weik (2009) - florida - african-native american

8/13/2019 Weik (2009) - FLORIDA - African-native American.

1/33

The Role of Ethnogenesis and Organization

in the Development of African-Native AmericanSettlements: an African Seminole Model

Terrance M. Weik

Published online: 18 April 2009

# Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2009

Abstract Archaeological research on a nineteenth-century settlement called Pilaklikaha

addresses gaps in the theory of African-Native American everyday life, community

composition, and social relations. By integrating analyses of human organization and

cultural transformation, it is possible to construct dynamic sociocultural scenarios for

African Seminole settlements that existed in what became Florida. In this region,

residents and visitors encountered diverse world views that originated in Africa and the

Americas. African Seminole cultural beliefs and practices were the product of both newly

created and ancestral traditions. The ways that these beliefs were practiced affected a

broad range of exchanges in the spheres of kinship, spirituality, ceremonialism, politics,

economics and anti-slavery resistance. Within these realms, people of African and Native

American descent recognized the importance of autonomy, cooperation, and alliance.

Keywords Ethnogenesis . Maroons . Transformation . African-Native Americans

Introduction

The manner by which settlements are established, perpetuated, and changed is a

central issue in history and anthropology. In the case of eighteenth- and nineteenth-

century African Seminole communities in Florida, this issue is complicated by the need

for reconciliation of views that emphasize social organization and ethnogenesis. A

more balanced theory of African Seminole sociocultural development is possible when

we consider both regional transformations and local attempts to create stability and

order. The heavy emphasis on cultural change in recent studies of Maroons and Native

Americans has created gaps in the discourse regarding the perpetuation of these

societies. These issues are addressed through archaeological analyses of socioculturalorganization, transformation, and interaction related to a settlement called Pilaklikaha

Int J Histor Archaeol (2009) 13:206238

DOI 10.1007/s10761-009-0079-9

T. M. Weik (*)

Department of Anthropology, University of South Carolina, 317 Hamilton Hall, Columbia, SC 29208,

USA

e-mail: [email protected]


2/33

(18131836). Military and government records, maps, and travelersaccounts provide

glimpses of these cultural processes and their manifestations in the realms of

demography, political economy, kinship, and spirituality (Carter 1962; Williams

1962). By examining ethnography and material culture, undocumented beliefs and

practices receive some of the attention that they deserve in explanations of AfricanSeminole societies.

African Seminole (otherwise known as Black Seminole or Seminole

Maroon) is used in this article for a number of reasons. There are and were

tangible aspects of both African and Native American heritage in African Seminole

populations. African Seminole individuals such as a man called John Horse had both

African and Native American ancestry. African Seminole transcends the racializing

label Black (negro), a reduction of diverse African cultural heritages. Although

Blacknesshas been historically reclaimed (e.g., Black Power), it does not explicitly

acknowledge the biological and cultural African connections that contributed toAfrican-Native American belief and physiology.

Many of the members of African Seminole societies were formerly enslaved.

Ogunleye (1996) offered self-emancipated Africans as an alternative label for

terms she felt were derogatory, such as maroons, runaways,and fugitives(also

see Price 1979). The Spanish word cimarron has been used since the sixteenth

century to refer to wild animals that escaped to the mountains. Cima means peak in

Spanish, and cimarron (maroon in English) could be literally translated as one

who lives in the mountains. Some descendants of formerly enslaved African rebel

communities, such as those in Jamaica, proudly claim

maroon

heritage, whiledescendants in other places reject the word as a term of self-identification.

African Seminole is preferable to terms like Maroon or self-emancipated

African, because it reflects multiple, interconnected, and newly created heritages

and relations that resulted from African-Native American contact. Not all African-

Seminole populations should be equated with Maroons or freed blacks, for they

also included people of African descent who lived under some form of servitude to

Native Americans. However, African-Seminole settlements such as Pilaklikaha were

not mere subcultures or outliers of Seminole Indian or slave societies.

Another key terminological issue is the toponymy and etymology of African

Seminole settlements. Pilaklikaha will be used in what follows instead of

Abrahams Old Town, a term employed by later chroniclers. Pilaklikaha does

not invoke male-centric, top down ideas about society. This is not to diminish

Abrahams significance in African Seminole history. The Florida Armed Occupation

Act (1842) established a system of land distribution to Euro-American settlers.

Various permits (e.g., Robert Williams, #79) mention Abrahams Old Town, and

link it to a location on current maps where field work has been conducted (Whitner

1849). The Pilaklikaha (river?) and Palatlakaha Prairie are mentioned in this

same set of records, and the latter term is on modern topographic maps. Pilaklikaha

may have emerged from either African or Native American origins. It could be a

product of Muskogean (Creek) linguistic derivation, from opilwa lako laiki, big

swamp site. It has been previously suggested that the Kongo word pakalala (a

defensive posture) may have inspired the settlement name. By 1770, there existed

the Seminole town Pilatka (B. Weisman, pers. comm.). More recent writings

emphasize a greater interest in Seminole Indian linguistic roots (Mulroy 1993,

Int J Histor Archaeol (2009) 13:206238 207


3/33

2004). Ultimately, Pilaklikahas meaning and origins do not have to be addressed in

a monogenetic conceptualization (Weik 2007, pp. 316317). It may have resulted

from similar words originating in both African and Native American populations.

