SOCIAIRELATIONS IN A MARITIME CREOLE COMMUNITY: NETWORKED 'MULTIFOCAIITY IN THE EAST END COMMUNITY OF ST. jojjWjJ)ANiSH WEST INDIES Douglas V. Armstrong

Summary*. Archaeological and historical examination of the East End community on St. John provide spatial and materi­ al evidence for reliance on networked social relations that is best described as "multifocal". As the maritime com­ munity emerged its component households were made up of several generations of individuals who were depend­ ent upon one another. Rather than constituting "matrifocal" households, domestic residences of the East End consistently relied on women and men of at least three generations including nuclear and extended kinship rela­ tions as well as individuals with no direct family relation. The networked social relations of this community uti­ lized cooperate yet differentiated gender and age group based occupations to maximize productivity and to main­ tain stability through the rapidly changing regional social settings of the 19™ century. This archaeological study will focus on the spatial and material evidence for the emergent multifocal community.

introduction This study examines the social structure of the now abandoned community on the East End of St. John, in the former Danish West Indies.(1) Rather than indicating a matrifocal system, as proposed by Raymond Smith (1956, 1957, 1996), the East End community projects a much more complex set of social relations that is "multifocal", or better yet "networked multifocality". The archaeological and historical study of the East End community provides the spatial and material links between people - place, and household - community The results indicate a need to revise assumptions, and models, of social organization in the region to more completely account for the multi-generational, multi-gendered Caribbean household.

Setting - The East End Community The East End of St. John was rocky, steep, dry, and generally not well suited for the production of cash crops (Figures 1-2). However, its resource rich shoreline and relatively isolated position provided an excellent venue for the emergence of a Creole community that specialized in maritime trades and cot­ tage industries (Figure 3). The lands of the East End were patented by Danish planters. From the 1720s to 1750s the area was inhabited by unsupervised slaves, with the owners making only periodic visits to collect provisions and a few bags of cotton. In the mid-18tn century, the land was aequired- communally by five families who arrived, with their slaves, from Virgin Gorda (British Virgin Islands). They quickly transcended into a Creole community in which the lines between black-and-white, owner-and-laborer, were fused. As early as 1790 parcels within the collectively owned family lands were assigned to mulatto

195 sons and daughters and their growing families. As the community moved into the early 19™ centu­ ry, most of the former slaves had been manumitted. This generation would later show up in census records as skilled seaman and seamstresses. By the 1830s, a free community of 115 individual was well established. This community retained a relatively stable population from the last decades of the period of slavery in the Danish West Indies (abolished in 1848) through the second decade of the 20tn century. The community was made up of people of color who owned their land, and were not bound by slavery or later wage labor. These, factors (communal landownership, and viable self-employ­ ment) were critical to social and economic stability in the post-emancipation era. In this paper, I will concentrate on the significance of networked social relations in shaping this community of small-scale maritime traders.

Multifocal versus Matrifocal Social Organization In the Caribbean, explanations of social structure have endeavored to come to grips with diversity, change and transformation. Since the 1940s, beginning with the scholarship of Cuban cultural anthro­ pologist Fernando Ortiz, social scientists have recognized this diversity and have worked to develop explanations that examine transculturation and cultural transformation within and between Caribbean societies (Ortiz 1940,1995; Mintz and Price 1976,1992; Deagan 1998; Armstrong 1990,1998, 1999). Unfortunately, this comprehension of social complexity and variation has not been fully extended to the exploration of Caribbean household and family structures. The East End study applies principles of transition and variation, ideas that are ingrained in principles of transculturation, to the household and community level. The net result of this approach is an argument for a networked multifocal household, family, and kinship structure. In the 1950's Raymond Smith took an in-depth look at Caribbean household structure, he noted that historically, scholars had tended to view household and kinship systems in the Caribbean as unstable, promiscuous, and disorganized (Smith 1966:iv). Extrapolating from his studies of family life and household studies in Guiana, Smith used the term "matrifocal" to assert that Caribbean kin­ ship and living systems were different but stable. In his studies, Smith emphasized women as the cen­ tral figure in the family and the household. Even though Raymond Smith recognized that a "variety of kinship ties may be activated to bring people together into the same dwelling unit" (Smith 1996:27), he simplified and normalized his explanation to fit the nuclear family and residential criteria pre­ scribed by Murdock (1949:1). To achieve a sharp contrast he focused his attention on the "siblingship and mother-child relations" that he found in his studies of British Guiana (Smith 1956:151-159). In "The Matrifocal Family" (1996), Smith reiterates that an underlying theme, or objective, of his work was to provide a counterpoint to "the common view of African-American life as being "disorganized" and "pathological" (Smith 1996:2). In this effort Smith was successful. However, in making his point and still staying within a normative paradigm, Smith resorted to an either/or explanation - if Caribbean societies do not fit the mold of defined "patrifocal" societies, then the alternative is that they are "matrifocal". Based on his studies of Guianan society Smith concluded that "Men, in their role of husband-father, are placed in a position where neither their social status nor their access to, and

