DOCSLIB.ORG

The Naval Cottages and Fort Henry Garrison Hospital 33

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Naval Cottages and Fort Henry Garrison Hospital 33 Bazely The Naval Cottages and Fort Henry Garrison Hospital 33 The Naval Cottages and Fort Henry Garrison Hospital: Public Archaeology at Two of Kingston’s Military Sites Susan M. Bazely Kingston’s past is rich in historical detail, whether it be architectural, political or archaeological. The staff of the Cataraqui Archaeological Research Foundation has drawn upon the archaeological collections to develop public access to the history and archaeology of the area with the view to promote and preserve the past. In addition to a variety of workshops, the Foundation provides a well-established summer archaeolo- gy field school program. An overview of public archaeology will provide the framework for two of Kingston’s military sites that have been investigated as part of this program. The Naval Cottages at the Royal Naval Dockyard, now the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC), and the Fort Henry Garrison Hospital have both revealed the process of archaeology and provided insight into the past at both of these sites for the pub- lic. They have also helped to shape and refine the Foundation’s approach to public archaeology. What Is Public Archaeology? of the past of people through examination of the material evidence that they leave behind. The General Overview “traditional” and “romantic” view portrayed by Public archaeology has different meanings and the discoveries of Heinrich Schliemann and his outcomes for those involved in doing archaeolo- work at Troy, Sir Arthur Evans at Knossos and gy, from government agencies and learning insti- Howard Carter at Tutankhamun’s tomb, are what tutions to avocational organizations. In order to movie makers associate with archaeology. That is, assess both positive and negative impacts of pub- archaeologists make magnificent discoveries and lic archaeology, including whether it actually obtain spectacular objects of art. It is this long helps to preserve the past, it is necessary first to developed concept of “treasure hunting” that define what it is. Naturally, it involves public par- seems to be at the root of some of the public’s ticipation in the discipline of archaeology, but to misconceptions about archaeology, the search for what degree? The concept of public archaeology artifacts. is not new and has undergone an evolution, or Archaeology has developed since the nine- possibly a revolution, especially in the more teenth century into a scientifically based, multi- recent past. Archaeology in the public’s eye, even disciplinary field. Archaeology involves the col- up to the first half of the twentieth century, was lection, analysis and interpretation of data from clearly not recognized as a tool for teaching peo- geophysical and aerial surveys, documentary ple about the past. sources, soils and stratigraphy, plants, animals, Archaeologists generally know that archaeolo- building materials and artifacts; these data are gy and information about the past is often mis- what enables archaeologists to investigate the understood by the public. Evidence for this past. It does not only involve collecting, analyz- comes from the “popular” presentation by the ing and interpreting artifacts. Two important media, especially in the television and movie questions need then to be addressed here. (1) industries (Stone 1997,1994), and even as a Why is it important to do archaeology? (2) Why direct result of inappropriate site interpretive is it important for others, non-archaeologists, to techniques (Sansom 1996; Stone 1997). It is know about what archaeologists do and find? therefore necessary to begin with the most basic Archaeology should be considered as a tool for and broad definition of archaeology—the study accessing the past. It cannot be said that we know 34 Ontario Archaeology No. 76, 2003 everything about the past, and it is clear even or passive, or might involve a combination of from recently recorded history and archaeology both (Figure 1). Passive forms of public archaeol- that accepted knowledge can be biased (Arnold ogy include museum, interpretive centre and 1996; McCann 1990). Archaeology should not, other exhibits, trails and tours, and presentation however, be thought of as a means of refuting through lectures and in the media including tel- written history, but a method to enhance our evision, radio, newspapers, magazines and books. knowledge