sign in sign up
<<
Home , Fort San Domingo, Rifling

An Excavation on Fort Santo Domingo: A Case Study on Historical Archaeology of

Lu Tai Lung Department of Anthropology National Taiwan University [email protected]

Abstract

Historical archaeology has been regarded as one of the branches of archaeology that has gradually attracted attention the world over since the mid-20 th century. Because of its unique geographical, historical, and cultural conditions, Taiwan plays a significant role in historical archaeology. Taiwan is located at the southeast of mainland China. As a strategic portal of the ocean Silk Road since the ancient times, Taiwan has played an important role in linking Southeast Asia to East Asia in terms of social and cultural interaction. As revealed by studies, indigenous people currently settling in Taiwan arrived from other areas by batches or via other areas at different prehistoric periods. However, particularly since the 17 th century, Taiwan has been colonized or occupied by different outsiders at different periods. The discovery and colonization of Taiwan by Europe in the early 17 th century not only changed the fate of the whole country, but also influenced various ethnic groups on the island as well. Historical archaeologists have begun to examine the role and importance of Taiwan in the ocean trading network during the Age of Sail from the macroscopic perspective as a means to explore relevant study topics or to concentrate on the interaction between colonists and indigenous nationalities or other clans, or to probe into the competition and conflict between different colonists. Based on relics unearthed from an archaeological excavation at Fort Santo Domingo in 2007, this paper will explain the value and significance of special historical events and historical archaeology in Taiwan on modern historical archaeology, particularly, through the study method of historic archaeology. By possibly identifying the date of the cannonball unearthed from the relics using comparative analysis of its shape, materials, and ingredients, we will demonstrate its possible origin by combining the data with those from historical literature. Consequently, we will rebuild historical events through Geographic Information System (GIS) techniques in order to understand and acquire events that are missing or unrecorded in history, and provide due recognition to the historical event as a way to further contribute to world history.

1 Hung Mou Cheng Site(i.e., Fort Santo Domingo Site) The Hong Mou Cheng Site is geographically located at a tableland downstream of the Tamshui River and at the north bank of a plain estuary. The tableland has a base course made of the lava stream that erupted from Datun Volcano and a volcaniclastic rock of cemented clastic lava. It is mostly covered by a layer of red earth, that is, weathered tuff breccia of different thickness. The site is inside Tamshui Historic Site, Taipei County, and has vast scenery, such that the view spans from the south bank of Tamshui River, the sea port, and upstream Kwan-tu. Based on available archaeological data, the people have settled on the site and its neighboring areas beginning the prehistoric stage. As revealed by the feature of archaeological relics unearthed from the surface survey and archaeological excavation (e.g., brown sand-inclusive potsherd with rope pattern, gray-white clay pottery, and pottery with geometric patterns), the relics belong to people and culture from different periods. The earliest probably belong to the middle of Neolithic Age, that is, 3500~4500 years ago. In 1628, Spanish colonists drove away indigenous Senar settlements, built military fortress and fortifications in their communities, and named it “Fort Santo Domingo.” This fortress was built mainly using timber. wooden piles were driven deeply into the ground and reinforced by the spreading earth and Figure 1. Hong Mou Cheng Site rocks at the bottom. sket ch Finally, wooden piles were observed as connected in circles to build the fortress. Houses in the fortress were all built with timber and covered by grass on the roof. The fortress was once burned down by the indigenous people in 1636; it was then rebuilt with rocks. When the fortress was almost completed in 1638, the Spanish governor based on the Philippine Islands, south of Taiwan, ordered the city destroyed and the army withdrawn (Li Yuzhong, 2005:160). By 1642, when the Dutch replaced the Spanish colonizers, they rebuilt the fortress and renamed it Fort Antonio. After Zheng Chenggong(i.e. ) defeated the Dutch colonizers in 1661, his group occupied Fort Antonio. During the Qing Dynasty, the government leased the fortress to England, being its consulate, in 1867. In the succeeding years, from 1868 to 1877, the British people regarded the fort as a consulate office and built a one-story building to its east for the consulate’s mansion. The mansion was augmented into a two-story building from 1889 to 1891. Consequently, after Taiwan was ceded to Japan in 1895, the area continued to serve as a British settlement. After England

2 eventually withdrew the consulate, Fort Antonio was subsequently entrusted for management to the Australian and the US embassies. The fort’s ownership was later handed over to Taiwan authority in 1980. In the recent years, the fort went through a series of renovation, first from 1982 to 1984, then from 2004 to 2005 (Xue Qin, 2005).