196 command of, economic resources are of major importance in the functioning of the household group at certain stages of their development" (Smith 1996[1956]:13). Thus, unfortunately, Smith's leveraged his explanation of the alternative family structures found in Caribbean settings by stressing a matrifo- cality in which women assumed central figures, while men were characterized as being weak, and the resultant family in constant flux (Smith 1956). However, because Smith's argument validated Caribbean households as legitimate; his views were embraced by scholars in the region. Furthermore, the notion of a contrasting "matrifocal" household became popular among feminist scholars. Unfortunately, the term matrifocal has tended to mute the importance of the broader social networks that make up a far more dynamic family, kinship, and household structure - thus limiting perspec­ tives on the importance of children, men, the elderly, friends, and community, along with women in the Caribbean household. With respect to the island of St. John, the most extensive ethnohistorical interpretation of fam­ ilies and household structures is by Karen Olwig (1978,1981,1985,1994). Olwig's studies make a com­ pelling case for the importance of networked social relations, rather than viewing the household as reflecting a nuclear family (Olwig 1985:128). She also correctly points out that one should not study individual households in isolation. However, in characterizing St. John family structure she falls back upon Smith's matrifocal model and emphasizes the role of women in society and in the household. In characterizing the social systems operating on the island, Olwig concludes that: "...a woman did not need a husband to provide for her or her children. Likewise, a man did not need a wife to provide food or sexual favors. The exchange relations made the composition of the domestic units a less vital concern" (see Olwig 1981:73). It would appear that Olwig astutely picked up on the importance of social networks but then falls back on partial, perhaps comfortable assumptions based on Smith's model of matrifocality. Certainly, women play a key role in family life, but not in isolation, or to the exclusion of others, as is implied by a restricted gender dependent term.

Assessing Social Organization through Archaeology While Olwig's ethnohistorical study of the island perceptively picked up on the networked social relations present across the island (1985). Archaeological studies have tended to focus on the larger scale plantation structures and until recently provided little detail on household (family, kinship) or community relationships - particularly among free persons of color. (2) The East End community operated at the margins of both plantation and mercantile society and was therefore poorly recorded in formal histories of the region. While the East End was almost forgotten by formal histories, upon survey, we found the dozens of East End house sites to be in an excellent state of preservation and as part of our archival research we found a wealth of information on the people of the community in the census, tax, probate, island administrator, and harbor master records found at the Rigsarkivet in Copenhagen and the National Archives in Washington D.C.. The data from survey and excavation of the East End added three essential elements necessary for the def­ inition of the networked multifocal households found in the East End: 1) the dimension of time; 2) the interpretation of social space; 3) and the context of the materials of daily life. In the process, the East End provides an important example of variation in the setting and condition of people of color in the Caribbean.

