DNA says you're an idiot.

these days i find myself swearing more .........using words like fuck bollocks & shit in my speech ........although i think it is unecessary to swear & is ugly...........i justify it to myself as a way of expressing my frustration & dissatisfaction with both the diabolical deteriorating reality of our society in Britain & America ..........& at my own personal disempowerment to do what is right ..........or do anything at all .........i agree with what you are doing ........i believe in the power of words language & thought to raise up humanity to a higher standard .......although i have never used the word epediectic before ........i am moved to attempt such a speech with you ..........i do not want to be a critic .........but i can't help wonder if your preoccupation is not a way to distract yourself too from the wretched realities of life in America for so many......... that have fallen so far short of the ideals of a Republic envisioned & strived for by the Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson .........have you not considered entering the public arena of politics to use your command of language to take a stand for the ideals of the American Dream ?.........i know what it is like to be completely ignored .........it's demeaning .......no one in the world is interested in what i have been saying about this ancient death trap that was intentionally imposed on humanity ...........& unfairly blamed on Britain & America as ongoing policy ........or is willing to face up to our ongoing SABOTAGE that i do not believe will work .......... best wishes to you sigh

Mbagu: that certainly is possible, but there is no evidence whatsoever specially, in any letters exchanged that anything like that happened i.e. that Thomas Jefferson knew about it

Dr. Holowchak provides an excellent, dispassionate summation of the prevailing historiography on TJ, from where it seems to have originated and perhaps why. As the great historians Will and Ariel Durant once wrote, "Our knowledge of any past event is always incomplete, probably inaccurate, beclouded by ambivalent evidence and biased historians, and perhaps distorted by our own patriotic or religious partisanship." Hence there will always be uncertainty, limits of knowledge, and historiographical biases to consider. Dr. Holowchak does a masterful job addressing these considerations regarding the life of Thomas Jefferson. The task of the public is now to ponder.

To 'matter'; to have 'meaning'. All 'meaning' exists in the eye of the beholder. My eye couldn't care less what Jefferson thought or believed, so it doesn't 'matter' in the least, at this moment, from this Perspective! ;) As far as 'morality', isn't that the prideful sin of judging others, against which we are 'warned'? Besides, how to judge when no one actually has 'free-will/choice'?

The first 1:06 of the video was enough for me; a clear Jeffersonian worshipper.

I hear the The enlighten ment was going on in the background in society between the puritan era to the American revolution.

Mark, suppose Randolph had a relationship with Sally. Is it possible that Thomas knew about it?

From the Amazon synopsis of her first Jefferson book. "Thomas Jefferson, Time, and History" "She follows Jefferson in his creation of an influential narrative of American and global history over the course of half a century, opening avenues into a temporal and historical imagination that was different from ours, and offering new assessments of the solutions Jefferson and his generation found (or failed to find) to central moral and political problems like slavery." Is she not aware of the fact that the Atlantic slave trade into the United States was ended during Jefferson's Presidency in 1808. Basic Jefferson facts elude her, even after she's supposedly "studied the revolutionary period for some twenty years.." Ironic, the very publisher of Spahn's two gibberish filled books is the University of Virginia Press, the very same University provided to her by Thomas Jefferson.

I know it is a year later, but do you still have any copies of the book?

Bravo mate.

in jeffersons notes on virginia he seems to state the inferiorty of the negro..........a letter exists to george jefferson where he seems to apologize.To from haverhill mass

Bravo mate, I’m glad to have found this channel.

Gem of a podcast

Well done. I’ve always felt most in line with Jefferson’s vision of what society ought to be. He was dead on with the notions of the yeoman farmer being the foundation of a free and prosperous people. While I would disagree with his religion and some of his views on the French Revolution I still think he was a fine man and patriot. He was also very well informed and understood the role the Jesuit order was playing in political subterfuge at the time, he well understood the danger they posed and discussed it with Adams in his letters at one point. Little did he know that they were a driving force behind the French Revolution which he seemed to support and that they would eventually overthrow American society during the time of Lincoln even going so far as to assassinate a sitting president.

In your opinion, was he a Deist or a Christian?

thankyou that was most interesting .........in a world that seems lacking in moral leadership it was nice to be reminded & educated on Thomas Jefferson............i believe the international global system is an ancient death trap where we were written off from the start...........i would like to save us from this & change the system...........i would like a new global mission statement where nations agree their primary purpose will be to keep the ship & her crew sustainably for as long as possible.........i would like our currencies issued as credit not debt to provide for this new purpose.......& for everyone to get the right to their own home in law..........unfortunately no one in the world has let me know they believe our neighbours ancestors intentionally handed out a self defeating death trap on us which they ended up blaming on Britain & America as ongoing policy...........& i am in no position to be able to change the law in the United Kingdom or any country.........i like the setting for your video & your style & demeanor remind me of Jeff Bridges ! best wishes to you si

Dr. Ken, unfortunately, passed on October 1, 2024. He was a large man and will be sorely missed!