about people, how they used These forms can also contain elements of active resources and developed technologies, how they participation or lead to it. The active types of lived and survived, died and even what they public archaeology are field schools and work- believed. Archaeological research is thus carried shops, but might also include interactive out to find the answers to questions we have exhibits. This can include research, fieldwork, lab about the past, and in so doing, it preserves the work and presentation of the data. past. It is necessary, however, to recognize that Is this what public archaeology means to those archaeological resources are fragile and non- actively involved in doing archaeology? Until renewable, and this message must be clearly con- recently, the most readily acceptable concept of veyed to the public. In order for people to sup- public archaeology seemed to be involvement by port archaeology and take an active role in the the public in fieldwork and directly related activi- preservation of archaeological heritage, they ties and the attitude, by professionals, that it was must have some level of interest and understand- not appropriate for amateurs to be involved at all ing of what it is and means. If archaeological (Poirier and Feder 1995:3-4). While this attitude interpretation is to be accessible to the public, appears to be changing, an underlying sense of they must be provided with the tools to evaluate mistrust on the part of professionals and the pub- critically what is presented to them. In doing so, lic towards each other, particularly in relation to they develop an understanding of the relevance human remains and aboriginal material culture, is of the past to the present (Davis 1997:84-98; evinced in recent and ongoing repatriation issues Jameson 1997:12-14; Smith 1995:28). (Hammil and Cruz 1989; Harrington 1993; Use of the word public in relation to archaeol- Moore 1989; Richardson 1994). While the intrica- ogy indicates availability to all people. The pub- cies of archaeological preservation are complex and lic itself then takes several forms, including the should not be over simplified, it must be recog- local community, tourists, and students of all nized by archaeologists that the public and their ages and levels. Participation of the public in involvement can have significant impacts on the archaeology can take one of two directions, active resource. Figure 1. Active and passive public archaeology at the Naval Cottages site during Can You Dig It? 1998. Bazely The Naval Cottages and Fort Henry Garrison Hospital 35 Identified Concerns believe that in educating members of the public Serious concerns have been voiced by archaeolo- about the past, their awareness of and appreciation gists with regard to the real benefits of public for the past will be of immense benefit in the future involvement in archaeology. The primary concern (Davis 1997:85-86; Heath 1997:66; Jameson appears to be that by providing the public with too 1997:12; Knudson 1991; Poirier and Feder much knowledge, they will have both the ability 1995:4; Smardz 1997:103; Smith 1995:28). While and desire to dig up archaeological sites without developer-funded archaeology is on the rise, limit- professional involvement (Florida Anthropological ed publicly-funded projects are still conducted and Society [FAS] 1994). Is this a valid concern? The the results of such work are presented through use professional community is reacting to the possibil- of public funds. The public appetite for archaeo- ity that anyone can learn various steps in the logical information seems insatiable, illustrated by process of archaeology and successfully apply a willingness to pay taxes and museum admission them, whether their goal is personal gain or exca- fees, take courses and workshops, purchase books, vation to professional standards in the context of video tapes and other mementos (Poirier and Feder research. Perhaps this is a reflection of insecurity 1995:3-4). This enthusiasm is also reflected in within the profession. Perhaps the concerns are membership in avocational organizations. A public valid, especially where vandalism and looting of that wants to know about archaeological heritage archaeological sites have been identified as a prob- should be encouraged to learn more. A more lem (Hoffman 1997; Messenger and Smith 1994; knowledgeable public will promote a desire for Smith 1995). greater knowledge. It is the teaching of archaeological field methods This desire