ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING AT FORT ORANJE, BONAIRE

Jay B. Haviser and Arthur Sealy

ABSTRACT

In February 1997, limited archaeological testing was conducted at Fort Oranje, Bonaire, in preparation for planned restoration of this fort. Historical background to Fort Oranje and its development is outlined, and the archaeological remains encountered during this study are described. From the evidence recovered, a previously unknown earlier structure was clearly present at this site prior to construction of Fort Oranje in 1796. Further, it was noted that several alterations to the fort complex had occurred through time, which were not indicated in historical documentation. The underlying theme of this paper is not only the presentation of archaeological data relating to excavations at Fort Oranje, but also the importance of combining historical documentation research with archaeology.

RESUMEN En febrero 1997 se realizaron limitadas pruebas arqueológicas en Fort Oranje, Bonaire, en

preparación de la restauración planeada de este fuerte. Estudios del ambiente histórico de Fort Oranje son trazados, y los restos arqueológicos encontrados durante esta investigación son descritos. De las evidencias recuperadas resulta claramente que en este sitio se encontraba una previamente desconocida estructura, antes de la construcción de Fort Oranje en 1796. Además se notó que con el pasar del tiempo habián ocurrido varias alteraciones en el complejo del fuente, que no fueron indicadas en documentación histórica. El tema esencial de esta ponencia no es solo la presentación de datos arqueológicos relacionados a las excavaciones en Fort Oranje, sino también la importancia de combinar investigación de documentación histórica con arqueología.

RESUME En février 1997, quelques tests archéologiques ont été conduit au Fort Oranje, Bonaire, en vue de

la planification de sa restauration. Le passé historique de Fort Oranje et les différentes étapes de son aménagement sont exposés et les vestiges archéologiques trouvés lors de cette étude sont décrits. D'après les preuves recueillies, il apparaît qu'une première structure inconnue précédemment existait sur la site, avant la construction du Fort Oranje en 1796. En outre, on e pu observer que plusieurs remaniements del'ensemble du Fort ont eu lieu dans le temps, ce qui n'apparaissait pas sur les documents historiques. Le sujet principal de cet article est non seulement la présentation des données archéologiques relatives aux fouilles menées au Fort Oranje, mais aussi l'importance d'associer l'archéologie à la recherche documentaire historique.

KEY WORDS: Dutch & English Occupations, Fort Orange, Historic Period.

INTRODUCTION

The fieldwork for the Fort Oranje research was financed by the Plan-D2 company and conducted by the Archaeological-Anthropological Institute of the Netherlands Antilles (AAINA) in

340

Haviser and Sealy 341

February-March 1997. This work constitutes the first professional historical archaeology conducted on Bonaire.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Dutch in 1796 (Figure 1) first built the present Fort Oranje. At that time the village of Kralendijk, where Fort Oranje is situated, was a mere scatter of small warehouse and house structures (Goslinga 1971).

In 1807 the fort was occupied by the English, who imported four iron carronades with dates of manufacture from 1808 to 1812. Today, the carronades are still present at the fort. Fort Oranje was recaptured by the Dutch in 1816. The few soldiers stationed there only conducted maintenance, and fired salute and time guns, having never seen any real military action (Hartog 1980).

From 1816 to about 1840, Fort Oranje was also the residence of the Lieutenant-Governor for Bonaire. Numerous other public services were also accommodated in the fort from the early nineteenth to late twentieth centuries (Nooien 1985).

The first wooden lighthouse at the fort was reportedly built in 1868. A photograph dated 1896 (Antoin 1992), did show a large lighthouse at Fort Oranje, which was supposed to have been replaced with a stone lighthouse in 1932 (Hartog 1978). Additionally in this 1896 photograph, the fort wall structures, particularly at the entranceway and northern side of the fort, are not consistent with the present wall structures at the fort.

As well, on the J. Werbata topographic map of Bonaire (1906-1909) there is no lighthouse indicated at the fort, and there are different wall structure positions noted than are present today (Figure 2). As well, in a photograph from the 1920, it appears that the battery walls were as at present, but that the entrance wall was more similar to the Werbata rendering.

Among the interior structures within the Fort Oranje complex (Figure 3), we identified that structures A, C and D are the oldest, and that structures B, E, F and G were built after the Second World War (Plan D-2 1996).