Based on the above brief description of the Hung Mou Cheng, we can then clearly understand the basis of the complicated and rich diversity of historical and cultural development of the site, also known as the Tamshui area. Based on evidence of historical and cultural development, this site is therefore a fairly good choice for historic archaeologists. As to relevant study topics or orientations, we could examine the role and importance of Taiwan in the ocean trading network since the Age of Sail, or explore the similarity and difference between Taiwan and the colonial past in the study of the world colonization. Similarly, we can focus on the interaction between colonists and indigenous nationalities or other clans of the abovementioned period, or probe into the conflict between different colonists resulting from trading activities at that time.

Archaeological excavation In January 2007, authorities of the Tamshui Historic Site in Taipei County entrusted Dr. Chen Yubei from the Department of Anthropology, National Taiwan University, with carrying out plans for archaeological excavation. The main purpose was to find the reasons behind the four round sunken pits, which became noticeable in 2006, at the slope in front of the former British consulate. Meanwhile, they also sought to find cultural layers, deposits, and cultural connotation that can be gathered through the archaeological excavation, and as a means to have clearer understanding on the historical and cultural development of the site. Similarly, results from the excavation will be used as reference for subsequent assessment of site preservation and maintenance.

The excavated area totals 26m 2, including a 4m x 4m pit and two 1m x 5m trenches. As revealed by the archaeological result, the stratum where the sunken pit was located had been disturbed before. Archaeological relics meshed with modern items like bricks, rocks, plastic bags, plastic pipes, beer cans, drink cans, waste wood, construction materials, and other materials. A few historical relics were found, albeit neither completely preserved nor broken, like blue and white porcelain, hard porcelain, Anping pot, and some stamped pottery and sand-inclusive potsherd. The last two items could be a product of the Iron Age Culture during the last prehistoric period in north Taiwan, possibly about 400 years ago. A few ecological residues were also found, such as the teeth of deer (mammals), animal bones, shells, among others, as well as a solid iron ball. Except for the last item (solid iron ball) that has undisturbed raw soil strata, the other relics all have a disturbed strata (Chen Youbei, Lu Tai Lung 2007a, 2007).

The archaeological excavation offered an answer for the four round sunken pits. More important, it led to a better understanding and recognition of the distribution and connotation of the cultural layers at the site. Based on the archaeological findings and relics unearthed from the pit and trenches, it is believed that four round pits were possibly directly and closely related with the last renovation of the Tamshui Historic Site (i.e., from 2004 to 2005) (Yang 2005:171). First, we know that unearthed relics from the sunken pit are mostly from the modern times (e.g., bricks,

3 stones, plastic bags, plastic pipes, beer cans, drink can, waste wood, and construction materials). The form of waste wood and construction materials is exactly the same as the window frame of the British consulate today, and the type and color of bricks are exactly the same as the bricks in front of the existing building. Second, the date on the beer and drink cans show that they have been manufactured in 1995 and 1994 (i.e., 940816), respectively. Based on the above materials and dates, we could then roughly understand the reason and process on the formation of the pits. That is, during the renovation of the Tamshui Ancient Relic Park from 2004 to 2005, especially when approaching the end of the renovation, workers dumped waste construction materials into four pits that have already been dug in advance and then backfilled. There were plenty of construction materials that could not be packed tightly. The backfilled ground, which seemed leveled, had many crevices in the strata; it would sink gradually due to sunshine, rainwater erosion, gravity, and other natural forces, and thus form pits. This archaeological excavation plan gave the reason and process of the pit formation. More important, it provided a good example on the formation of the site of ancient ruins, as attested by the archaeological study. The place where the ancient ruins were located has been classified as Level I Ancient Ruins. The result of archaeological excavation highlighted the problems of relevant authorities in repairing, managing, and maintaining cultural assets.