197 Syracuse University's survey and subsequent excavations in the East End (1995-1999) result­ ed in the definition of almost 50 discrete house sites distributed on the ridge tops, hillsides, and shore­ lines of the East End (Figure 4). The recovery of these house sites provide evidence of a community that thrived on the margins of West Indian society for more than 150 years beginning in the late 18™ century. This does not mean that the people of the East End community did not face restrictions in their existence. For in-fact, this community rested squarely within what Eisa Goveia has defined as a "slave society"; which was "based on slavery" and which "included masters and freemen as well as slaves" (Goveia 1965:vii). However, their communal ownership of land and in-depth mastery of mar­ itime trades, including the ownership of numerous sloops, made this group less vulnerable to rigid definitions of race, ethnicity, or class, than experienced by those bound to the broader superstructure of the region's plantation economy.

People and Space, Household and Community Changing patterns in the type, location, and distribution of East End house sites reflect the formation of the community, and the complex social relations expressed by the inhabitants (Figure 4). Fortunately, census records allow us to place individuals and extended families with each spatially distinct household and to explore changes through time which demonstrate the intersection between people and space within this cultural landscape. The earliest house sites were small-scale estates. Recorded as cotton plantages, (plantations) because some cotton was produced, they were essentially provisioning estates and were without the massive works and processing centers associated with sugar estates such as Carolina, the Danish Company estate at Coral Bay. Prior to 1800, five distinct house sites were occupied by the families, and slaves, of the early settlers from Virgin Gorda (Figure 5). An example is Hansen Bay, an early estate that was later divided into two free-holding households -Windy Hill and Nancy Hill. These first, and second, generation households were dispersed across the landscape (Figure 5). By the turn of the 19™ century, new forms of houses begin to show up on the landscape, but houses continue to be dispersed throughout the combined family lands. By the mid-19m century house sites began to concentrate along the flanks of Hansen Bay. Finally, from 1870 to 1917 the community became con­ centrated on the shoreline and hill slopes of Hansen Bay (Figure 5). Even through the community still owned all of the lands, their economic structure had shifted towards greater reliance on the sea and greater inter-reliance upon one another. This shift is associated with an aggregate community of inter-related households that is linked to an expertise in maritime trade. The change seen in use of the physical landscape is also document­ ed in the Danish West Indies "free colored" lists and census records that beginning in the 1830s. These records clearly show that each East End households involved multiple generations (at least three), usually of kin. The population was supplemented by new arrivals, often from the British Virgin Islands (Virgin Gorda, Tórtola, and Peter Island) who came to live and to intermarry with East Enders.

198 integrated Evidence - Census Records and Archaeology Census records show that decades before formal emancipation in the Danish West Indies (1848) all but a few East Enders were free and almost all of the men of the community were engaged with the sea (Figure 6). Through the years scores of probate records document the names of East End boat captains and sailors: Timothy George (resident of Windy Hill/ Nancy Hill), John Ashton (resident of Pleasant Lookout), John Henry (resident of Rebecca's Fancy); and the names of there vessels: "The Harmony", Little Sister, etc. The women who lived and worked in East End households: Sara George was a seamstress and planter; Johanna Henry was a mid-wife; and Ingeborg Henry was a teacher. By tracing shifts in individual's places of residence and occupations we can see the integrat­ ed nature of networked multifocality. Most individuals lived their childhoods in one house, then moved on to one or more new house during the course of their lives By way of example, I will describe the networked social relations expressed at Rebecca's Fancy, one of the house sites that was extensive­ ly excavated as part of this study. John Henry and Many Smith were both born in the East End com­ munity (SJR - 1880 and 1901). Mary was born at Eva's Fancy John was born at Hard Labor (Figure 7). They each had similar backgrounds, they were of mixed African and European heritage and were phenotypically black. Each had one parent who was born in the East End and one was from outside the community. Mary's family lands trace back through her mother's line and John's family through his father's line. As children they, and their age-mates, were transported by boat to school at Emmeus in Coral Bay. After schooling Mary was a seamstress and laundress while John became a sailor. The two were married at the Moravian Church, where by the late 19*° century, more than 95% of the com­ munity's inhabitants were affiliated. Upon the recognition of their union, they were given a parcel of land within communal lands linked to both families. As we have seen, over time the parcels selected changed in cadence with social and economic activities, but the practice of establishing new house­ holds within the family lands was consistent from the late 18* century through the early 20* centu­ ry. The community gathered together and built a house platform and then a house for this new house­ hold. In short order, this house was occupied by the couple, their children and near relatives. John became a boat owner and sea captain and Mary continued to engage in seamstressing while serving as primary cook and provider of childcare to their young children, with the assistance of aunts and uncles. Their children attended the newly built East End School. Later their grandchildren would fetch water for the household from the community cistern adjacent to the school, several of their chil­ dren and grandchildren would serve as teachers at the school, and all family members would congre­ gate at that location for community and religious event.