EXCAVATION METHODOLOGY

Excavations consisted of 30 preliminary posthole test pits, 40 cm diameter, followed by three 1 x 1 m test units, and then three trenches of 1 x 3 m, 1 x 11 m, and 1 x 14 m, all dug in 10 cm arbitrary levels (Figure 4). These units revealed a variable soil stratigraphy over the site, with deeper deposits immediately adjacent to the battery walls

STRUCTURAL FEATURES

Structural features were noted in four of the posthole test units. The most important was noted in tests 15 and 17, at 10 cm depths. Here both ends of a wall foundation composed of aligned large limestone was discovered, which was connected by way of the south fort wall to structure D.

In trenches A and B, we noted the foundation of structure J. The structure J feature consisted

342 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

of compacted yellow-orange clayey-sand with large limestone, as a wall foundation of 10-15 cm in thickness, which represents the lowest portion of the wall. On the west face was a white lime piaster facing (Figure 5).

In trench C2, we noted a massive wall structure, from 30 cm to 70 cm depth, attached exactly at structure I's southeast corner, and running slightly diagonal in a direction southeast. This wall feature is 65 cm thick, has lime plaster facing on both interior and exterior sides, and consists of very large limestone compacted together with yellow-orange clayey-sand. This wall feature fits exactly the position of the fort wall indicated on the 1906-1909 Werbata map (Figure 6).

ARTIFACTUAL MATERIAL RECOVERED

For the 8377 total artifacts recovered during this excavation, the analyses were separated into eight basic classes of artifacts: being shell material 25 percent, glass material 21 percent, building material 21 percent, faunal material 17 percent, ceramic material 9 percent, metal material 4 percent, charcoal 2 percent, and kaolin pipes 1 percent of the total artifacts.

There were 720 ceramic artifacts analyzed from Fort Oranje. This ceramic material analysis was separated into five basic categories of ceramics, these being: coarse earthenware, stoneware, porcelains, tin-enamel glaze refined wares, and lead-glaze refined wares (Figure 7).

In the category of coarse earthenware the most common type found were plain coarse earthenware. With 203 total specimens, these wares were composed of 143 specimen of plain coarse earthenware and 60 specimens of lead-glazed coarse earthenware (Figure 8). Eight of the plain coarse earthenware sherds had a crushed shell-temper similar to Amerindian ceramics noted on Bonaire (Haviser 1991).

In the category of stoneware there were 63 examples recovered, these are most often drinking vessels and bottles, however the white salt-glazed variety is a tableware. The most common type found were brown, grey or tan salt-glazed cylindrical gin bottles, having 51 specimens or 81 percent of the stoneware total.

In the category of porcelains there were 45 specimens collected, these are primarily tableware and ornamental objects. The majority of these (60 percent) were blue patterned English copies of Chinese porcelains. However, 18 examples of true Chinese porcelain were noted, and each with red or gold overglazes.

For the category of tin-enamel glaze wares, there was only one type of ceramic noted, these were the Dutch manufactured Delftwares (Wilcoxen 1987), with a total count of 102 specimens, which were concentrated mostly in the area of structure J (Figure 9).

In the category of refined lead-glaze wares there were a variety of manufacture types noted at Fort Oranje. This is not surprising considering that after 1740 most ceramic manufacturers in Europe were beginning to change to lead-glazing due to the superior quality and durability compared to tin-enamel glazed wares. There were 350 specimens of refined lead-glazed wares recovered from Fort Oranje, these fall into three basic types: creamware, pearlware, and whiteware (Hume 1978).

Creamware were represented with 28 specimens recovered at Fort Oranje. Pearlware were of both English and Dutch manufacture, with 183 specimens recovered at this site. Whiteware were noted with a total of 139 ceramics recovered (Figures 10-12).

Haviser and Sealy

It is important to note here, that unlike the ceramic assemblages excavated at various seventeenth to nineteenth century Dutch sites on Curaçao (Haviser and Simmons-Brito 1991,1995; Nagelkerken 1989, 1993) and St. Eustatius (Barka 1985), this Fort Oranje assemblage completely lacked the presence of common German wares such as Rhenishware, and common French wares such as Faience, and had only a single example of a Spanish storage jar ceramic.

Metal Materials

The vast majority of metal objects recovered at Fort Oranje were of iron material, with 345 total metal artifacts found, 326 (95 percent) were iron, 15 were copper, 3 were lead, and 1 was brass. The general categories of metal objects found were: nails, strap and sheet metal, unique objects, modern objects, and unidentifiable metal material.

There were 135 specimens of nails recovered from this site, with square nails having 78 examples, and round nails having 57 specimens found.

The category of strap and sheet metal was represented here with 34 specimens of strap and 9 specimens of sheet metal. The strap type of artifact most often consists of the circular iron straps that were used to bind wooden barrels. The sheet metal objects are most often fragments of iron cooking pots.