for more knowledge leads into a and the involvement of students under the age of consideration of the second and third beneficiar- about 12 to 14 that seem to cause the most anxiety ies of public archaeology. The resource itself, among professionals (Joe Last, personal communi- when made available to the public through well- cation 2000; Public Archaeology Facility [PAF] structured education programs and interpretive n.d.; Heath 1997:67). What messages are archae- presentations, can be better preserved. This ology educators attempting to give to people learn- response to public archaeology is promoted by ing field methods? What messages are these people people involved in cultural resource management actually getting? Members of the Society for (Davis 1997:86; Heath 1997:70-72; Hoffman American Archaeology Public Education 1997:73; Knudson 1991; Poirier and Feder Committee have found that pre-collegiate educa- 1995:4; Smardz 1997:103; Smith 1995:28). tion programs are increasingly emphasizing stew- There is, however, according to Stone (1997:24), ardship and down-playing the role of digging and no direct evidence that a greater understanding of artifacts (Messenger and Smith 1994:2). To con- archaeology by the public will ensure protection of sider fully the detrimental effects of public involve- any archaeological resources now or in the future.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Battle of Hampden and Its Aftermath
    Maine History Volume 43 Article 3 Number 1 Here Come the British! 1-1-2007 The aB ttle of aH mpden and Its Aftermath Robert Fraser Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/ mainehistoryjournal Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Fraser, Robert. “The aB ttle of aH mpden and Its Aftermath” Maine History 43, no. 1 (January 2007): 21-40. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE BATTLE OF HAMPDEN AND ITS AFTERMATH BY ROBERT FRASER The successful British attack on the Penobscot Valley in fall 1814 was to annex eastern Maine to Canada, a move taken to protect the important line of communications between Halifax and Quebec. New England merchants had opposed the War of 1812, as it destroyed their interna- tional trade, and most New Englanders tried to remain neutral during the fray. At Hampden, enemy threats brought them out to defend their homes. Although Great Britain returned the area to the United States at war’s end, the occupation of the Penobscot Valley had lasting implica- tions for the District of Maine. Between 1954 and 1984 Robert Fraser was assistant curator at the Cohasset Historical Society and a consultant to other historical societies. He writes historical articles for local newspa- pers and national magazines, and has published two books on light- houses and another on local history.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom by Reaching the Wooden World: American Slaves and the British Navy During the War of 1812
    Freedom by Reaching the Wooden World: American Slaves and the British Navy during the War of 1812. Thomas Malcomson Les noirs américains qui ont échappé à l'esclavage pendant la guerre de 1812 l'ont fait en fuyant vers les navires de la marine britannique. Les historiens ont débattu de l'origine causale au sein de cette histoire, en la plaçant soit entièrement dans les mains des esclaves fugitifs ou les Britanniques. L'historiographie a mis l'accent sur l'expérience des réfugiés dans leur lieu de réinstallation définitive. Cet article réexamine la question des causes et se concentre sur la période comprise entre le premier contact des noirs américains qui ont fuit l'esclavage et la marine britannique, et le départ définitif des ex-esclaves avec les Britanniques à la fin de la guerre. L'utilisation des anciens esclaves par les Britanniques contre les Américains en tant que guides, espions, troupes armées et marins est examinée. Les variations locales en l'interaction entre les esclaves fugitifs et les Britanniques à travers le théâtre de la guerre, de la Chesapeake à la Nouvelle-Orléans, sont mises en évidence. As HMS Victorious lay at anchor in Lynnhaven Bay, off Norfolk, in the early morning hours of 10 March 1813, a boat approached from the Chesapeake shore.1 Its occupants, nine American Black men drew the attention of the sailors in the guard boat circling the 74 gun ship. The men were runaway slaves. After a cautious inspection, the guard boat’s crew towed them to the Victorious where the nine Black men climbed up the ship’s side and entered freedom.