Through this archaeological excavation, we could then understand clearly the formation of four pits and the reasons behind its formation. Meanwhile, we can judge from the strata section and unearthed relics that the stratum of relics had already been disturbed by human activities in the contemporary period. The undisturbed cultural layer may likewise appear in the other northern parts of the site. We also know that the authority had been negligent in the supervision or management during renovation of cultural assets. This plan thus recommends that the authority be more careful and prudent with any renovation or maintenance of ancient ruins by strengthening its supervision and management of construction and subsequent maintenance.

On this note, we then transfer our focus onto the solid iron ball, the only relic found from the undisturbed stratum during this excavation.

Solid iron ball This iron ball came from L8 layer of the second trench. The surface was discovered with accreting materials. It is round and weighs 752.5g, and with a diameter of 6cm. After treatment, it has a diameter of 5.7cm and weighs 698g. The iron ball is round, solid, and made of cast iron; its surface is corroded. This was the first time that we found such relic for the archaeological study of Taiwan. In the past, most of the unearthed archaeological relics belong to the metal age, that is, from about 2000 to 400 years ago. The possibility that the iron ball belongs to the metal age can be Figure 2. after treatment 4 preliminarily excluded based on the shape, layer of unearthing, and position of relics.

In contrast, the possibility of it belonging to the Historical period is more probable for the following reasons: The iron ball has the greatest semblance with the cannonball. The in the historical period could be traced back to the North Song Dynasty (A.D 960~A.D 1127). The firearm had the major shapes of a fireball and a fire arrow. The hard outer shell of the fireball was made by gluing many layers of paper with inside, and could be catapulted against the enemy by trebuchet. As to the fire arrows, they were attached with a gunpowder packet glued by paper, and could be shot against the enemy by bow or cross-bow. The aim of the above two weapons was to burn down the enemy’s supplies, or kill and wound the enemy’s soldiers and horses. The fireball was further modified during the South Song Dynasty. The outer shell was changed to iron and referred to as an “iron fire ball” or “lightning bomb.” The fireball invented at the late period of South Song Dynasty included a barrel, gunpowder, and (made of pottery), that is, an embryonic form of the modern cannon (Wang Zhaochun, 2007).

Figure 3. Eighteenth century . Source: Manucy (2001 Figure 41).

During the 17 th and 18 th centuries, China made great progress in the manufacturing technique and the development of types of with the introduction of Western cannons. The types of cannon shells did not change much over the years, and were mainly composed of solid and sound iron shells, silver shells, stone balls, and empty explosive bombs and firebombs. Take the case of the Ming and Qing dynasties wherein the cannon was normally casted by copper and iron, and added with several stirrups to increase compressive resistance. Cannon shells were mainly composed of lead shells, iron shells, and explosive bombs. As revealed by studies, the solid shells fired by the Qing army during the Opium War (1839~1842) could be classified into four types: stone, cast iron, lead wrapped by copper, and wrought iron. The Qing army used cast

5 iron to manufacture cannon shells in the early period. At that time, the cannon shell was made by two semi-spherical molds with the mold-closing line left in the middle, but was later changed into wrought iron. The British army also used wrought iron instead of cast iron in their manufacture of cannon shells, especially since the wrought iron was easy to process and the surface of the cannon shell was smooth (Liu Hongliang 2006: 32~35, Liu Hongliang, Sun Shuyun 2007: 64~67).

Meanwhile, in Europe, the technique of gunpowder was introduced in the West along with the expedition to the Mongolian Empire during the 13 th and 14 th centuries. The manufacture of cannon thus experienced great improvements. , cannon, and serpentine were developed to attack cities. They were likewise adopted by various ships that ventured into various colonizing activities and ocean trading. As to cannon shells, the earliest shells used by Europe were “stone and iron” shells based on this material specification: solid iron, burning, chain, lever, explosive, grape, and to accommodate the cannon shells’ form and purpose. Cast irons were formed into solid and round shells by molds. Generally speaking, early stone shells were subsequently replaced by iron shells alongside the improvement and development of manufacturing cannons and gunpowder. The earliest cast iron shell appeared in the 15 th century and was mainly used for breech (like folangi) and shotguns. Breech or not, the fired shells had the feature of being “iron-made, solid, and round, and formed through die-casting.” The solid iron shells were used until the 1850s. With the use of conical shells and the advent of design in the conical shells, the shape of cannons and shells was then changed to replace the traditional round cannon shells, which are featured with loading at the front and without rifling. With this explanation, and based on the development history of cannon in China and the West, it is evident that the manufacturing year of the solid cast iron shell may not be later than the 1850s (Manucy 2001:63-64).