The category of unique objects is rather broad, having 15 total items, including a six-pounder, round-shot, cannonball, and the four carronades (Gooding 1980).

Glass Materials There were 1772 glass artifacts recovered in this investigation, of which all but 3 were bottle

fragments. These bottle fragments were separated by color, with 1427 green, 279 clear, 41 brown, 9 blue-green, 8 aquamarine, 4 white, 2 pink, and 1 blue.

The three unique glass artifacts consisted of two fragments of clear glass, stemmed goblets, and one eighteenth century blue glass wound bead, often referred to on St. Eustatius as "slave beads."

Kaolin Pipes At Fort Oranje there were 89 kaolin pipe fragments recovered, including 5 specimens with

makers' marks. With the pipe fragment examples that exhibited a diagnostic shape, it was noted that these were mostly late eighteenth and some early nineteenth century forms (Duco 1987).

There were several kaolin pipe makers marks found at Fort Oranje. One mark is from the Dutch manufacturer Jan Danens in Gouda, during the period around 1740-1760. Another mark is from a Dutch manufacturer in Gouda, during the period around 1750-1770 (Tymstra and van der Meulen 1988). These artifacts were directly associated with the structure J wall, along with most of the kaolin pipe fragments recovered (Figure 13).

Based on bore diameters, for the 79 stem specimen recovered, 91 percent dated between 1750-1800, while 9 percent dated between 1710-1750. It is of interest to note that all of early pipe stems were excavated from below the dense charcoal layer noted in test pit #10 (Figure 14). Additionally, no diagnostic English kaolin pipes were noted at this site, albeit some of the many plain stem fragments could have been English.

344 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

Building Materials There were 1722 total building material artifacts analyzed from this site. For this study,

building materials were categorized into one of the following types: bricks, plaster fragments, roof tiles, and modern cements. Yellow bricks are most often associated with the eighteenth century on Curaçao (Ozinga 1959), and were noted as specifically associated with structure J at Fort Oranje (Figure 15).

Faunal/Shell Material The faunal bone material collected from this site consists of 1427 specimens, of which 78

percent are mammalian fauna and the remaining 22 percent are represented by reptilia, aves, pisces, and unidentified specimens (Figure 16). The two primary mammals noted were goats and cows, the primary reptile noted was sea turtle, and the primary fishes noted were pelagic, deep water types.

The shell material collected consisted of 2074 specimens, of which 63 percent were located in the stratigraphie zone which represents the site area prior to human occupation. Therefore much of this sample is natural shoreline remains, prior to human use of the site. Of those shell materials found in the artifact producing levels, the most common marine types noted were: Cittarium pica (kiwa), Strombus sp. (careo), Astrea sp. (star shells), Cypraea sp. (cowries), and various bivalves (clams); and the most common land snail was Cerion uva (cocolishi). The most common shell group from the deeper natural levels were small bivalves, particularly Diplodonta sp. and Codakia sp.

Other Materials

This category was included to cover lithic artifacts and charcoal materials. Except for the large limestone used in wall construction, there were only two lithic artifacts recovered from this site, a single slateboard fragment and a single gunspall of probable Dutch origin.

GENERAL SITE INTERPRETATION

In the overall site analysis there appears to be three periods of intensive activity at this site, one from the eighteenth century, one from the early nineteenth century, and one from the early twentieth century. These are both horizontally situated over the site, as well as vertically segregated within the soils around the battery wall.

For the earliest occupations at the site, there is clear artifactual evidence for an early to middle eighteenth century Dutch use of the site, with the additional presence of African slaves and Amerindian workers, particularly in the areas of structures J, I and H. This deepest artifact concentration is noted in test 10 at levels 11-12, and is identified by the presence of Delftware, earthenware, green glass, and large-bore kaolin pipes. There is also building rubble noted with this period, consisting of roof tiles, square nails, and particularly grey lime plaster. Food resources during this period were the most variable of all the site occupations, having mostly mammal remains yet also fish, and both Cittarium and other shellfish as well. This occupation is just at the bottom of, and below, the base of the plastered fort wall, associated with the sub-construction brown clayey-sand fill, and prior to a major charcoal deposit. Therefore, this deposit is seen as from prior to and during the period of construction of the original fort.

Haviser and Sealy 345

Structure J is the primary location of this early-middle eighteenth century occupation within the site area. Based on its stratigraphie position immediately atop the zone IV sterile soils and the early artifact associations, this feature appears to be a structure built at the site prior to the construction of the fort itself. The rather crude plaster technique, minimal wall foundations, and a step-extension to the seaside of structure J, all suggest a small house or storage structure function for this feature.