    [Show full text]
  • 'A Remarkable Fine Ship'
    A REMARKABLE FINE SHIP 1 ‘A REMARKABLE FINE SHIP’ SIR JAMES YEO AND THE ST. LAWRENCE First published in THE BEAVER, February-March 1992 James Lucas Yeo was the sort of Royal Navy officer who embodied the era of Nelson and Trafalgar. He joined the navy before he reached his eleventh birthday and by 1797, not long after his fourteenth birthday, he was a lieutenant. Yeo quickly proved to be a capable officer of initiative and daring. He was first lieutenant of the 46-gun Loire in June 1805 when the ship made an attack on the fortified Spanish port at Muros Bay. A harbour battery garrisoned by 250 men and armed with twelve cannon had the Loire under fire. Yeo led a shore party of fifty in a dramatic charge that carried the battery. Among the resulting prizes was the French privateer Confiance, of which Yeo was immediately given command. He was made a post-captain two years later as a result of his part in the evacuation of the Portuguese royal family to Brazil in the face of a French invasion of Portugal. His action at Muros Bay was repeated, on a larger scale, when he led an Anglo-Portuguese force of some 400 men and a few heavy guns against a strongly fortified garrison of 1,200 men with over 200 guns at Cayenne in French Guiana. The resulting expulsion of the French from South America led to James Yeo’s becoming the first Protestant awarded a knight commander’s cross of the Portuguese order of St.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT Nadine Kopp. the Influence of the War of 1812 on Great
    ABSTRACT Nadine Kopp. The Influence of the War of 1812 on Great Lakes Shipbuilding. (Under the Direction of Dr. Bradley Rodgers) Department of History, January 2012. The purpose of this thesis is to determine whether the War of 1812 influenced ship construction techniques on the Great Lakes. During the War of 1812, much of the fighting in the North American theater of war primarily took place along the Niagara frontier and later along the St. Lawrence River. From the outset, both the Americans and British realized that gaining the upper hand in the conflict depended upon control of the Great Lakes. Critical to achieving the advantage was the development of a significant and powerful inland navy, which led to a shipbuilding race on both shores. The primary question raised surrounding Great Lakes ship construction in the early nineteenth century is whether or not this large scale event, the War of 1812, permanently influenced the way in which ships were constructed once the war was over. To answer this question, this study examines diagnostic attributes of archaeologically examined wrecks from the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain from before, during and after the War of 1812 to find similarities and difference in their design and construction The three time periods have been defined as the period before the War of 1812, from the French and Indian War (1754 to 1763), when British sailing ships first appeared on the Great Lakes, up to 1811; the period of the War of 1812 itself (1812-1814); and the period after the war leading up to the opening of the Welland Canal (1829) and the widespread use of steam engines on the Great Lakes (1830s-1840s).
    [Show full text]
  • Pubuc Archives of Canada
    PUBUC ARCHIVES OF CANADA MANUSCRIPT DMSlON • • PRELIMINARY INVENTORY RECORD GROUP 8 BRITISH MlUTARY AND NAVAL RECORDS 1954 r PUBLIC ARCHIVES OF CANADA • MANUSCRIPT DIVISION PRELIMINARY INVENTORY RECORD GROUP 8 BRITISH MILITARY AND NAVAL RECORDS 1954 This preliminary inventory co"ers all the British milil.l.f"y and naval records transferred to the Public i'rchives up to January, 1954. The measurements given indicate the linC'M space occupied on the shelves. CONTENTS RECORD GROUP 8 BRITISH MILITARY AND NAVAL RECORDS PAGE IXTRODLJCTIO~ . 5 J. C. SERIES (BRITISH :\1IL1T.-\RY RECORDS) A. Correspondence of the :\Iilitary Secretary of the Commander of the Forces. 1767-1870 7 B. Records of the Canadian Command, 1785-1883... 12 C. Records of the ;\ova Scotia Command, 1762-1899. 14 D. :\Iiscellaneous Records, 1757-1896 _.... 18 E. :\Iissing and Transferred \·olumes................ 20 11. OROX.\NCE RECORDS . 21 Ill. AD:\IIR.-\LTY RECORDS A. .'\dmiralty Lake Service Records, 1814-1833. 23 B. Admiralty P3cific Station Records, 1858-1903.... 25 INDEX . 27 3 97308-2 INTRODUCTION From 1759 until 1871 the defence of Canada was primarily the responsibility of British military and IIJ,val forces. However. in ISil Britain decided to recall most of her troops st'ltioned in Canada and left only a garrison at Ilalifax for the protection of the naval station. A similar garrison was later sent to Esquimalt. Early in the twentieth century increasing tension in Europe led Britain to concentrate a larger proportion of the Royal Navy in home waters. As a result the garrisons at Halifax and Esquimalt were recalled.