In addition to the short introduction and illustration of cannons in China and the West, as well as their development, we can preliminarily affix the high possibility that this iron ball, which is round and solid, and used as an iron cannon shell, belong from the 16 th to the 19 th century, as evident in its shape and size. We likewise examined the material specification and mode of manufacture of the cannon shell. We know that the cast iron mainly comprises iron with 2%~4% carbon. To understand the ingredients of the unearthed iron ball and its difference between that of early cannon shells, as recorded in the historical literature, X-ray fluorescent analysis was used to detect the iron ball’s materials during the study. Results indicate that its major ingredient is Fe (Fe: 99.3% and Cu: 0.7%). X-ray fluorescent analysis likewise detected the surface of the iron ball non-destructively. Since the surface of the iron ball was already oxidized, it was impossible to accurately detect its internal ingredients, and as such, the data measured were possibly only about ingredients of the surface oxide. Hence, this study aimed to make further ingredient analysis on the iron ball in a destructive analysis, but failed to do so due to statutory and administrative constraints.

6

Figure 4. X-Ray Fluorescent Analysis.

At present, most studies on the ingredient and manufacturing technique of cannons and shells are based on studies of historical literature; in contrast, studies based on unearthed relics through archaeological excavation are fewer. Although the inspection result cannot indicate the ingredients of the early cast iron shells, the author will continue to contact pertinent authorities to allow further study of this iron ball on the basis of academic study, as well as to understand the ingredients of the early cannon shells.

Origin of cannon shell We have mentioned the importance and uniqueness of the Hung Mou Cheng site—the place of the unearthed cannon shell—in the historical and cultural development of Taiwan, primarily due to its historical background. It is unique because it had been used by various regimes as a defensive fort during different periods for nearly 300 years, which stretch from the early 17 th to the end of the 19 th century. Thus, it would not be easy to determine to which period this cast iron ball belongs. For one, the form of solid cast iron shell had not manifested any distinct changes throughout centuries. Moreover, regimes that once occupied the Hung Mou Cheng Site had all built cannons and stores for cannon shells. Hence, it is difficult to find out the origin of the unearthed cannon shell. Nevertheless, the author would still attempt to gain clues from the archaeological excavation based on available data on the origin of the cannon shell.

7

Figure 5. Sea shore map between (left) and Tamshui (right) drawn by Jan Gerbrantsz. Black (1629).

First, based on archaeological clues, the unearthed cannon shell was found at the slope of the middle part of the site facing the estuary of the Tamshui River, a place where there was no apparent store or cellar for gunpowder and cannon shells (Hellebrand 2005:35). Moreover, the cannon shell was unearthed from the raw soil layer instead of the cultural layer; thus, we cannot exclude the possibility that people accidentally left it there. For these reasons, we can infer that this cannon shell possibly came from other places. In the early 17 th century, the Dutch people had a reconnaissance on Tamshui. This event could possibly be taken as a clue to finding the origin of the cannon shell.

In August 1629, the Dutch fleet sailed northwards along the west coast of Taiwan from Tainan, with the mission of spying on the northern fortress of the Spanish colonizers (Keelung and Tamshui) and China’s coast (Borad 2001:139, Chen 2000)(Figure 4). The Dutch staged a cannon fight with the Spanish armies during its reconnaissance on August 15. Based on Spanish literature, “Soon after the Spanish people deployed their cannons in the Fort Santo Domingo, several Dutch ships appeared on Tamshui River. The arrogant Dutch fleet shot the square of Fort Santo Domingo with cannons” (Li Yuzhong 2006: 42-43). On the same note, the Dutch people also mentioned: “The Spanish fleet fired against us and we chased them with a fast boat. When we approached one bay, they fired at us with the onshore cannons for four times” (Borad 2001:140) and “we defended the firing from the Spanish fleet and onshore cannons from the fast boat” (Borad 2001:140). Although the record did not mention clearly that the Dutch fired the cannon shells to the Spanish fleet or via onshore fortress, we can reasonably surmise from the above description that the Dutch had to defend themselves from the firing from the Spanish fleet, thus a fight ensued using available onshore cannons.

