Having children with a woman has never been correlated 100 percent with having respect for that woman. My guess is vast majority of enslavers who had sex with enslaved women remained racist.
Enslaver has a particular meaning - it is someone who makes a formerly free person a slave. Thomas Jefferson didn't enslave Sally Hemings - it rather looks like they had an exclusive partnership. Being such a partner was probably a focus of a lot of white female social envy. After all, how would you - a free, affluent white female - feel if eligible, very high-status men were taken by such women?
You’re presuposing that race is an inherent element of slavery, but for most of human history that has not been the case. Romans did not think slaves were morally or racially inferior, or in any way lesser because of their slavery. Slavery was simply a legal category and a piece of paper could reverse your fortunes and make you a citizen just as easily.
I’ve never doubted the claim since reading John Hartwell Cocke’s diary entries which were not shared with the public until long after his death and were hidden away. The Cocke family were enormously powerful in their time and were hands behind the scenes types. The family were descendants of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn (see ‘Other Boleyn Girl’) through Lord Delaware and had a multi generational close association with the Randolphs (Jefferson’s mother’s family). Cocke played an administrative role in the execution of Jefferson’s estate.
“Cocke, John Hartwell. Diary, 1853, 1859. Papers of John Hartwell Cocke. University of Virginia.
Cocke, a close friend of Jefferson, attests decades later to the reality of the Jefferson-Hemings relationship twice in his diaries. In 1853 Cocke complained that many slave owners had children by their slave women, and there's no wonder that this should be so "when Mr. Jefferson's notorious example is considered." And in 1859 Cocke complained about the common practice of unmarried slave owners keeping a slave woman as "a substitute for a wife. . . . In Virginia this damnable practice prevails as much as anywhere -- probably more -- as Mr. Jefferson's example can be pleaded for its defense."
Ordinarily I would trust the results of this kind of analysis, but in this case, I just don't trust the team doing the work. The Smithsonian is an ultra-political environment and the person writing up the report is a "cultural anthropologist".
My credence has risen from 5% to 50%. To get any higher the analysis would have to be redone by people I trust.
Remember, the Jefferson-Sally Hemmings allegation was originally published by James Callender, who was the 1800s version of Alex Jones.
The allegation was not believed by Thomas Jefferson's bitter political enemies, like John Adams and Hamilton, and did not become a mainstream view among historians until the 1990s.
If these scientific results are true, it seriously damages the credibility of history as a discipline.
This is the dumbest hill to die on. The man has been dead for 200 years. What is the reason to be this skeptical that a widower started hooking up with his deceased wife’s younger hotter sister who he lived with and owned?
You need living cells if you need to clone individual; analyzing DNA is usually done anyway by breaking it into smaller strands so mosts tissues are okay for that use.
Ann Coulter is going to be very disappointed. She's been arguing for the "Randolph did it" thesis for years. Christopher Hitchens made the point that Sally coming of age with womanly appearance and nubile secondary sexual characteristics looking a lot like a younger, somewhat browner version of TJ's wife must have created an irresistible temptation during such a long trip overseas.
Also his wife's half-sister, who by all accounts Jefferson dearly loved and deeply missed. There was probably some resemblance. If you've never encountered a doppelganger for a lost loved-one, I can tell you from personal experience it is an emotionally flooring event, and one is immediately overcome with powerful mental associations, convinced by some primitive and pre-rational part of one's cognitive architecture that this other individual must somehow carry some of the spirit of the departed. That, and the consequences of long term sexual deprivation, must have put TJ under a lot of strain.
"During that time, she stayed on as Jefferson’s servant, and over the course of their 26-month French sojourn while she was a free woman, Jefferson and Hemings began a romantic relationship. At the time, she was roughly 15 years old and Jefferson was a mid-40s widower.
When it came time to return to the States, Jefferson negotiated with Hemings: come home, return to slavery, and you’ll be afforded considerably leniency in work, and your kids will all be manumitted when they come of age."
That's pure speculation on your part. The DNA analysis is also not so straightforward as you make it out to be.
The things you quoted are attested to by multiple people. You should try to grapple with facts instead of alleging "pure speculation" that isn't.
And the DNA analysis *is* straightforward. Try to clarify what your issue is. Simply stating there's a problem without identifying it is grating and will result in receiving a ban from commenting.