I stumbled on your you tube and ii find it very interesting . Way back in the late 1980’s when doing family genealogy I talked with a lady Mrs. Mildred Winn of Homer , LA . My family surname is Wynne to my knowledge is not related to the Jefferson family that said Martha Jefferson the daughter of Thomas Jefferson I married Robert Wynne . I am not related to this Wynne family but when discussing this with Mrs Mildred Winn she told me that it had been rumoured that Thomas Jefferson had children with Sally Hemings and it was just rumours. According to her the father of some of Sally Hemings children was Peter Jefferson the brother of Thomas Jefferson . Anyway when the y DNA of the Jefferson clan was revealed in about 1998 I remembered this information. I now live in the U.K. and have not been to Monticello since about 1990 . Looking at their website it would appear that the whole place has changed they are in my opinion saying that it’s a fact that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with Sally Hemings backed by y DNA from a Jefferson . I personally don’t know if that is true . Thank you for your thoughtful discussion.

This interview was an outstanding intellectual exchange by two of the finest Jeffersonian scholars today. Listening to them, and reflecting upon what they had to say, one was left with the impression that the mind of Thomas Jefferson had been penetrated, in spite of what many other scholars may insist upon, that Jefferson is too difficult to comprehend. Thank you gentlemen, and thank you Donna for hosting, asking great questions, and offering insightful commentary as well.

❤

Donna's Back!!!

Dr. Garrett Ward Sheldon joins us next week to discuss Jefferson's political philosophy. Don't miss this show!

You gave a quote that you labeled as "stoic wisdom" but Jefferson was not a stoic, he was an Eppicurean. I've tried to understand the difference but can you elaborate on this topic in relation to Jefferson and different philosophies he believed?

Adams' letter of June 27, 1813, should be June 25, 1813....

Yes, Mr. Give Me Liberty , or Give Me Death, was a free Black man. The following is the fullest description which the author has been able to procure of Mr. Henry’s person, He was nearly six feet high; spare, and what may be called raw-boned, with a slight stoop of the shoulders; his complexion was dark, sunburnt and sallow, without any appearance of blood in his cheeks." - Life of Patrick Henry, page #426

I do I have a few questions about the history of the south as I have recently learned more about it. I plan to email them later on👍 It's actually quite interesting history.

post revolution Jefferson put Americans on notice- you must learn to read & write to participate and maintain what was so courageously won..few know this- glad to hear you bring this to your listeners attention...

I love that movie, one of the best.

Ackem's Razor says the simplest explanation is most likely the right one. His wife begged him not to remarry. Sally met him in France with his daughter and spent considerable time with the family there. She had a child not very long after her return. This was an imperfect time. How do we know that this was not in his character? He was flawed just like everyone else. He wasn't a saint because he helped found our country. We must acknowledge his lineage regardless. He inexplicably made no effort to recover her children when he listed 2 of them as runaways. He did every one of his other slaves. Also, he freed upon his death her other children. Yet again the only slaves that he freed. He was at home at the times of conception. Even if she didn't go full term. There is a certain window. At least one of Sally's sons wrote about his life at Monticello and said that he knew very well that his father was Jefferson. Then throw in the article by the rival. That's enough for most historians. You are wasting your time.

Nice to have Donna back, as she seems to "tames the beast", in the colonel. As usual, very informative. Info you won't find just anywhere, other than the world's foremost authority on TJ.

