Ellen Schwartz's example of the Iroquois confederacy and the constitution of the US is precisely appropriate for comparison to the Jefferson/Hemmings story. The principle reason that the Iroquois have been implicated in the Constitution (which, it might be noted, William Lloyd Garrison called a "covenant with death") is that two 18th century English commentators, Cadwallader Colden and Benjamin Franklin, both admired described the confederacy. Colden wrote a history of the Iroquois while Franklin in his discussions at the Albany Congress of 1754 compared the white colonists unfavorably to the Iroquois. There is no evidence that the main architect of the Constitution, James Madison, was at all influenced by these comments. Again, as in the case of Jefferson and Hemmings, this is a subject about which there is some very substantial scholarship. Those of us who work in museums ought to be insisting on the absolute requirement that our interpretive activities rely upon the best available scholarly work -- whatever conclusions it may lead us to. History is not merely a matter of opinion; it is a discipline with rules of evidence and logic that ought to be respected. Needless to say, this is not to say that historians don't frequently disagree about matters like these. They do. As it happens, however, the two interpretive issues that have been raised here enjoy a fair degree of unanimity in the scholarly literature. To wit: there is no evidence that Jefferson had a sexual relationship with Sally Hemmings. And there is no evidence of an influence of the Iroquois Confederacy on the drafting of the Constitution. Both assertions MAY be true, in other words, but there is no evidence to prove them. Douglas Greenberg President and Director The Chicago Historical Society Clark Street at North Avenue Chicago Il. 60614-6099 Telephone 312 642 5035 FAX 312 266 2077 OR 312 642 1199 Bitnet U27777@UICVM Internet [log in to unmask]