Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy (Paperback)

~ Ms. Annette Gordon-Reed (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

Annette Gordon-Reed, a professor of law at New York Law School, doesn't take a position for or against the proposition that Thomas Jefferson may have had a liaison of nearly 40 years with a slave named Sally Hemings, and that Hemings may have borne him several children. Instead, in this scrupulously researched book, Gordon-Reed examines the evidence both for and against Jefferson's liasion with Hemings. Among the strongest evidence in this provocative book is the fact that though Jefferson's time in Virginia was limited when he was in public life, Hemings's six children--born over 15 years--were delivered with months after each of Jefferson's stays at Monticello. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Historian Ellis (Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy of John Adams, LJ 4/15/93) does not attempt to give a full-scale biography of the Sage of Monticello. Rather, he offers a balanced meditation on Jefferson's character and ideals. Reaffirming and taking further what some previous authors have stated, Ellis maintains that Jefferson's ambiguous, secretive character was able to support mutually contradictory positions on a variety of issues. Moreover, Jefferson often retreated into romantic illusions rather than face reality. Ellis's work is based on many years of research into this period of American history, and it is perfectly pitched to appeal to both general readers and specialists. Attorney Gordon-Reed (law, New York Law Sch.) presents a lawyer's analysis of the evidence for and against the proposition that Jefferson was the father of several children born to his household slave Sally Hemings. Gordon-Reed is not concerned with Jefferson and Hemings as much as she is with how Jefferson's defenders have dealt with the evidence about the case. Her book takes aim at such noteworthy biographers as Dumas Malone, who has been quick to accept evidence against a liaison and quick to reject evidence for one. In sum, the Jefferson who emerges from these two books is a great though deeply flawed man. Both books are highly recommended as essential reading for all libraries.?Thomas J. Schaeper, St. Bonaventure Univ., N.Y.
Copyright 1997 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 288 pages
• Publisher: University of Virginia Press (April 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0813918332
• ISBN-13: 978-0813918334
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (34 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #85,282 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #27 in	Books > Biographies & Memoirs > People, A-Z > ( J ) > Jefferson, Thomas
  #55 in	Books > History > Historical Study > Historiography

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

29 of 33 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Gordon-Reed is Clearly a Lawyer, not an Historian, November 26, 1999

By A Customer

I found this book fascinating not just for its intelligent analysis of the Jefferson-Hemmings controversy, its exploration of American racism, past and present, but for the insights it offers about the meaning of history and the nature of the culture wars which are taking place currently in academia. Gordon-Reed is an attorney and this shows in her style of argument, and I don't mean that in a manner which is completely positive, she organizes evidence in the way an lawyer might, subjects what she finds to juridical standards of proof, and, I think it's clear, concludes that Jefferson and Hemmings had the liason which was alleged, hence her accusation that historians have covered this up, or paid insufficient attention to the question, for decades.

The truth, unfortunately, is more complicated, and in an odd way this book hints at why historians are forced to use different standards. There is no compromise solution to this controversy, Jefferson either fathered these children or he didn't, some part of our regard for this important figure hangs in the balance, and yet there is no evidence which settles the matter conclusively, not even a perponderance of evidence which suggests that one outcome is more likely.

What of the famous "DNA evidence"? It's a wash. Those who pay careful attention to what the article in "Nature" found will discover that this scientific evidence disproved a whole branch of oral testimony of alleged Jefferson descendants which, ironicly, had been the strongest evidence up to that point for the liason. Hemmings did not have a child by Jefferson when the two were in Paris, that has now been proven scientifically beyond all doubt, so some arguments in this book have been overtaken by events. And yet there is a genetic link between a child of Hemmings who was born years after Jefferson was president and a Jefferson. Problem, no one can prove which one it was. Oral tradition supports the argument that the father was Thomas but similar oral tradition was wrong in this other instance. Such evidence is interesting, perhaps compelling, but it's not conclusive.

That is enough to keep the controversy alive, and yet Gordon-Reed, the good advocate she is, responds to thiswith lawyerly prose, makes the best case for the argument she favors, attempts to poke holes in the rebuttals of skeptics, I don't think historians are allowed to present intuition as conclusion. If this were a legal case I think it's clear the skeptics could establish reasonable doubt about whether there ever was a Jefferson-Hemmings affair, but that begs the question, it's not.

