• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Mighty_Emperor

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
19,406
Talbot Dig Unveils Surprise
Mingled African, European Remains Found at Md. Site

By Michael E. Ruane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 8, 2004; Page B01

At the bottom of grave B-7, where the autumn's afternoon light was rapidly fading, Doug Owsley looked puzzled as he gently ran the palm of his hand over the young woman's skull.

All day, as he and his crew of experts crouched in the dusty graves of the remote, unmarked cemetery on Maryland's Eastern Shore, something had been bothering the Smithsonian anthropologist.

Volunteer John Imlay and Easton High School biology teacher Nicole Barth examine a skeleton. (Gerald Martineau -- The Washington Post)

_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• Today's Headlines & Columnists
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Breaking News Alerts
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

The site, a mysterious mound in the swampy Talbot County tidal flats, seemed to have the earmarks of a lost 17th-century European cemetery: the small boulders used as tombstones, the east-west orientation of the bodies, the old, hexagonal "toe-pincher" coffin styles.

But Owsley had seen signs of the unexpected here. And now, after scrutinizing B-7, whose skeleton was still squeezed into the crumbling wooden sides of her coffin, he quietly announced to the others in the pit that her skull didn't look European. "It looks African," he said.

The discovery came near the end of a three-week dig, which concluded Tuesday, that was designed to educate a group of local high school students and net the Smithsonian the bones of some of Maryland's earliest settlers for scientific study.

Owsley, of the National Museum of Natural History, expected the bones to be those of Europeans right off the boat, the first bold immigrants who gambled their lives and fortunes in the hostile Chesapeake wilderness and became among the earliest Americans. "I think they're going to date somewhere between 1650 and 1680," he said.

He planned to study the bones for nutrition and disease and fill in the portrait of Maryland's first settlers in conjunction with the 400th anniversary of the 1607 Jamestown settlement in Virginia. Instead, he stumbled upon an intriguing surprise. "It really threw me," he said later. "I wasn't expecting it at all."

Why were people who looked to be African buried in what appeared to be a 17th-century European cemetery?

There were very few blacks on the Eastern Shore in those days, perhaps only about 300 in 1665, according to one history of slavery in the period. Did these burials then date from a later time?

Others buried in the mound seemed to have European features. Perhaps the cemetery did date from the 1600s, and the earliest days of slavery, when white indentured servants and black slaves were not yet so segregated and might have been buried together in such a lowly spot. Perhaps these early Marylanders were white and black.

"That would fit with what we know about the 17th-century Eastern Shore," University of Maryland historian Ira Berlin said. "Poor people caught in some kind of unfree relationship, whether slavery or various kinds of indentureships, lived together, drank together, slept together, and that they're buried together may not be that surprising."

One day late last month, as the sun set behind a distant tree line and the gnarled remains of toppled cedars lay in a brackish creek that bordered the site, a colleague asked Owsley what the discovery meant.

At the moment, he didn't know.

The cemetery first was investigated about a year and a half ago, when its owner called archaeologist Darrin Lowery and reported that his property contained a Native American burial mound.

-----------
Lowery, executive director of the Chesapeake Watershed Archeological Research Foundation in Easton, Md., knew that no such burial mounds existed in the area, but he agreed to investigate anyway.

Lowery said in recent interviews that when he inspected the mound, which rises between the creek and a marsh, he noted that it was aeolian, made of fine, windblown soil. He also noticed strange rocks scattered across its crest.

Volunteer John Imlay and Easton High School biology teacher Nicole Barth examine a skeleton. (Gerald Martineau -- The Washington Post)

_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• Today's Headlines & Columnists
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Breaking News Alerts
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

They were not part of a building foundation. Nor were they plow stones unearthed from a farm field.

But Lowery had seen them before in very old cemeteries. They were primitive grave markers placed by early colonists who lacked the tools and materials to make a proper tombstone, he said.

And when Lowery and a soil scientist friend bored into the ground later, they came up with strikingly well-preserved human bone.

"Guess what," Lowery said he told the landowner. "You've got a 17th-century cemetery."

Owsley, 53, one of the nation's top forensic anthropologists, was eager to learn more about the region's unheralded first colonists. By studying their bones, he could tell much about what they ate, what ailed them, how they lived and how they died.

He began to assemble a crew of mostly volunteer archaeologists, a pair of experts in the use of earth-penetrating radar and a group of students and teachers from three Eastern Shore high schools. Work started Oct. 11.

