posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 04:09 PM
The article does also suggest:
The possibility that: 1) either there was a migration of African people to St. Thomas before the discovery of the New World by Columbus or 2)
African slaves form the early Spanish colonies escaped to St. Thomas and lived with the Indians, interbreeding and sharing cultural traits, during the
173 years these islands remained aboriginal after the European discovery.
From what I can tell, most of the info "out there" comes from the 1974 newspaper clipping, which seems very unreliable. The study (linked above) does
attempt to determine a date for the "African" (or hybrid African/Indian) remains and concluded at least one of them must hale from the Colonial period
(due to the Colonial-period artifacts it was buried with). The study did not use radiocarbon dating, but then this was back in the mid-70's.
One of the other skeletal remains was found with a pre-Columbian pottery shard, but this is too inconclusive - was the shard a simple relic buried
with an escaped slave? Was the body a post-Colonial intrusive burial over earlier remains?
From what I've been able to find online the only book written on the topic was by a Mormon author;
No Bone Unturned: The Adventures of a Top Smithsonian Forensic Scientist and the Legal Battle for America's Oldest Skeletons
, by Jeff Benedict,
HarperCollins (2003). The author does not follow a very scientific methodology, in that he ignores evidence that would lead you to conclude this was a
Colonial-era burial. Mormons have pushed pre-Columbian contact for their own religious agenda.
I'm more inclined to think this represents a small population of Africans that managed to escape the early (16th-17th C.) Spanish colonies and settled
(as best they could) into the aboriginal population on one of the Caribbean islands not yet colonized by Europeans. They obviously would have no means
of escaping back to Africa.
edit on 24-6-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)