette Gordon Reed's "Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings" are "trivial" and simply "misprints" is disingenuous at best. Counting both the number of words that she dropped from the most important sentence and those that she rearranged to not just change but reverse the clear meaning of the original document, there are more than a dozen "errors" in this one sentence. (...). Anyone who believes this was a "misprint" or "typo" would presumable also accept the story that the anthrax-laced letter sent to Tom Brokaw was intended to read: "Dear Tom: Love your show. Keep up the great work!" Evidence tampering is a more serious offense than plagiarism, as it distracts the reader from the search for the truth. Yet the anti-Jefferson establishment seems determined to cover up this clear act of wrongdoing. For that disclosure alone, even if this book provided no other insights on the issue (which it does), we should all be indebted to its contributors.

The PC, anti-Jefferson crowd jumped to conclusions upon the completion of the DNA study in 1998 and again with the shameful press conference at Monticello in 2000, obviously attempting to further an agenda rather than to search for the truth. This book exposes them.

You will learn much about the process, the quality of the scholarship, and the special interests that lead to the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation's pronouncement that Jefferson was likely Eston Heming's father. They apparently found enough "evidence" to support the conclusion they hoped to reach a priori, that Jefferson fathered Hemings's children, while ignoring more persuasive exculpatory evidence.

As for Reed's motives,... view the Coolidge letter for yourself. You decide whether Reed's error was innocuous.

It is this reader's opinion that the "investigation" that gave rise to the original report will accompany fantasy Vietnam war veterans among the discredited pretenders whose works merit pity. This work provides a palliative to the shoddy "scholarship" that resulted in the original report.

Though the quality of the essays is uneven, to anyone interested in the truth of this matter I commend this book.

Well done! This book comes closer to the truth than any other book on this subject.

The anguished moans you hear are coming from politically correct academia as they witness the destruction by this book of their carefully burnished canard that Thomas Jefferson had one or more children by his black slave, Sally Hemings. The diligent research evident in the essays in THE JEFFERSON - HEMINGS MYTH is based upon careful analyses of historical, genealogical and scientific data by Jefferson experts. It is welcome new scholarship resulting in an eye-opening contrast to the recent spate of anti-Jefferson books that use flimsy or created "evidence" to draw one-sided conclusions only the flakiest conspiracy theorist could believe.

As the book shows vividly, the real story behind the creation and ongoing enhancement of the Jefferson - Hemings myth is absolutely fascinating. James T. Callender, who in 1802 created this hoax, was a paid character assassin who hated Jefferson and wanted to embarrass him by slandering him with miscegenation, the usual stock-in-trade charge Callender used against his enemies. More than seventy years later one of Sally Hemings' sons, Madison, was profiled in an Abolitionist newspaper. In that account, purportedly in Madison's own words, Madison claimed Jefferson was his father and that Sally's mother Betty Hemings was the concubine of John Wayles, Jefferson's father-in-law. This rambling profile has long been taken as fact by unwary (or uncaring) historians, despite the fact, as is amply shown through new historical and genealogical research, virtually all of what Madison said is extremely suspect as to accuracy and intent. Nonetheless, the words of Callender and Madison Hemings serve as a basis for modern books by Fawn Brodie and Annette Gordon-Reed, as well as several abominable movies.

The much ballyhooed DNA evidence was manipulated by the media. In fact, Thomas Jefferson was proved not to be the father of Tom Woodson, despite the Woodson family's allegedly long oral tradition to the contrary. Moreover, as is exceedingly well described, it is far more likely than Randolph Jefferson, Thomas' much younger and slightly retarded brother, was the father of Eston Hemings, the only Hemings descendant whose DNA was tested. Strangely, the Hemings family claimed not to know the burial site of a son of Madison Hemings (Eston's brother), despite the fact he was a Union Army veteran. When one of the authors of this book located the grave, the Hemings family refused permission for DNA testing. Were they afraid tests would reveal no Jefferson DNA, which in addition to damaging their claim would also show that Sally had multiple sexual partners?

Nonetheless, release of the DNA findings, such as they were, allowed Jefferson's enemies to attack his reputation with a vengeance. Foremost among them was the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, the tax exempt operator of Monticello. They went so far as to say that Jefferson may have fathered all of Sally's children, and a compelling chapter in this book is an insider's view of the politically correct shenanigans that took place within the TJF as this charge was bullied into existence.

Publication of THE JEFFERSON - HEMINGS MYTH will no doubt raise the ire of Jefferson's enemies. Indeed, one can expect them to come out of the woodwork soon to attack the authors and their conclusions as "Hemings-deniers" or some such thing. And that is exactly why it deserves to be read by everyone who - like Jefferson himself - values the truth.