With the help of the radar, which can search the ground for evidence of graves, the team determined that about 34 people were buried at the site, most in a formal, orderly manner.

By midmorning Oct. 27, the field excavation was well underway. Several graves were open, and members of the team sat or squatted beside skeletons, using small brushes and strips of bamboo to scrape dirt from the bones of two men and the young woman in B-7.

Nearby, Smithsonian anthropologist Kari Bruwelheide sorted through the remains of a roughly 18-month-old child, one of three children unearthed by the team.

"We have most of the spine," she said. "We have all of the ribs. All of the neck vertebrae are here. The skull is complete. We have the arms, the shoulders, clavicles . . . the upper thorax is all there."

She said it was not clear whether the child was a boy or girl. She saw no evidence of disease.

The ribs of a 6-month-old exhumed before, she said, did have evidence of a vitamin deficiency disease such as rickets, which comes from insufficient exposure to sunlight.

-------------
But many diseases don't leave evidence in the bones. "High fevers, things . . . [that] kill you really quickly," don't leave time for the bone to react, she said.

"Kids get sick so quickly," she said. "You get a high fever [and] it can kill you in a matter of a day, two days, three days, and that won't show up on the skeleton."

Volunteer John Imlay and Easton High School biology teacher Nicole Barth examine a skeleton. (Gerald Martineau -- The Washington Post)

_____Free E-mail Newsletters_____
• Today's Headlines & Columnists
See a Sample | Sign Up Now
• Breaking News Alerts
See a Sample | Sign Up Now

Still, the bones were extremely well-preserved, probably because the soil was dry and well drained. "The preservation is just amazing for this time period," she said. "Getting a skeleton where you can take out the bone is good," she said. "Usually you just have a stain in the soil that would show you the position of the body."

Aside from bones, coffin nails were the main artifacts the group was finding, until about 3:40 p.m., when volunteer archaeologist John Imlay found another object near the pelvis of the young man in grave B-3.

"It's brass," he called to Owsley.

"Where's it coming out?" Owsley asked.

Right around the skeleton's crotch, Imlay indicated. It looked like some kind of fastener.

Did the individual have pants on? Owsley asked.

Imlay wasn't sure. But moments later, he found a second, similar object, this time with something attached. Owsley examined it. "That's fabric," he said, a terrific find that, under a microscope, might help date the burial.

As the day waned, and a giant moon began to rise on the horizon, attention focused on grave B-7. Its occupant probably was in her late teens or early twenties and had unusually healthy teeth, said Prince George's County archaeologist Dana Kollmann, who was working on the bones.

When Owsley climbed into the pit for a closer look, he said he had been thinking that the skull of the man in grave B-1 also looked African. He could tell by features of the face and jaw. Three tiny hoops later would be found with B-1's skull.

As he pondered B-7, turning the skull in his hands, Owsley looked as if he were waiting for her to speak, waiting for her to explain how and why she had been buried there so long ago.

Owsley eventually would exhume the bones of 12 people from the mound by the creek for study. Three, buried in shallower graves, would turn out to date from the 1850s or 1860s, he said in an interview at the Smithsonian on Thursday. He could tell by their coffin hardware.

The rest, buried together more deeply, are likely to be from the late 1600s or early 1700s, he said. But he is not yet sure.

"In archaeology, when you're digging," he said, "you never know what you're going to find. It's like a mystery. . . . I like the mystery. There's no doubt about it."

Requires (free) registration:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32744-2004Nov7.html?sub=AR
 
Was there not a few black Africans in the UK at this time?.Possible that some went with the Settlers?.
 
Maybe they were slaves shipped there by English slavers.

The exact location of what is thought to be the first English slave fort in Africa may have been found - the BBC has been hearing about the significance of the discovery in Ghana.
Short presentational grey line

Taking care, archaeologist Christopher DeCorse spreads the rare artefacts out on a makeshift table next to the dig site. A gunflint (used in old-fashioned guns), tobacco pipes, broken pottery and the jawbone of a goat are carefully laid out. These discarded fragments, unearthed from centuries of compacted soil, offer clues to a lost past.

"Any archaeologist who says they are not excited when they find something are not being entirely truthful," the professor from Syracuse University in the US says with a broad smile. These remnants point to the existence of "the first English outpost established anywhere in Africa", he argues.

The archaeologist is standing in the ruins of Fort Amsterdam, speaking above the wind and roar of the Atlantic Ocean waves hitting Ghana's coastline. Inside that fort are what are thought to be the remains of an older fort - Kormantine - long-lost under the earth, which the professor's team are gradually excavating with brisk activity.