Conclusion Through archaeological and historical studies we can trace the location of these houses and see the dynamic movement of people within the community. This same type of story could be told for of each household in the East End. We can also see that each household was dependent upon a complex set of interrelations with their neighbors and relatives - a pattern of networked multifocality. The networked multifocal family described here is quite different from the matrifocal family that has frequently been used to characterize households St. John and throughout the Caribbean

199 (Olwig 1985; Smith 1956,1996). Networked multifocality, as demonstrated for the East End commu­ nity, facilitates a more inclusive definition of family and community life that takes into consideration the multi-gendered extended family of all ages who are reliant upon one-another. It also cross-cuts the increasingly untenable and exclusionary social categories associated with gender, age, race, and class (Figure 8), Now that evidence from the East End has been compiled, it is probable that similar social structures were replicated in other free holding communities on St. John, such as found along the shore of Coral Harbor, Browns Bay, and Little Reef Bay, if not elsewhere on the island; but, none of these communities were as long lived, large, or stable as that of the East End community. Moreover, similar social structures are probably common to the Caribbean region as a whole and should be most easily seen in places like Saba, Dominica, settings of marronage, and in settings of relative self deter­ mination throughout the Caribbean - particularly in the post-emancipation era.

Notes 1. This study was funded in part by the Wenner-Gren Foundation. The full community study will be published as part of a book titled "East End Creole" by the University Press of Florida. While the detailed archaeological and historical evidence that provides the empirical backbone to this study are far too expansive and detailed for a short conference paper, I felt that the general principals involved and the implications for anthropological research were significant and should be presented at this Caribbean forum.

2. Portions of the East End were surveyed in the early 1980s to assess the physical residue of plantations (Ausherman 1982). They surveyed only part of the area and found a few, dispersed, small- scale structures and determined that this part of the islands retained little of cultural significance. Their definition of significance revolved around expectations of a plantation with a large planter's house, massive stone industrial works, and a densely compact grouping of laborer quarters. In con­ trast, the current study began with the knowledge that the abandoned hillsides of the East End had once served as the home to a community made up of many households. Therefore, our survey aimed at locating all of the house sites in order to examine change through time and the emergence of the community.

References Armstrong, Douglas V. 1990 'The Old Village and the Great House: An Archaeological and Historical Examination of Drax Hall Plantation, Jamaica'. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 1988 'Cultural Transformation Among Caribbean Slave Communities'. In: Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, and Archaeology, James G. Cusick editor, pp. 378-401. Southern Illinois University, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Carbondale. 1999 'Archaeology and Ethnohistory of the Caribbean Plantation' . In: "I, Too, Am America":

200 Archaeological Studies of African-American Life, Theresa A. Singleton, editor, pp. 299-310. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.

Ausherman, Betty (editor) 1982 St. John Sites Report 1981-1982. Division of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. United States Virgin Islands, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas.

Deagan, Kathleen 1998 'Transculturation and Spanish American Ethonogenesis: The Archaeological Legacy of the Quincentenary'. In: James G. Cusick, (éd.), Studies in Culture Contact: Interaction, Culture Change, and Archaeology, pp. 23-43. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Mintz, Sydney, and Richard Price 1976 'An Anthropological Approach to the Afro-American Past: a Caribbean Perspective'. Philadelphia, Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1992 'The Birth of African-American Culture, an Anthroplogical Perspective.' Boston, Beacon Press.

Murdock, G. P, 1949 Social Structure. Macmillan Company, New York.