The question concerning Thomas Jefferson's paternity of the Hemmings children was, as far as I am concerned, answered conclusively in the September 2001 issue of The National Genealogical Society Quarterly (vol 89, no. 3). The entire issue was devoted to that topic. Every objection was answered. The only possible way that President Jefferson was not their father was if he had an enslaved half-brother resident at Monticello (which means that his father had a slave lover) and that Thomas knew of that relationship. There is zero evidence that such a person existed.
Why "5th generation"? Generations can be 13-50 years. You cannot tell it's been exactly 5 generations, nor even "on average" 5 (not independent samples because of common ancestors early on)
I'm skeptical now. If they had been mixed generations and the math had accounted for it, I would buy it. I am not attached to the theory either way. But "everyone is 5th, trust us" sounds fake.
I believe the person who has the highest percentage of Jefferson DNA is one of the youngest measured at age 64 and also that that individual was one of Hemings descendants.
I am perfectly willing to accept the hypothesis that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Sally Hemmings children in light of new evidence.
This does mean we now lose one of those questions that would highlight those who didn't understand the difference between what the evidence actually showed versus what conclusion they drew from pop culture vibes, when all we had was the Y chromosome paper.
Whenever such questions get resolved in light of additional evidence, half of the hasty commentators will have cause to say, "hahah, I told you I knew that," when, in fact, they didn’t know that, they were just bad at understanding the available evidence at the time.
As an aside, I had always thought that the most plausible alternative hypothesis was that an unknown enslaved person who shared a Y chromosome with T.J. was father, given how poorly family history among enslaved people was tracked.
I'd always assumed Hemmings' children were Jeffersons' and this supports that some were. Am I wrong in thinking this suggests that some of them might not have been his?
Finally proof that Thomas Jefferson wasn’t racist. Will woke ever recover from this blow?
lmao
Having children with a woman has never been correlated 100 percent with having respect for that woman. My guess is vast majority of enslavers who had sex with enslaved women remained racist.
Enslaver has a particular meaning - it is someone who makes a formerly free person a slave. Thomas Jefferson didn't enslave Sally Hemings - it rather looks like they had an exclusive partnership. Being such a partner was probably a focus of a lot of white female social envy. After all, how would you - a free, affluent white female - feel if eligible, very high-status men were taken by such women?
You’re presuposing that race is an inherent element of slavery, but for most of human history that has not been the case. Romans did not think slaves were morally or racially inferior, or in any way lesser because of their slavery. Slavery was simply a legal category and a piece of paper could reverse your fortunes and make you a citizen just as easily.
I’ve never doubted the claim since reading John Hartwell Cocke’s diary entries which were not shared with the public until long after his death and were hidden away. The Cocke family were enormously powerful in their time and were hands behind the scenes types. The family were descendants of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn (see ‘Other Boleyn Girl’) through Lord Delaware and had a multi generational close association with the Randolphs (Jefferson’s mother’s family). Cocke played an administrative role in the execution of Jefferson’s estate.
“Cocke, John Hartwell. Diary, 1853, 1859. Papers of John Hartwell Cocke. University of Virginia.
http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/small/collections/tj/jhc.html
Cocke, a close friend of Jefferson, attests decades later to the reality of the Jefferson-Hemings relationship twice in his diaries. In 1853 Cocke complained that many slave owners had children by their slave women, and there's no wonder that this should be so "when Mr. Jefferson's notorious example is considered." And in 1859 Cocke complained about the common practice of unmarried slave owners keeping a slave woman as "a substitute for a wife. . . . In Virginia this damnable practice prevails as much as anywhere -- probably more -- as Mr. Jefferson's example can be pleaded for its defense."
You probably mean Mary Boleyn, not Anne Boleyn. Anne Boleyn had only one surviving child, the latter QER1.
Ordinarily I would trust the results of this kind of analysis, but in this case, I just don't trust the team doing the work. The Smithsonian is an ultra-political environment and the person writing up the report is a "cultural anthropologist".
My credence has risen from 5% to 50%. To get any higher the analysis would have to be redone by people I trust.
Realistically, what would that entail - reanalysis of the data gathered by the authors, or entirely new data being gathered by a different team?
Either, but the second would be preferable.
Remember, the Jefferson-Sally Hemmings allegation was originally published by James Callender, who was the 1800s version of Alex Jones.
The allegation was not believed by Thomas Jefferson's bitter political enemies, like John Adams and Hamilton, and did not become a mainstream view among historians until the 1990s.
If these scientific results are true, it seriously damages the credibility of history as a discipline.
This is the dumbest hill to die on. The man has been dead for 200 years. What is the reason to be this skeptical that a widower started hooking up with his deceased wife’s younger hotter sister who he lived with and owned?