Aerial shot of the fort

Image caption, The site of the dig, under the blue canopy, is inside Fort Amsterdam built by the Dutch

They are methodically combing through distinct layers of soil and stones with soft-bristle brushes and trowels. The disturbed soil removed from the trenches is carefully sieved. A canopy protects the team and the site from the weather and despite the intense sun and the occasional shower, the archaeologists' work continues.

Ancient maps had referred to a Fort Kormantine in that area, for example the name of the nearby town, Kormantse, is clearly related. In addition, another version of the name, Coromantee, was given to some of the enslaved people in the Caribbean thought to have been transported from this place and later known for slave rebellions.

But where exactly the fort was located remained a matter of speculation, which may have now been brought to an end. Dating back to the 17th Century, Fort Kormantine sat on the Atlantic coast just at the time when Europeans started shifting their interest from the trade in gold to the trade in humans. It was a pivotal moment in the history of their involvement in Africa that would have a profound effect on the continent.

The discovery by the team of archaeologists may shed some light on the lives of those early traders and what they were doing, as well as those who were sold and the impact on the community around them. Ghana's coastal fishing towns, known for their colourful boats and the melodies sung by the fishermen, remain scarred by a past of European exploitation and human cruelty.

The slave forts dotted along what was called the Gold Coast are a looming reminder of that past. Hundreds of thousands passed through them before being transported in horrific conditions across the sea.

Fort Kormantine - built by the English in 1631 - was one of the earliest places where that journey started. It began life as a trading post for gold and other items like ivory.

The slave trade only began from there in 1663 when King Charles II granted a charter to the Company of Royal Adventurers of England Trading into Africa (later the Royal African Company). He gave it monopoly rights over the trade in human beings.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-66359512
 
Maybe they were slaves shipped there by English slavers.

The exact location of what is thought to be the first English slave fort in Africa may have been found - the BBC has been hearing about the significance of the discovery in Ghana.
Short presentational grey line

Taking care, archaeologist Christopher DeCorse spreads the rare artefacts out on a makeshift table next to the dig site. A gunflint (used in old-fashioned guns), tobacco pipes, broken pottery and the jawbone of a goat are carefully laid out. These discarded fragments, unearthed from centuries of compacted soil, offer clues to a lost past.

"Any archaeologist who says they are not excited when they find something are not being entirely truthful," the professor from Syracuse University in the US says with a broad smile. These remnants point to the existence of "the first English outpost established anywhere in Africa", he argues.

The archaeologist is standing in the ruins of Fort Amsterdam, speaking above the wind and roar of the Atlantic Ocean waves hitting Ghana's coastline. Inside that fort are what are thought to be the remains of an older fort - Kormantine - long-lost under the earth, which the professor's team are gradually excavating with brisk activity.

Aerial shot of the fort

Image caption, The site of the dig, under the blue canopy, is inside Fort Amsterdam built by the Dutch

They are methodically combing through distinct layers of soil and stones with soft-bristle brushes and trowels. The disturbed soil removed from the trenches is carefully sieved. A canopy protects the team and the site from the weather and despite the intense sun and the occasional shower, the archaeologists' work continues.

Ancient maps had referred to a Fort Kormantine in that area, for example the name of the nearby town, Kormantse, is clearly related. In addition, another version of the name, Coromantee, was given to some of the enslaved people in the Caribbean thought to have been transported from this place and later known for slave rebellions.

But where exactly the fort was located remained a matter of speculation, which may have now been brought to an end. Dating back to the 17th Century, Fort Kormantine sat on the Atlantic coast just at the time when Europeans started shifting their interest from the trade in gold to the trade in humans. It was a pivotal moment in the history of their involvement in Africa that would have a profound effect on the continent.

The discovery by the team of archaeologists may shed some light on the lives of those early traders and what they were doing, as well as those who were sold and the impact on the community around them. Ghana's coastal fishing towns, known for their colourful boats and the melodies sung by the fishermen, remain scarred by a past of European exploitation and human cruelty.

The slave forts dotted along what was called the Gold Coast are a looming reminder of that past. Hundreds of thousands passed through them before being transported in horrific conditions across the sea.

Fort Kormantine - built by the English in 1631 - was one of the earliest places where that journey started. It began life as a trading post for gold and other items like ivory.