8 In this battle, the Dutch fleet comprised mainly of Domburch and Junk, and several single-mast boats. Since the wanted to protect its ocean trading, its commercial fleet was often equipped with cannons to defend themselves against the Spanish, Portuguese, and other pirates (J.B. Kist 1988: 101-102, Chen Guodong 2003:128-130). Meanwhile, the Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oost- Indische Compagnie, abbreviated as VOC) was known to keep a detailed record of their crew and cargoes on each vessel (J.B. Kist 1988:101- 102); yet, the author has not found any similar data to date, hence, has Figure 6. Yatch Domburch. (Figure 4 enlarged) no idea about the type and quantity of cannons installed on the Dutch fleet.

Batavia, a big vessel, was installed with at least 30 copper or iron cannons of different sizes (Jeremy N. Green 1980:46) and the Dutch sunken ship was also found to have cannon shells (diameter: 4.8cm and weight: one pound) and cannons (McBride, P., Larn, R and Davis, R: 1975: 246~248). Based on above data from underwater archaeology and information provided by the image of Domburch yacht, as drawn by Jan Gerbrantsz. Black , we can confirm that the vessel was indeed installed with cannons. As we can see in Fig. 5, Domburch had several gunports near the shipboard at the lower deck.

In the 17 th century, to protect the ocean trading and the safety of cargo and staff, European states would equip their fleet with long-barrel cannons of different sizes that are made of different materials. Cannons were at the lower deck or shipboard. Meanwhile, cannons that were installed at the shipboard were generally called swivel , and are featured with small apertures and lugs at the two sides of the cannon body. For its main feature, the cannon plug was Y-pinned, its upper part engaged into the lug at the two sides of the cannon, and the lower part penetrated into the foundation. The cannon had an iron rod or empty iron cylinder (i.e., the tail hole). The cylinder could be inserted with a wooden stick to control the direction of the cannon. Folangi, a Western cannon initially introduced by the Portuguese, belonged to this type of cannon, as well as from Southeast Asia. In the early period, these types of cannons could be deployed near the city wall or wooden racks during land battles. They were mostly put on the shipboard (rail gun) when deployed onto vessels. Hence, Domburch had probably swivel guns, apart from the cannons, installed on the lower deck.

The author attempted to find out the possible scope of the Dutch fleet, especially since Domburch might have been attacked by a Spanish cannon during the battle between the Dutch and Spanish armies (1629). This was conducted using a GIS and backed up by historical literature.

9

Figure 7. Sea shore map between Keelung(left) and Tamshui(right) draw by Jan Gerbrantsz. Black(1629).

Past literature has recorded that the Dutch fleet was attacked by cannons deployed by the Spanish armies from Fort Santo Domingo and onshore fortress. The Dutch vessels were damaged after the cannon attacks; several sailors were injured and the ship was grounded. As mentioned, “They hit the fast boat for several times and caused serous damages. The sail repairer Junk Slooten was dead; merchant Adrijaen van der Wel and the pilot of Junk boat lost one leg respectively. Our carpenter got his knee crashed… It was too late. Our ship was grounded at three feet water at the falling tide and fell into the firing range of the enemy’s cannon.” (Borad 2001:140). This description implies that the Dutch fleet, especially Domburch, was within the firing range of the Spanish cannons when it was attacked and grounded. At that time, Spain’s Fort Santo Domingo had one 1/3 long-barrel cannons that fired 15-pound shells, one long-barrel cannon that fired eight-pound shells, two sacre cannons that fired eight-pound shells, two 1/2 sacre cannons that fired eight-pound shells, and one falcon cannon that fired 12-pound stone balls. (Li Yuzhong, 173, 211). The study indicates that the Spanish cannons from the 16 th century could reach 1742 yards, except for Culebrina (Media culebrina: 833 yards; Media sacre: 417 yards; and Falcon: 417 yards) (Manucy 2001). Figure 7 shows the possible scope of the Dutch fleet attack resulting from Spanish cannons, as based on the above firing range of Spanish cannons and the GIS technique.