    [Show full text]
  • Captain Barrie
    The Captain, The Needles and the lighthouses Captain Barrie Robert Barrie 1774-1841 was born in Florida, USA on 5 May 1774. He was the son of Dr Robert Barrie, a Scottish surgeon’s mate. His father died when Barrie was an infant. His mother was Dorothea ‘Dolly’ Gardner, the sister of Admiral Lord Gardner. Barrie first saw active service aged 14 on board HMS Goliath in 1788. In 1795 Barrie was made Lieutenant and he joined HMS Queen in the Channel fleet. He was promoted to captain in 1802 and was appointed to HMS Pomone on 10 May 1806. In December 1806 Pomone was sailing from Portsmouth harbour as a terrible storm broke out. The men were on deck and in the rigging, trying to keep the ship stable in the rough conditions. Suddenly a freak bolt of lightning hit the ship. Barrie describes the accident in a letter to his step-brother: - "the Pomone was obliged to return to Spithead having sprung her Bowsprit off Portland - we were struck by lightning and twenty-two men were knocked down by it. However, they will all I trust recover except two Portsmouth Harbour, with the Haslar which are very doubtful cases - the weather Hospital in the distance. 1791 Thomas Rowlandson (1756-1827) was extremely bad and we had one of our best © Isle of Wight Council IWCMS.2002.171 men washed overboard". The members of Barrie’s crew were mostly new recruits, and this incident did not help him in the task of maintaining discipline on-board. When they got back into Spithead five of his men stole a boat; they reached the shore but were promptly captured.
    [Show full text]
  • Friday, October 29, 2010
    Britain and America Go toVVar The Impact of War and Warfare in Anglo-America, 1754-1815 Edited by Julie Flavell and Stephen Conway University Press of Florida GainesvillerrallahasseerrampalBoca Raton Pensacola/Orlando/MiamilJacksonvillelFt. Myers , -I 7 A "Species of Milito-Nautico-Guerilla­ Plundering Warfare" Admiral Alexander Cochrane's Naval Campaign against the United States, 1814-1815 c. J. Bartlett and Gene A. Smith The Anglo-American War of 1812 served as an embarrassing and unwel­ come diversion for a British government struggling for survival against Revolutionary France and Napoleon. The ongoing contest on the European continent, which had time and again stretched Britain's resources to the limit, during the summer of 1812 expanded into a troublesome conflict against the United States that left British policymakers facing a serious di­ lemma. Britain would have to continue operations against France, as well as defend Canada, protect British shipping from American warships and pri­ vateers, blockade the American coast to destroy commerce and hinder American naval operations, and aggressively take the transatlantic war to the shores of the upstart republic. These strategic objectives would tax a nation already reeling from the continued war with France and ultimately force military and naval officers to use innovative and aggressive unlimited warfare, or what Americans would term extreme and barbaric warfare, to achieve their objectives. And not surprisingly, both sides would vividly re­ member for years to come the "horrible species of warfare" that had been perpetrated during the conflict. 1 Admiral Alexander Cochrane's role in the second war against America, not only his campaign but also the reasons behind his appointment as naval commander in chief, encapsulates the attitude of Britain as it went to war against the American Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Engagements of the Revolutionary and 1812 Wars in Maryland
    NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD PROTECTION PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT NO. GA‐2255‐09‐015 NAVAL ENGAGEMENTS OF THE REVOLUTIONARY AND 1812 WARS IN MARYLAND BY MARYLAND MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY PROGRAM MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST AND NEW SOUTH ASSOCIATES, INC. FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT VOLUME I – TEXT SEPTEMBER 2013 For future copies: Kristen L. McMasters Government Technical Representative DOI – National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program 1201 Eye Street NW (2255) 6th floor Washington, DC 20005 This material is based upon work assisted by a grant from the Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Maryland Maritime Archaeology Program (MMAP) wishes to express its appreciation to the American Battlefield Protection Program, especially Kristen McMasters and Paul Hawke, for their guidance, advice and patience as we worked through unfamiliar bureaucratic processes, vast geographic areas, changes in staff, equipment failures, and inclement weather. Evie Cohen, the Maryland Historical Trust’s Chief, Operations Management/Grants Manager, managed all the finances for the project and ensured that fiscal reports were completed and submitted on time; a daunting task for which we are eternally grateful. We would also like to thank former MMAP staff member Brian Jordan for his efforts, early in the project, in crafting and submitting the various work plans requiring approval to begin fieldwork. Like many agencies, MMAP is understaffed and has been operating with only 2/3 of the required personnel. Therefore, the assistance provided by the large number of volunteers, many of them loyal supporters for years, is more than gratefully received, it is critical to the undertaking and completion of most projects.