The slave trade only began from there in 1663 when King Charles II granted a charter to the Company of Royal Adventurers of England Trading into Africa (later the Royal African Company). He gave it monopoly rights over the trade in human beings.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-66359512
Slightly skewed reporting there by the BBC " The English slave trade only began from there in 1663". The dutch were trading slaves from 1621 and the Spanish from the 1530s from various parts of West Africa, not to mention the medieval trade. Not that any of thatb makes it right, of course.

It's all pretty horrible stuff but I've noticed how other nations involved in the trade hardly get a mention (or is that just the BBC?). To read many stories today you'd get the impression that England /GB were the only slave trading nation, and slavery was only a problem between about 1600 and the late 1800s; regretably not true.

Although minor in comparison it shouldn't be forgotten that around this time Barbary pirates were raiding Cornwall and Normandy for slaves and at one point had a base on Lundy island in the Bristol Channel.

Slavery has been a nasty stain on human history probably throughout history and given how little people seem to know about history now it's scope and impact across many nations and peoples, slavers and slaves ought to be as carefully reported and taught as stories about the Shoah.
 
Slightly skewed reporting there by the BBC " The English slave trade only began from there in 1663". The dutch were trading slaves from 1621 and the Spanish from the 1530s from various parts of West Africa, not to mention the medieval trade. Not that any of thatb makes it right, of course.

It's all pretty horrible stuff but I've noticed how other nations involved in the trade hardly get a mention (or is that just the BBC?). To read many stories today you'd get the impression that England /GB were the only slave trading nation, and slavery was only a problem between about 1600 and the late 1800s; regretably not true.

Although minor in comparison it shouldn't be forgotten that around this time Barbary pirates were raiding Cornwall and Normandy for slaves and at one point had a base on Lundy island in the Bristol Channel.

Slavery has been a nasty stain on human history probably throughout history and given how little people seem to know about history now it's scope and impact across many nations and peoples, slavers and slaves ought to be as carefully reported and taught as stories about the Shoah.
As a nation we like to beat ourselves up over stuff, it's the whole loss of the Empire thing, which itself was a lot more recent than perhaps people think (my parents were 'children of the empire'). A redemption for slavery and other sins of Empire was partly achieved thanks to our pivotal role in defeating fascism and industrialised genocide in Europe, but it bankrupted us in the process (the "entire accumulated wealth of a century" is how it has been described). We never recovered and had to go cap in hand to the IMF and beg France to join the EU - that is one hell of a fall in a short space of time.
 
Was there not a few black Africans in the UK at this time?.Possible that some went with the Settlers?.

As an aside, the British Isles being, well, islands - and fairly easily navigated to by competent sailors - there has been evidence of people from Africa, Asia minor, eastern Europe, the Arctic circle, south Asia and Arabia visiting, living and dying in these lands since before recorded history. People did and still do travel everywhere!

For example: https://www.hexham-courant.co.uk/features/16953484.norseman-following-footsteps-romans/

"KEVIN Robson sees the evidence all around him. Flashes of the German infantry, the Spanish cavalry, the Syrian archers, the Italian legionaries and the Iraqi boatmen who once inhabited these lands.
"We have monuments and carved stones that tell us where soldiers came from, of course,” he said, “so we know the Spanish were based at Chesters Roman Fort and the Syrian archers at Magnae Fort in Greenhead..."


and https://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/f...tion found in,present day Morocco and Algeria.

"...A stone inscription found in Cumbria shows that in the 3rd century AD a legion of Roman soldiers from North Africa were stationed in Britain.

The ‘Aurelian Moors’ were named after Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD). The word ‘Moors’ tells us that they were from ‘Mauretania’ – present day Morocco and Algeria. They were stationed along Hadrian’s Wall, probably between AD 253 and 258. Based at the fortress of Aballava, they defended the Roman Empire’s northern border.

The ‘Aurelian Moors’ are the first recorded African community living in Britain. It is likely that they settled and had families in Britain..."
 
As a nation we like to beat ourselves up over stuff, it's the whole loss of the Empire thing, which itself was a lot more recent than perhaps people think (my parents were 'children of the empire'). A redemption for slavery and other sins of Empire was partly achieved thanks to our pivotal role in defeating fascism and industrialised genocide in Europe, but it bankrupted us in the process (the "entire accumulated wealth of a century" is how it has been described). We never recovered and had to go cap in hand to the IMF and beg France to join the EU - that is one hell of a fall in a short space of time.

A very worthy reason and cause to bankrupt our country for. I am glad 'we' as a people did that - and formed a Commonwealth of linked nations instead.
 
Back
Top