10 On a similar note, this paper illustrates and explores one of possibly many ocean clashes between the Dutch and Spanish colonists in the Tamshui region, which have resulted from ocean trading competition during the early 17 th century. These are based on the study of the unearthed cannon shell, which was conducted through archaeological excavation, in combination with historical literature and the GIS technique.

Conclusion This paper explores the age and possible origin of an unearthed cannon shell based on the archaeological excavation data and related literature. It likewise demonstrates, by deploying the GIS technique, the possible range of areas at which the Dutch fleet was attacked during the Dutch- Spanish ocean battle. However, the author has encountered difficulties in collecting historical literature on the Dutch East India Company. There were also limited studies on historic archaeology on European colonists during historic periods, especially on cannons or fleets found in Taiwan. Thus, this paper is only a trial study by the author on historic archaeology in Taiwan, following clues from an archaeological discovery and related historical literature, to compensate for the limited data available. The author hopes that further studies can be carried out in the future based on these limitations.

References

Alvarez, José María ¡

2006 1930 ¢Spanish in Taiwan(1626-1642). Fabio Lee, Yu-chung and Wu, Meng-cheng, trans.

Nantou: Taiwan Hisrorica. Borad, J. E. 2001 Spaniards in Taiwan Vol.1. Taipei: SMC Publishing Inc. Chen, Kuo-tung 2003 “Dutch History in seventeen century and Taiwan of Dutch Colony Period”. Taiwan Historica 54(3):107-138. Nantou: Taiwan Historic. Cheng, Yu-Pei. and Lu, Tai-lung 2007a “Preliminary Report of the Excavation of the At Tamshui”, International Conference of Archaeology around Greater Taiwan Area and Annual Meeting of Taiwan Archaeology 2007”. Taipei: Department of Anthropology NTU. 2007b Final Report – Archaeological Test Excavation Project on the depressed area at Tamshui Hung Mou Cheng. Archaeological Excavation Project. Department of Anthropology, NTU

Chen, Shao-kan trans Report of the East India Service ¡

2000 1619~1678 ¢Dutch in Hermosa. . Taipei: Linking Publishing Inc.

Hellebrand, Walter 2005 “Fighting for Profit—The Dutch East India Company`s 17 th Century Fortifications and Fort Anthonio in Tamshui”. Fort San Domingo Conference :21-40. Taipei: Tamshui Historic Site.

11 Kist, J.B. 1998 “The Dutch East India Company`s ship`s armament in the 17 th and 18 th centuries: an overview. The international Journal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration 17(1)101-102. Liu, Hong liang 2006 “Performance Differences of Chinese and British Cannons during the First Opium War”.

Studies in Qing History 3 £31-42.

Liu, Hong liang, Sun, Shu-yun 2007 “The Contrast between Chinese and British Cannons’ Shells during the First Opium War”.

Journal of Dialectics of Nature 169 £63-68.

Manucy, Albert 2001 Through The Ages: A Short Illustrated History of Cannon, Emphasizing Types Used in America. Honolulu: University Press of the Pacific. McBride, P., Larn, R. and Davis, R. 1975 “A mid-17 th century merchant ship found near Mullion Cove 3 rd interim report on the Santo Christo de Castello ,1667”. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration 4(2):237-252. Syue, Cin 2005 “The Restoration of Fort San Doming in 1980”. Fort San Domingo Conference :171-188. Taipei: Tamshui Historic Site. Wang, Chao-Chung 2007 History of the World . Pei-Ging: Military Science publishing. Yang, J. C. 2005 “Discoveries under the Restoration of Fort San Doming”. Fort San Domingo Conference :171-188. Taipei: Tamshui Historic Site.

12