I am so glad that this book was written. Long before the DNA evidence became popular myth on this topic, one of the science journals that the biotech I worked for (can't remember the name) 10 yrs. ago, asserted that the DNA ONLY verified that a male of the Jefferson family (at least 6 lived at Monticello) was involved in the paternity claim. Historian Elizabeth Langhorne's excellent must-read book called Monticello, verifies that the Carr brothers, nephews of Jefferson's, were notorious for frequenting the slave quarters....

This book is long overdue, and a powerful piece of work. It exposes the lies,agendas,and duplicity involved in the interpretation of the DNA "evidence" obtained two years ago.From the first to the last chapter this book destroys the report of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, which concluded that Jefferson was the father of all of the children of Sally Hemings. Particularly good is chapter five by White McKenzie Wallenborn,MD,which shows how the TJMF prevented his dissenting committee report from being published with the majority report. He exposes the political agenda of the TJMF, and their lack of honesty.Chapter seven by Robert Eyler Coates,Sr is a brilliant refutation of the supposed "evidence" using common sense and logical alternative possibilities for Eston Heming's father. I believe the Conclusion by Bahman Batmanghellidj is truly the most inspiring. He passionatly describes the principles and character of Thomas Jefferson,in both his public and private life. He refutes the agenda that is attempting to destroy one of the greatest champions of human liberty.If you believe in truth and liberty,buy this book. If you do not want to see the name of a great human being such as Thomas Jefferson maliciously destroyed,buy this book. Above all if you value truth and logic and wish for them to triumph, buy this book.

I can appreciate the efforts of the TJHS to defend this great man, as they do so based on what they truly believe about him.

What I cannot appreciate are the methods they sometimes use such as overstating the significance of trivial matters. I believe an example of this is the significance of misprints attributed to Annette Gordon Reed. This is especically true when the American Travesty book itself has noticeable misprints.

For instance, the chronology chart on page 197 states that Lucy Elizabeth I, was born within 4 months of her sister Polly. If this were the case then Lucy Elizabeth I, would have been born prematurely, about 3 months old at best, during a time that was ill equipped for such premature births. In all actuality, Lucy Elizabeth I, was born in 1780.

Another trivial error in the chronology chart is on page 198. The birth of Harriet Hemings is listed as having occurred in 1802 when Harriet Hemings was actually born in 1801. The subject of Harriet Hemings brings up the testimony of the overseer Edmund Bacon which was mentioned in the book. The essay by Wallenborn on page 59 backs the assertion by Edmund Bacon that in the year of 1800, at age 16, he may have been in a position to witness the conception of Harriet Hemings at Monticello. This does not seem possible when according to chronologies on the building of Monticello, the dependencies in which Sally Hemings room was apparently located did not even begin construction until 1801. Harriet Hemings was being born, not conceived in the year of 1801. If Bacon was in a position to witness anyone emering numerous times out of Sally Hemings room during the year of 1800, the room must have been located in a cabin somewhere on Mulberry Row. Cabins on Mulberry Row were apparently shared by many. There could, therefore, be no clear distinction of who the alledged gentleman caller, if he did exist, was there to see.

The same type of conflicts exist during the time frame that is associated with the conception of Eston Hemings in 1807. There is some question as to how numerous visits could occur during all the heavy construction that was going on during this time frame in 1807. Particulary when Jefferson was absent for most of the time during this time frame. The book is a strong proponent of the main reason that anyone would come to Monticello is to visit with Thomas Jefferson. But it seems clear that Jefferson was gone for most of the months that could have fallen within a numerous visit time frame, regarding the conception of Eston Hemings.

The "numerous visits" to Sally Hemingses room also falls within a time in which Hemings was apparently removed indefinitely from any room she may have had due to the laying of a new roof.

The overall significance is that knowone alive really knows the whole truth, and should avoid attacking the honest efforts of others to arrive at one.

To all you negative reviewers! I own the book, I read the book and I own about 450 other books dealing with this time in our history. Check out the facts in this book and others like it and stop following the pack, which are just following each other around mainly using circler and subjective reasoning! The book is Excellent! Go to all the primary sources.

This is a great book with a variety of points that explain why Sally Hemmings was never more than a slave to the President. Mr Jefferson was in the public eye most of his life and none of these allegations were ever mentioned until after his death. The people who want to defame this President are those who want to build a case for reparations for their ancestors who were allegedly indentured in our early history. Of course, our country was the first to abolish slavery and is to this day the freest country in the world. To say Sally Hemmings was a concubine is a lie to get political dollars from a dead man. My ancestry is traced to Wales.........maybe I can build a case against some dead Englishman whose people attacked and killed the Welsh hundreds of years ago. Give this issue a break! Jefferson has been gone over 100 years.