The concentration of early artifacts in the area of structure H, can represent another early-middle eighteenth century house or storage area, as noted by the structural wall features and the large quantity of barrel hoops recovered there, as well as, a trash disposal area for the structure J and later inhabitants. There was a continuation of this area for trash disposal into the early nineteenth century with the fort construction of first Dutch period.

There was a dense charcoal layer noted in test 10 at levels 9-10. In the broader site analysis it is apparent that a massive burning event was not present over the site area. Indeed the charcoal is primarily found in the upper levels over the site, and situated outside the fort walls at irregular intervals. It is more reasonable to assume that these charcoal deposits are the remains of kitchen and other trash disposal outside the fort wall, at various locations through time, with a particular focus on the test 10 area during the early nineteenth century. This charcoal peak is associated only with the deepest yellow lime wall plaster. However, this charcoal peak also seems to be a critical changing point for several other specific artifact types. One example is the presence of large-bore kaolin pipes primarily below this peak, and small-bore kaolin pipes noted above the peak. The ceramics also seem to indicate a change related to the charcoal peak, such that the Delftwares are primarily noted in/below the peak with the sub-foundation brown and grey sands, while the pearlware and whiteware are located in/above the peak, with the zone EI soils. Additionally, the vertical distribution of glass artifacts indicates that proportionally more green glass was used prior to the charcoal peak, and more clear glass after.

With the arrival of the English in 1807, there was an apparent dramatic shift in activities, as noted with a second artifact concentration. The fort was replastered white, with probably the battery walls reinforced and expanded north, resulting in the different battery wall foundation profiles between trenches A and C2. There was also a shift to the use of more refined tableware such as pearlware and creamwares, mostly manufactured in England. This is indicative of both actual English presence at the site, but as well, the extensive use of English trade goods by the Dutch subsequently. New carronades were brought in, and eating habits favored fish, and a variety other food sources such as birds and sea turtles, and various shellfishes in their diet.

The end of the English period and beginning of the second Dutch period in 1813, is not clearly distinguished in the archaeological record. Indeed, it seems that the second Dutch period was basically a continuation of the activities and lifeways of the English period. There were however some artifactual evidences of change, such as the introduction of glazed coarse earthenware, a typical Dutch ceramic, and the presence of more elegant artifact types such as goblets and porcelains, most probably indicative of the Governor's family residence at the site from 1813-1840. The overall site distribution of artifacts for both of these periods was scattered over the fort grounds, yet with a concentration in the courtyard area between the battery and the main residence building.

However, it is interesting to note that the introduction of whiteware ceramics, as a nineteenth to early twentieth century product, was more specifically focused to the southeast area of the fort, indicative of a shift in trash disposal to that area during the period. Of additional mention for this

346 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

point, are oral history accounts that the exterior southeast area was used as a goat-pen area in the mid twentieth century.

The third artifact concentration in test 10 at levels 3-4, was also clearly evident over the entire site area, and represents extensive early to middle twentieth century alterations to the fort complex. Large quantities of yellow and white lime plaster are replaced with cement plaster, and square-nailed structures are rebuilt with round-nailed alterations. The bulk of yellow and grey lime plaster noted with this period, along with scatters of wall stones with yellow plaster attached, indicate that large sections of the 'old fort walls' were being demolished during the twentieth century. This included some of the main fort walls, as well as some other structures, such as a wall between structure G and the south fort wall.

It is hoped that with these reports the glory of the true old Fort Oranje, can be brought to light, so that we may better admire the dignity this unique monument has, as itself, and as a symbol of Bonaire

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our gratitude to Plan-D2 and Dito Abad, for their inspiration to conduct and sponsor this project, to the AAINA for allowing Haviser's participation, to Johan Reitveld for his logistical help on Bonaire, and to Boy Antoin for his help in compiling local historical sources about Fort Oranje. Also our appreciation to the fine work carried out by the fieldcrew, they being; Hubert "Ibi" Wanga, Theo Kelly, Humphrey Paulina, and Raphael Alcantara.

Haviser and Sealy 347

REFERENCES CITED

Antoin, B.

1992 E Tragedia di Gouverneur van Heerdt. Parera Printing, Curacao.

Barka, N.

1985 Archaeology of St. Eustatius, Netherlands Antilles. St. Eustatius Archaeological Research Series, No. 1, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia.

Duco, D.

1987 De Nederlandse Kleipijp: Handboek voor dateren en determineren. Stichting Pijpenkabinet, Leiden.

Gooding, S.