My feelings exactly!
I agree it's plausible, but it's odd that historians overwhelmingly rejected this view for nearly 200 years.
Re: my comment above. Delaware was descendant of Mary Boleyn and Henry VIII.
Great-grandson of Mary Boleyn.
I thought this matter was settled years ago.
Not an American here. How the hell do you have DNA of these people from the 1700s?
He had a lock of his hair cut off on his deathbed. Sharing hair is a thing people used to do to remember one another.
If the hair was cut off, can you still get DNA from it? I thought you needed the cells from the root of the hair for DNA.
You need living cells if you need to clone individual; analyzing DNA is usually done anyway by breaking it into smaller strands so mosts tissues are okay for that use.
Very interesting!! I got kicked off x for being a bot so I'm glad to see your posts here!
Ann Coulter is going to be very disappointed. She's been arguing for the "Randolph did it" thesis for years. Christopher Hitchens made the point that Sally coming of age with womanly appearance and nubile secondary sexual characteristics looking a lot like a younger, somewhat browner version of TJ's wife must have created an irresistible temptation during such a long trip overseas.
Can't blame him! She was hot.
Looks like 3/4 white is the sweet spot.
Also his wife's half-sister, who by all accounts Jefferson dearly loved and deeply missed. There was probably some resemblance. If you've never encountered a doppelganger for a lost loved-one, I can tell you from personal experience it is an emotionally flooring event, and one is immediately overcome with powerful mental associations, convinced by some primitive and pre-rational part of one's cognitive architecture that this other individual must somehow carry some of the spirit of the departed. That, and the consequences of long term sexual deprivation, must have put TJ under a lot of strain.
"During that time, she stayed on as Jefferson’s servant, and over the course of their 26-month French sojourn while she was a free woman, Jefferson and Hemings began a romantic relationship. At the time, she was roughly 15 years old and Jefferson was a mid-40s widower.
When it came time to return to the States, Jefferson negotiated with Hemings: come home, return to slavery, and you’ll be afforded considerably leniency in work, and your kids will all be manumitted when they come of age."
That's pure speculation on your part. The DNA analysis is also not so straightforward as you make it out to be.
________________________________________
The things you quoted are attested to by multiple people. You should try to grapple with facts instead of alleging "pure speculation" that isn't.
And the DNA analysis *is* straightforward. Try to clarify what your issue is. Simply stating there's a problem without identifying it is grating and will result in receiving a ban from commenting.
The question concerning Thomas Jefferson's paternity of the Hemmings children was, as far as I am concerned, answered conclusively in the September 2001 issue of The National Genealogical Society Quarterly (vol 89, no. 3). The entire issue was devoted to that topic. Every objection was answered. The only possible way that President Jefferson was not their father was if he had an enslaved half-brother resident at Monticello (which means that his father had a slave lover) and that Thomas knew of that relationship. There is zero evidence that such a person existed.
NO SHIT??
we been knowing that
Why "5th generation"? Generations can be 13-50 years. You cannot tell it's been exactly 5 generations, nor even "on average" 5 (not independent samples because of common ancestors early on)
By chance, the people sampled were fifth-generation descendants.
Every one, exactly 5th? And their full genealogy is recorded reliably?
And a spread from 0.5% to 5% is expected at that sample size??
Yes. Yes. Not expected, but not outlandish.
I'm skeptical now. If they had been mixed generations and the math had accounted for it, I would buy it. I am not attached to the theory either way. But "everyone is 5th, trust us" sounds fake.
I believe the person who has the highest percentage of Jefferson DNA is one of the youngest measured at age 64 and also that that individual was one of Hemings descendants.
I am perfectly willing to accept the hypothesis that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Sally Hemmings children in light of new evidence.
This does mean we now lose one of those questions that would highlight those who didn't understand the difference between what the evidence actually showed versus what conclusion they drew from pop culture vibes, when all we had was the Y chromosome paper.
Whenever such questions get resolved in light of additional evidence, half of the hasty commentators will have cause to say, "hahah, I told you I knew that," when, in fact, they didn’t know that, they were just bad at understanding the available evidence at the time.
As an aside, I had always thought that the most plausible alternative hypothesis was that an unknown enslaved person who shared a Y chromosome with T.J. was father, given how poorly family history among enslaved people was tracked.
This wouldn't explain manumission on TJ's deathbed.
I'd always assumed Hemmings' children were Jeffersons' and this supports that some were. Am I wrong in thinking this suggests that some of them might not have been his?