It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Blackmarketeer
a reply to: Spider879
a reply to: Hanslune
The article begins on page 3 and continues on page 23 in spider's link.
It reports that 'prehistoric' remains were found dating to around 100 AD, and appear to be a 'hybrid' of races - Native Indian and African Negroid.
Here's a screen cap of Spider's find:
Spider, I found some counterpoints to the statements made in the article, that while the site contains many prehistoric indian remains, archeologists also determined that colonial burials had intruded upon the site.
Analysis of the Hull Bay Skeletons (PDF File)
Let's remember that the Atlantic slave trade was underway as early as the late 16th C. and touched the Caribbean Islands first.
One of the 'Negroid remains' that had been earlier suggested belonged to a pre-historic burial had been found buried with colonial-era nails. It was also suggested these 'intrusive burials' had been placed into or on top of much older indigenous people's remains.
This skeleton was buried in a non European fashion with a large pot fragment dating to the Elenoid period (950-1250 A.D).It's upper body was contorted while it's legs was rigidly aligned and aiming true east as if they had been tied together;three heavy rocks were placed above the feet.The skeleton was racially hybrid,part Indian part Negro.It also exhibits what Dr Stewart considers tooth mutilation characteristic of West African cultures.
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.
originally posted by: Spider879
This is a spin-off thread from a good scholar Kantzveldt who have a great eye for art and artifacts along with some very interesting POV In her thread, the quest was to find the origins of the Symbolism of the Fuente Magna Bowl. www.abovetopsecret.com...
A side issue arise when I tried to place a connection between Phoenicians and their descendant medieval Libyans , Saharans and bones of a non native American type of probable African origins along with what I originally thought was a water side Petrogalyph of a Saharan script called Tifinag.But alot of questions arose about the bones themselves ,this thread is dedicated to find out who were they and when did they came to the New world,I invite the participants who have question,suggestions and answers to pick-up where they left off on the other thread.
I researched the Hull Bay skeletons because they came up recently on Historum. One of them is definitely and has been declared to be modern. For some odd reason, they have not declared the second to be modern....if you find one African skeleton as a level and it is modern, then the second one is almost certainly from the same area. No mystery here.
They make a great deal out of the artifact with the Native symbols, but here is no evidence it is ancient, and again, was found at the same strata as a known modern skeleton. My guess is that these were slaves, one of whom re-produced some older symbols that he found.
originally posted by: OriginOrion
Keep digging (pun intended) on this one. One of the problems I have with the reviewers from the Smithsonian is the carbon dating without a doubt places the remains of one as being pre Columbus.
What places doubt are the nails in one of the coffins. The nails themselves being metal. This is hugely disconcerning that this is the evidence that shatters strata layer & carbon dating science.