1980 An Introduction to British Artillery in North America. Historical Arms Series, No.4, Museum Restoration Service, Ontario.

Goslinga, C.

1971 The Dutch in the Caribbean and on the Wild Coast, 1580-1680. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.

Hartog, J. 1978 A Short History of Bonaire. De Wit Pers, Aruba. 1980 Twelve Forts of the Netherlands Antilles. Beaujonville Mansion publisher, Curacao.

Haviser, J. 1991 The First Bonaireans. AAINA Reports No. 10, Curacao.

Haviser, J., and N. Simmons-Brito 1991 Sub-surface Archaeological Testing in the Punda Area of Curacao, Netherlands

Antilles. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by A. Cummins and P. King, pp. 380-407. Barbados Museum and Historical Society, Barbados.

1995 Excavations at the Zuurzak Site: A possible 17th century Dutch slave camp on Curacao, Netherlands Antilles. In Proceedings of the XVInternational Congress for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by R. Alegría and M. Rodriquez, pp. 71 -82. Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Caribe, San Juan.

348 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

Hume, I. N.

1978 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Knopf Borzoi Books, New York.

Nagelkerken, W.

1989 1989 Survey of the Dutch Frigate " Alphen' which exploded and sank in 1778 in the harbour of Curaçao. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Congress for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by E.N.Ayubi and J.B. Haviser, pp.771-775. The Archaeological-Anthropological Institute of the Netherlands Antilles, No. 9 Curaçao.

1993 Onderwaterarcheologisch onderzoek van de historische vuilstortplaats langs de Handelskade in de St. Annabaai, Curaçao. AAINA Reports, Curaçao.

Nooien, R.

1985 Isla di Papa Cornés. Bonaire Offset Printing, Bonaire.

Ozinga, M.

1959 De Monumenten van Curacao in Woord en Beeld. Stichting Monumentenzorg Curacao.

Plan D2 Proposal for Fort Oranje

1996 Projektdossier Gerechtsgebouw Bonaire. Plan D2 Reports. Copies available from AAINA Curacao.

Tymstra, F., and J. van der Meulen

1988 De Kleipijp als Bodemvondst. Pijpelogishe Kring Nederland Jubileumuitgave, Netherlands.

Wilcoxen, C.

1987 Dutch Trade and Ceramics in America in the Seventeenth Century. Albany Institute of History and Art, New York.

Figure 1. Overall view of Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

Figure 2. 1906-09 Werbata map, with inset indicating structures at Fort

Oranje, Bonaire.

350 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

Figure 3. Present structural features at Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

Figure 4. 1997 Testpit and Trench excavations at Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

FORT ORANJE, BONAIRE Trenches A and B Archaeological Features

Figure 5. Archaeological Features noted in Trenches A and B, Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

352 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

TT»M 3 a j n i o r u i s

S> 5

f t: o u u c

3 o G en

a 4-1

ca PH

'S u jo "o

<L> Co

X I

u

so 8 s 00

Haviser and Sealy 353

CERAMICS

Whitewares Gt. Earthen.

Peariwares Earthenware

Delftwares

Figure 7. Proportional ratio of ceramic artifact types, by 10cm excavation levels, Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

; » 1-5 »rtii««t« pi*«»nt <B over 10 artifact» present

Figure 8. Horizontal distribution of Plain Coarse Earthenware ceramics.

354 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

= 1-9 artifact» presont * otar 1© artifacts present

Figure 9. Horizontal distribution of Delftware ceramics.

1-9 artifact* present orer 10 artifacts present

Figure 10. Horizontal distribution of Creamware ceramics.

,1

i !, .

Figure 11. Horizontal distribution of Pearlware ceramics.

ttroa<l

1-9 mrtif»«* present over 10 »rtii»cts present

Figure 12. Horizontal distribution of Whiteware ceramics.

356 Proceedings of the 17th Congress for Caribbean Archaeology

c x—9 artifact» peasant o ovar 10 artifacts present

Figure 13. Horizontal distribution of Kaolin pipe fragments.

KAOLIN PIPES AND CHARCOAL

Kaolin Pipes Charcoal

Figure 14. Proportional ratio of Kaolin pipes and Charcoal, by 10cm excavation levels, Fort Oranje, Bonaire.

Haviser and Sealy 357

* 1-9 *rtif*et* pretest • or«r 10 artifacts present

ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING AT FORT ORANJE, BONAIRE

Figure 15. Horizontal distribution of yellow brick.

FAUNAL BONE MATERIAL

j | Mammal Fish

Figure 16. Proportional ratio of Faunal Material (mammal and fish remains only), by 10cm excavation levels, Fort Oranje.