Slave-Trade Archaeology and the Public: The Excavation of a ‘Liberated African’ Graveyard on St Helena

Abstract

Within the framework of contractual archaeology in the UK (in which both authors largely operate) individual graves and funerary sites are regularly encountered, while they are also the object of targeted research projects. The ability to investigate a burial and to exhume human remains is a practical skill that can be taught and which may be mastered by practice. The investigation of a cemetery of any age is essentially a repetition of this basic technique, in which each grave (or indeed any feature-type containing human remains) is revealed, excavated, and the human remains recorded and lifted. Such exercises vary in scale, but the largest can address very significant numbers of bodies: one obvious example is the cemetery at Spitalfields, London, in which several thousand skeletons were exhumed. Post-excavation methods are also fairly standardized, both in terms of general archaeological reporting and the specific osteological analysis of human remains. These approaches can reasonably be said to be universal within European and North American archaeology, though inevitably with some variation in detail. As a consequence, field archaeologists are, in a technical sense, expert in dealing with the dead. Archaeologists, however, are often less familiar with the more esoteric aspects relating to the dead. Taking the British example again, the field archaeologist generally arrives at a site only after any discussion about the moral or social aspects of exhumation has been concluded. Thus, while provided with technical guidance and being aware of the wider issues involved, they are essentially there to dig. But away from such controlled circumstances, governmental frameworks for dealing with cultural heritage are either less developed or do not exist at all. Here, archaeologists can find themselves enmeshed in matters that go far beyond the technical and, not uncommonly, do so in societies where local attitudes and belief systems are very different to their own. This requires a skill-set for which ‘standard’ archaeological education and training has not necessarily equipped them. This chapter offers a narrative of one such example, which took place on the remote South Atlantic island of St Helena during 2007–8. Here, a team of experienced British field archaeologists, tasked with the excavation of a graveyard of considerable size and international significance, came to deal with the dead— and the living—on a number of fundamental levels that extended far beyond the project brief.

The ancestry and geographical origins of St Helena’s liberated Africans

“…The sampled individuals included 32 adult males, 16 adult females, and 15 subadults whose genetic sex could not be determined on the basis of skeletal traits (Table S2). 21 Teeth with evidence of cultural dental modification were avoided during sampling because they carry cultural information. 25,26 All laboratory work was carried out in dedicated aDNA clean lab facilities at the University of Copenhagen following established guidelines.…”

“…While there is no recognized descendant community on the island today, it is clear that hundreds if not thousands of descendants of St Helena's liberated Africans must exist on as well as off the island. 19 The origins of St Helena's liberated Africans are likely to have been diverse. Records in the Transatlantic Slave Trade Database 1 indicate that the vast majority originated in West Central Africa, and a lesser number came from the Bight of Benin and the port of Quilimane in Southeast Africa (Table S1).…”

“…Professionally led archaeological excavations on the island, carried out in 2007 and 2008 ahead of roadwork in connection with the construction of the island's first airport, led to the discovery of two large unmarked graveyards in Rupert's Valley on the north side of the island. 21 In total, the remains of 325 individuals were recovered from 178 graves and it quickly became clear that they were most likely the remains of liberated Africans who had died on the island in the mid-19 th century. The exhumation of the remains provoked mixed feelings in the community, but most St Helenians accepted it as a necessity.…”

“…The exhumation of the remains provoked mixed feelings in the community, but most St Helenians accepted it as a necessity. 19 However, there was broad consensus that the remains should be reburied, although it was initially unclear how and where exactly reburial should take place. 22 Following public consultation on the reburial plan, the remains were eventually reburied in Rupert's Valley during a ceremony in August 2022 and plans are currently underway to create a memorial and interpretation center at the site in order to commemorate St Helena's liberated Africans and to provide opportunities for knowledge transfer.…”

The Dignity of the Dead: Ethical Reflections on the Archaeology of Human Remains

“…Other observations have focused on the form of body preservation and exhibition (Fletcher et al 2014;Swain 2016), while others have discussed the relevance of repatriation and reburial (Hubert 1989; several chapters in Fforde et al 2002) and the role that research should play in these processes (McClelland and Cerezo-Román 2016). Several authors have paid attention to the problems generated by the treatment of human remains from recent conflicts (Gassiot 2008;Renshaw 2013;Brown 2016), burials from the non-distant past (Anthony 2016), or from postcolonial contexts (Pearson and Jeffs 2016). Religious feelings about death have also led to conflict between researchers and the wider community; this is especially marked in the Jewish community (Kersel and Chesson 2013;Colomer 2014).…”