    [Show full text]
  • H.M.S Pomone - the Ship and Her Sinking
    H.M.S Pomone - The ship and her sinking HMS Pomone was launched 17 January 1805, the year of the Battle of Trafalgar. Based on a French design, she was a Royal Navy, Leda class 38-gun frigate, carrying a crew of 284. Built at Chatham Dockyard in Kent, Pomone was placed under the command of Captain William Lobb for service in the English Channel. Under his command she seized smuggling and privateer vessels. Pomone had considerable firepower, carrying 10 nine-pounder guns, 28 eighteen-pounder guns, 14 thirty-two-pounder guns, 2 thirty-two pounder carronades Robert Barrie 1774-1841 was appointed captain of HMS Pomone on 10 May 1806. Napoleon’s brother In August 1810 HMS Pomone captured an American-bound ship that was carrying Lucien Buonaparte (Napoleon’s brother) and his family. Barrie described the incident in a letter to his half-sister Fanny: - "At first Lucien was very angry at being made a prisoner-of-war but by degrees he became reconciled and we are now very great friends… " Barrie refused to claim any of Lucien’s treasure which he considered to be private property. Lucien remarked: "We could not have been better treated by the captain of this frigate". On his departure from the ship Lucien ordered a cash gift to be distributed amongst Barrie’s men. The crew honourably refused. The petty officers returned the money saying they did not make war upon private individuals, especially women and children, but if Lucien cared to give the men a glass of grog each, they would have no objection to drinking his, and his family’s, health.
    [Show full text]
  • The Naval War of 1812: a Documentary History
    The Naval War of 1812: A Documentary History Volume III 1814–1815 Chesapeake Bay, Northern Lakes, and Pacific Ocean Part 1 of 7 Naval Historical Center Department of the Navy Washington, 2002 Electronically published by American Naval Records Society Bolton Landing, New York 2011 AS A WORK OF THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THIS PUBLICATION IS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. .Mi~·/I'-~. A Documentary History ~ THE NAVAL WAR OF 1812 sxtq)~~ THE NAVAL WAR OF 1812 dq)~~ Volume III 1814-1815 Chesapeake Bay, Northern Lakes, and Pacific Ocean MICHAEL J. CRAWFORD Editor CHRISTINE F. HUGHES Associate Editor CHARLES E. BRODINE,jR. CAROLYN M. STALLINGS Assistant Editors With a Foreword by WILLIAM S. DUDLEY Director of Naval History and Series Editor NAVAL HISTORICAL CENTER DEPARTMENT OF THE NAW WASHINGTON, D.C. 2002 SECRETARY OF THE NAWS ADVISORY Foreword SUBCOMMITTEE ON NAVAL HISTORY The history of the United States Navy during the years 1814 and 1815 illus­ Dr. David Alan Rosenberg (Chair) trates many of the principles-tactical, strategic, and logistical-of naval war­ Commander Wesley A. Brown, CEC, USN (Ret.) fare. Perhaps the most valuable principle that the naval history of those years underscores, however, is moral: the value of perseverance. Dr. Frank G. Burke During the final year and some months of the war, the nation reached the limits of its naval resources. The treasury was empty and the nation's credit Vice Admiral Robert F. Dunn, USN (Ret.) strained to the breaking point. Ships of the line of the largest class were rising Vice Admiral George W. Emery, USN (Ret.) on shipways on the shores of Lake Ontario, even though the shipwrights went unpaid, and even though there was serious doubt that they could be manned.