Very early in Dr. Mark Holowchak's remarks, he refers to Dr. Eugene Foster as, "...the geneticist behind the study." That is a fallacy. Dr. Foster was not a geneticist and did not claim to be a geneticist. Also, at the outset of his remarks Dr. Holowchak mentions, "the James Callender incident early in Jefferson's presidency..." Callender was a newspaper reporter. He wrote an article which was published in a Richmond newspaper on September 1, 1802, which in part read, "It is well know that the man [Jefferson].....keeps and for many years has kept, as his concubine, one of his slaves. Her name is Sally. The name of her eldest son is Tom." Callender wrote additional articles on the subject in the ten weeks following the beginning of September.1802. In the ensuing 200 years no one except Dr. Holowchak has written or spoken about "...the James Callender incident..." There are many definitions for most words, but the Cambridge Dictionary definition for incident is 'an event that is either unpleasant or unusual.' In the areas of diplomacy and politics the event is most often unpleasant. Thus Dr. Holowchak cast a cloud over Callender's newspaper articles before even revealing to viewers that James Callender had written newspaper articles. He could have simply said, "James Callender's reports." The goal of a historian should be objectivity. Jefferson and his family probably thought of Callender's articles as unpleasant. Sally Hemings probably shared their perspective. Some of Hemings's relatives may have had a markedly different reaction. Today many people see Callender as a bitter and vindictive man and others see him as a brave and cunning renegade. Dr. Holowchak should have removed himself from disparagement. I did not watch the video beyond that first couple of sentences of Dr. Holowchak's remarks.

The Jefferson-Hemings controversy was a scandal before it was a controversy; the scandal started on September 1, 1802 with an article written in a Richmond newspaper. The article was written by James Callender, who wrote, " It is well known that the man [Jefferson]...keeps...as his concubine, one of his slaves. Her name is Sally. The name of her eldest son is Tom...The boy is ten or twelve years old." Dr. Mark Holowchak did not mention Callender or Tom is his video. Callender's assertions began the scandal. Books such as Fawn Brodie's biography of Jefferson quoted Callender. Brodie's book sold 350,000 copies in 1974. Barbara Chase Riboud's novel followed Brodie's research. The novel sold over one million copies in 1979. The novel revealed the entire September 1802 article, about 500 words in all. The point here is that the scandal did not start with Madison Hemings's testimony, and the recovery of this history never depended on Annette Gordon-Reed, as she did not recover any evidence. Dr. Holowchak directs too much attention to both Madison and Gordon-Reed and by doing so misses the greater part of the controversy. The controversy was dormant between 1876 and 1951. Jefferson's Farm Book was first printed in 1953. In 1954 Dr. W. Edward Farrison published an article in Phylon, that recovered critical evidence, including Callender's assertions. Before Farrison's recovery, Callender's assertions had been dormant for 151 years. Farrison helped Pearl M. Graham extend her research. Graham wrote an article titled "Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings," that was published in the Journal of Negro History in 1961. It was the first article to be published in an academic journal that asserted that the Jefferson-Hemings liaison was a reality. Graham was not aware of Madison's testimony. Her assertion was based on an accumulation of evidence; at the center was 1) Callender's assertions, 2) Jefferson Farm Book records revealing names and dates 3) the assertions of Frances Trollope. Trollope had spoken to Frances Wright who went to Monticello with Lafayette in 1824 and heard Jefferson acknowledge that some of his mulatto children had left Monticello unhindered. The essence of Graham's imperfect, but truly groundbreaking, article is now very widely accepted. Brodie added much more evidence to Graham's accumulation, including Madison's testimony. Widespread access to Madison's testimony was effectuated by way of Brodie's biography. This comment must be relatively brief. Writers and historians of all colors and stripes have latched onto this history for its benefit or for its corruption. The descendants of Sally Hemings have never lost their history. Brodie's book emboldened their stance. First history, then DNA. Newsman James Callender wrote an article for a Richmond newspaper, Sept. 1, 1802. He wrote T.J. had a concubine named Sally. Sally had a son named Tom - 12 years old. Callender said that she had more children, but Callender never named them. Historians like Annette Gordon-Reed (Pulitzer Prize) say that the baby died soon after being born. Think about it. The baby was born in 1790 right after they returned from France. If the baby died, then why was Callender writing about him in 1802? Somebody has a bogus story. Also, in 1802 a man named Thomas Gibbons wrote a letter to an U.S. Senator, saying that T.J. and Sally gave birth to Tom, Hariot, and Beverly. If the first child died why was Gibbons writing about him in 1802? The newspapers never named the other two kids, so Gibbons had his own source for information. The Callender account and the Gibbons account corroborate one another. The 1870 U S census for Jackson Co. OH indicates that Thomas Woodson was born in 1790 in Virginia. He owned a 382-acre farm in Ohio; he and his wife Jemima raised 11 children including Sarah Jane, who was the first black American to teach at a historically black college or university (1859). The Woodson family has never lost its history. Fawn Brodie’s Jefferson biography sold 350,000 copies in 1974; Barbara Chase -Riboud’s novel Sally Hemings sold over one million copies in 1979. The movie Jefferson in Paris was screened coast to coast in 1995. Jefferson historians such as Joseph Ellis, who disagreed with Brodie’s conclusion, started calling for DNA tests in 1997. Historians have never accepted the evidence in Brodie’s book, even now. They are not guided by the historic record. Byron Woodson was one of the DNA donors. He is a first-hand witness. Dr Foster, the testing organizer, promised the DNA donors that historians would be kept away from the DNA process. Historians had never handled the history honestly, so the donors wanted them kept away. Foster also promised to contact and inform the donors before the results were made public. The testing and laboratory work may have been perfect, but the reporting was hijacked by historian Joseph Ellis and others. Dr. Foster was distraught when he learned that he had lost control. After Woodson learned that things had gone astray, Foster answered Woodson's pointed questions honestly and never failed to answer the telephone. Donors found out that things were in motion from the Washington Post. Foster did not know Ellis. (Byron Woodson, A President in the Family, 2001, 221-29) When Ellis and news outlets, like U. S. News and World Report were preparing a media dump, Foster thought the DNA results were still secret. Ellis appeared as the star of a massive multi-media media dump, reporting the reputed DNA results Nov. 1st and 2nd 1998. Ellis appeared on PBS News Hour Nov. 2, 1998, announcing "...the scientific evidence that we have now generated." Again, DNA donors had been promised that historians would be kept away from the process, knowing of their untrustworthy track record. Foster sent a letter objecting to the handling of the matter to Nature (magazine) and the Washington Post reported that Foster had issued a written objection. (Leef Smith, WAPO, 1/6/1999) Foster told Woodson, "I don't know," when his project was breached, thus Foster did not know if the Nature article, that he had co-authored, reported the actual results or not. Ellis was later embroiled in a scandal which forced him out of his teaching job for a year and caused him to admit that he is a habitual liar. (Cox, Journal of Higher Education, 7/13/2001) The Thomas Jefferson Foundation embraced a hijacked DNA report announced by an admitted habitual liar. Is that best practices? The producers of the movie, Sally Hemings, knew about the DNA tests, but decided to reject that process and embrace Brodie’s book and the Woodson family’s oral history and research. They bought the rights to Brodie’s book. (T. Andrews, Sally Hemings, The Struggle to Tell the Controversial True Story, 2001, 16,55). The movie had to make sense. Well over 20 million Americans have seen the movie (now on You Tube). Like Dr. Holowchak, the movie producers disagreed with Gordon-Red and the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, but they disagreed in a different way. The historic record is very robust. There is much more to this but in this format, this must end here.