Olwig, Karen 1978 Households, Exchange, and Social Reproduction: The Development of a Caribbean Society Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Minnesota. University Microfilms: Ann Arbor. 1981 'Women, 'Matrifocality' and Systems of Exchange: An Ethnographical Study of the Afro- American family on St. John, Danish West Indies'. In: Ethnohistory 28(1): 59-78. 1985 Cultural Adaptation and Resistance on St. John: Three Centuries ofAfro-Caribbean Life. Gainesville, University of Florida Press,. 1994 The Land is the Heritage: Land and Community on St. John. St John, Oral History Association (Monograph #1. Reproduction Center of the Division of Social Sciences. University of Copenhagen, Denmark).

Ortiz, Fernando 1995 Contrapunteo Cubano del Tabaco y Azúcar. Havana, Ediciones Ciencias Sociales. Cuban Counterpoint: Tobacco and Sugar. Durham, Duke University Press.

201 SJR (St. John Registers) 1880-1901 Central Management Archives, Registers for St. John, 1835-1911. Rigsarkivet, Copenhagen. Census's of 1880, 1901, 1911 [data tabulated from microfilm copies at the Baa Library, St. Thomas].

Smith, Raymond T. 1956 The Negro Family in British Guiana: Family Structure and Social Status in the Villages. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1957 'The Family in the Caribbean'. In: Vera Rubin (ed.) Caribbean Studies, a Symposium. Kingston, Institute of Social and Economic Research. 1996 The Matrifocal Family: Power, Pluralism, and Politics. New York, Routledge.

202 ^ •" ••••• t.;" , í/ *~r^\ ' - '' -- *"7b¡^ •".--•

• ^ • E - -; Maho /emita » 0- J -:Í Herma. .. n Far•m :; «aj?f í .-.\ Cora_ l Bay - ; . .

Cruz iay ^.„,.¿— —- "\ --. ,

AS # •Betiifiny/' RflflfBay f Lairaihur v*

L^HS ÍÍ VWW ° -sit : o -- ' £> -••tosi.'srwTO.a ...; !«iwl« fromOilnlm 1Ti

Figure 1: Map of St. John

203 ísítifri'S HiH < ñ\\4- \¡ -% \T\ N Sí? •'i-. iP ' •••••:.•'••." : . I '•: 'i •/ / iS^^í^m 1 í'^"«^VbïS* i > ' : (-'OS; '-'HâRsa "VNSi \ 1 -¡ ErSe ¡En'öCsnirniinl^M^^^^Ás l(^^^-^^\ ' Bay ',/ VW'i, : s^-5^;-^ J \ Paint

J ,/ 3T JCHH1 ' llr (Pe \B¡s»sf'

: c Lon; "Í: :^o -~

.Iff', ('é'"// j F' v'

m\lQ nwH P< SÍ ' JÍ- ; <'T J .*'""'- S Ktortite'

•'•-'••.'V:''''" C.om:Dfi?':.'L,':*^-i ••"'.• :.::-f;î

Fz'gwre 2: Topography of the East End, St. John

204 Figure 3: TTie Easf End, 2S00 Ox/zo/m Map o/ St. John (Rigsarkwet, OM 1799).

205 East End: Multifocal Social Network

Multifocal Social relations allowed the 4 East End to integrate the méh'íáusl within i their household Multifocal kinship Mnit) and with Social the broader Relations This provided integrated solutions to economie, mû»k mi rnvkmrnemtai e»nditioBS and aM»wed for slabüty with» the eemmpnitf M a whrtte Imetgtaf Mwiwft Qmmmfâg

Figure 4: East Ender's Social Multifocal Social Network

206 Figure 5: East End: Change in house location over time

207 -^•î>

r-jy atetóte? *L/wÍ í'3w.. .

: si Til"MUÍ 3::;#g#:p|fi

^;- = -':'.';---^í tli© Danish Wssí Mies End, Si

Figure 7: East End Sloops circa 1900 (postcard, Knight collection)

208 ^.,,^^¿:=%^Se0v:

•Èk. P. kl i»ecc;i"s I ;i

Figure 7: Establishing a new household at Rebecca's Fancy.

209 r:

W-r

Figure 8: Mending Fish Pots, St. John (postcard, Knight Collection)

210