    [Show full text]
  • War of 1812-14', Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements of the MA in Maritime History of the University of Greenwich, October 2002
    Greenwich Academic Literature Archive (GALA) – the University of Greenwich open access repository http://gala.gre.ac.uk __________________________________________________________________________________________ Citation: Arthur, Brian (2009) The Royal Navy and economic warfare in North America, 1812-1815. PhD thesis, University of Greenwich. __________________________________________________________________________________________ Please note that the full text version provided on GALA is the final published version awarded by the university. “I certify that this work has not been accepted in substance for any degree, and is not concurrently being submitted for any degree other than that of (name of research degree) being studied at the University of Greenwich. I also declare that this work is the result of my own investigations except where otherwise identified by references and that I have not plagiarised the work of others”. Arthur, Brian (2009) The Royal Navy and economic warfare in North America, 1812-1815. ##thesis _type## , ##institution## Available at: http://gala.gre.ac.uk/5708/ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Contact: [email protected] LIBRARY FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY University of Greenwich Greenwich Maritime Institute Dissertation submitted towards the degree of Ph D in Maritime History The Royal Navy and Economic Warfare in North America, 1812-1815 Brian Arthur Parti February 2009 DECLARATION I hereby declare that this work has not been previously accepted in substance for any degree, and is not being concurrently submitted by another candidate for any degree. I further declare that this dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Ph D in Maritime History of the Greenwich Maritime Institute of the University of Greenwich. I also declare that this work is result of my own independent work except where otherwise stated, and that I have not plagiarised another's work.
    [Show full text]
  • Provincial Marine to Royal Navy: Archaeological Evidence of the War of 1812 at Kingston’S Naval Dockyard Susan M
    Northeast Historical Archaeology Volume 44 Special Issue: War of 1812 Article 3 2015 Provincial Marine to Royal Navy: Archaeological Evidence of the War of 1812 at Kingston’s Naval Dockyard Susan M. Bazely Follow this and additional works at: https://orb.binghamton.edu/neha Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Bazely, Susan M. (2015) "Provincial Marine to Royal Navy: Archaeological Evidence of the War of 1812 at Kingston’s Naval Dockyard," Northeast Historical Archaeology: Vol. 44 44, Article 3. Available at: https://orb.binghamton.edu/neha/vol44/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). It has been accepted for inclusion in Northeast Historical Archaeology by an authorized editor of The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). For more information, please contact [email protected]. Northeast Historical Archaeology/Vol. 44, 2015 35 Provincial Marine to Royal Navy: Archaeological Evidence of the War of 1812 at Kingston’s Naval Dockyard Susan M. Bazely The naval dockyard at Kingston, established in the 1790s, was arguably the most important physical representation of the War of 1812 in Upper Canada. Its evolution of structures and facilities, the people who worked and lived in and around it, and the material remains they left behind are symbolic of the war effort within the community of Kingston. Prior to, during, and immediately after the war, the peninsula of Point Frederick, on which the dockyard was situated, became a thriving “village” populated by hundreds of people. Although historical research on the dockyard has been conducted throughout much of the 20th century and to the present, archaeological investigations were first carried out on the point in 1995.
    [Show full text]