I suspect that if you play this video backwards, there is a Satanic message....

Just to let you good folks know: This was posted on FaceBook and, because of that, my TJ was put on suspension!!!! Can you %$#@! believe that???? Will I next be thrown into jail for flying the American flag in front of my house?????

Wikipedia is okay, but Wikileaks is essential.

Succession for Liberty's sake is a good thing. Although you need to figure out if it's being done intentionally by an outside actor. maybe to fracture a nation?

i had no idea Slavery was in the Declaration.👏👏👏

Another important piece of evidence in favor of the Jefferson paternity that isn't mentioned is that Sally Hemings is Jefferson's wife's half-sister.

he was a real jerk!

Myth of Thomas Jefferson by O'Brien (Irish Labour Party) : kzbin.info/www/bejne/qXuulaynn9qheNE thoughts?

I'm not saying I'm commenting before getting very far, but 'wife beater' is easy to figure out-what's unexplained is 'tank top'.

Congrats on those Dips

I just read your article on Jefferson v Hamilton: A Northern versus Southern feud? in the Abbeville Press and decided to check out your channel. I have come to realize that there is a concerted effort to rewrite American history so I have started a book collection and will be adding something from your work. We have to defeat the Trotskyites who want to destroy America and bury Western Civilization. Historians such as yourself give us at least a foothold. So many scholars across many fields have had your experience. I encourage you to find like minded gardeners, together uproot the weeds and find a place with fertile soil. Final thought, Harvard is a poor excuse for an institution of knowledge and learning....more like a communist boot camp.

Wow this is the first time I'm hearing about this story. This is not the Thomas Jefferson I grew up learning about.

He loved his slaves too,, and i dont mean that in a bad way…

Nice hoe!

Was Jefferson aware that his Ideals, about Government and Society, might or would be overtaken by corruption? did he think it even stood a chance?

what were Jefferson's thoughts on Secret Societies? was he involved at any level?

Great Show! Hamilton couldn't maneuver his way out of something so senseless as a Duel? not a good sign.😅