Those who have strong passions on both sides, I'm sure, will continue to argue their beliefs while responsible historians are caught in the middle. How are historians supposed to write about an event which either happened or was a fiction concocted by political enemies? Sometimes the best conclusion is, "We don't know".

Those who have any interest in this controversy will enjoy this book. Gordon-Reed leans markedly towards one side but she does an excellent job presenting her evidence and doesn't ignore the arguments of skeptics (though the book was written before the DNA evidence was presented, and this shows).

32 of 38 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Historical prospective, not detective work!, October 12, 2004

By	Robin Cole-Jett (Lewisville, Texas United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

From the preface on, Annette Gordon Reed assures her readers that her intent is not to prove that Jefferson was the father of Sally Hemings' four children. Instead, her thesis is to expose the racism that has clouded the argument for over 200 years; at that, she succeeds.

Malone, Dumas, Wills, Adair - all have tried to paint "Dusky Sally" as a prostitute, and Jefferson as something akin to a saint. Using letters and their "intellectual imaginations" they surmise that someone as morally impeccable as Jefferson could not have been involved with a slave, although he evidently wasn't morally impeccable enough not to sell many of them on the auction block upon his death.

I've always admired Jefferson for his contributions to American governance and culture - that he might have fathered children by Sally Hemings in a 38 year long affair only enhances his distinction for me. He was a man with needs - ok, a genius, but a man all the same. He promised his wife that he wouldn't remarry. And Sally, being the half sister of his wife, Martha, could have been the kind of arms he sought refuge in.

Becoming lovers with a slave was not uncommon. Although it was rarely discussed in polite circles, "masters" often found that taking slaves as concubines limited their responsiblities, while at the same time helped fulfill their needs. One has to remember that many slaves looked very similar to their white "masters." Sally Hemings, for example, was 3/4 white, "with long, straight hair down her back." This doesn't negate her slave status, or make her more "acceptable"; rather, pointing out the "whiteness" of these slaves shows just how incredibly foreign the idea of slavery is to the natural state.

Gordon Reed makes an excellent case in her book. She criticizes conventional (white, male) historians' views in that they did not look at all the evidence - like Madison Hemings' (Sally's youngest son) oral history - or found ways to dispute claims made by first-had accounts. For example, historians claim that Madison (by then living as a free man) supposedly pretends to be Jefferson's son to increase his social standing. Pray tell, just how could that be? He was still a black man, an old man, and had already the respect of the African American freedman community. I guess gaining respect of the white community just means so much more?!

Read this book if you like a thorough discussion on historiography. Of course, bear in mind that Gordon Reed may have her own agenda (for one, she doesn't mention the Jefferson relatives living in the vicinity that might have been Hemings' lover). As usual, read evert book with a grain of salt, but read this book nonetheless - it'll open your eyes to the racism present in current historical discourse.

32 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Did we really need DNA evidence?, August 23, 2001

By A Customer

Annette Gordon-Reed's book should be required reading in graduate history programs across the country. Not because of its topic, but because it is one of the finest, most careful and critical reading of documentary evidence I've ever encountered. By providing an outstanding example of how professional historians should operate, it also exposes one of the tragic weaknesses of the discipline of History--it has for too long been among the least intellectually rigorous of all the disciplines. The recent publication by the "scholar's commission," sponsored by the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society is a classic example of the problem. In finding Jefferson "innocent" of the charges, the commission ignores the most powerful arguments put forward in Gordon-Reed's book, and builds its authority mainly on the commission member's own pedigree (mostly aging white scholars from prestigious institutions). While the commission points out the real limitations of the DNA evidence, by ignoring Gordon-Reed's work, it fails to understand what an intelligent, open-minded reader of Gordon-Reed's work will quickly grasp: credible evidence pointing to Thomas Jefferson as the likely father of Sally Heming's children has been around for more than a century, but was until recently blithely dismissed by generations of historians who were prisoners of their own racist, and guild-protecting assumptions. Gordon-Reed raises the bar for serious historical inquiry in this book, and I beleive its importance will outlast the controversy it explores.