In order to explain the establishment of the African Seminole society at

Pilaklikaha, attention has been given to both physical features and dynamicprocesses of the emerging society. These historical developments have been

connected with the practices and beliefs that facilitated communal organization

and socialization. African and Native American resistance to Euro-American

influence may have expressed itself differently in the belief systems and organizing

principles of African Seminole settlements such as Pilaklikaha versus those of some

Muskogean or Seminole neighbors. African Seminole acquisition and use of

information, goods, and services have been examined in ways that cross-cut

traditional compartmentalized fields of social analysis, such as economics and

spirituality. Socio-cultural creation, destruction, and transformation are explored atdifferent scales to link actions with beliefs.

Previous Approaches to African Seminole Societies

The formation, change, and functioning of particular African-Native American

settlements is not well understood, in part, because past studies have focused on

regional or family scales of analysis concerning cultural identity, intercultural

relations, borderland politics, and slavery (Bateman 1990pp. 1

24,2002pp. 227

257; Brooks2002; Jones2001; Miles and Holland2006; Riordan1996, pp.2544).

Archaeologists explicit discussions of African and Native American interactions at

colonial period sites have been largely limited to debates such as the contributions of

these two populations to the development of creole society. The case of

colonowares is instructive (Singleton and Bogard 2000). This plain, hand-built

pottery was constructed by African and Native American techniques. It often

exhibited European or plain forms.

The African Seminole and Garifuna are the only people of African and Native

American heritage whose settlements have been explored by archaeologists (Bullen

and Bullen 1972; Burger 2005; Fewkes 1922, pp. 1012, 35281; Herron 1994;

Boteler-Mock and Davis1997, pp. 810; Weik2002; Weisman1989, p. 174;http://

www.lookingforangola.com/home.asp). Thus far, Pilaklikaha is the most intensively

excavated African Seminole settlement, compared to other known sites at Boggy

Island (Florida), Angola (Florida), Fort Clarke (Texas), and Nacimiento (Mexico)

(Fig. 1). Africans who lived in Creek, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and other Native

American territories deserve more attention by archaeologists (White2001pp. 550

551; G. Waselkov, pers. comm.).

Two problems that must be avoided in a study of a specific African Seminole

historic settlement are the assumption that archaeological sitesare isomorphic with

the space inhabited by a certain society, and the idea of a homogeneous, bounded

community. These challenges are addressed by shifting inquiry between individual acts

and group relations, by considering ancestral (and descendant) analogues and idiosyncratic

sources for beliefs, and by oscillating the focus from local to regional contexts. Places and

material culture are viewed as derivatives of and catalysts for human experiences and

208 Int J Histor Archaeol (2009) 13:206238
http://www.lookingforangola.com/home.asphttp://www.lookingforangola.com/home.asphttp://www.lookingforangola.com/home.asphttp://www.lookingforangola.com/home.asp


4/33

meanings across time and space (Ashmore2002, pp. 11721183; Beaudry et. al.1991).

The creation of landscapes is another theoretical thread that helps to constitute and

connect different parts of this paper. Settlements and the intervening countrysides are not

randomly inhabited or used. They are not merely the backdrop for human action. Spaceis socially constituted and constituting. While a full landscape analysis is beyond the

scope of this paper, the concept of landscape will inform the analysis in places.

Scholarship on African-Seminole societies in Florida has followed the late

Kenneth Porters perspective, emphasizing Seminole Negro life in independent

settlements (Porter 1971, 1996; Milligan 1974, pp. 418). Porter argued that their

autonomy derived from their abilities to wield weapons, farm, and select their

leaders. He also argued that African-Seminole opportunities were not diminished by

a semi-feudal relationship that they had with the Seminole Indians. Other approaches

to African and Seminole settlements recognize their mutable community membership,

sociocultural newness, mobility, and ability to manipulate borderland politicsin a

word ethnogenesis (Mulroy 1993; Sturtevant 1971). Core features of African

Seminole communities include various descent systems, central and west African

naming practices, and mixed subsistence strategies. African Seminole were set off

from their Seminole Indian neighbors by unique social, economic and political

activities. Following creolization theory, their religion was a mix of Anglo and

Spanish Christianity, Seminole Indian religion and African spirituality.

Kevin Mulroy (2004, pp. 465477) argues that Seminole Maroon cultural

distinction was reinforced by marriage, which rarely happened between Africans and

Seminole Indians. In a small number of cases, women and men, whether they were

of Native American or African descent, married, crossing the race and cultural

distinctions that past and present observers have ascribed to them. The rather slim

documentation that is available for many locales suggests that these marriages did

not result in bicultural offspring receiving rights and obligations prescribed by

Seminole Indian clans (Porter 1996). Oral history from the early twentieth-century

Fig. 1 African Seminole populations and sites



5/33

Seminole suggests that bicultural (or biracial) unions and offspring were not

encouraged in Florida Seminole communities (Jumper and West2000).

Research at Pilaklikaha represents one of the latest installments in a growing

discourse on the development of free African communities in Florida (Weik1997).

Historians and archaeologists have collaborated on Fort Mos (17381740, 17521763), where Africans who escaped from enslavement in the Carolinas allied with

Spanish colonists from St. Augustine, Florida (Deagan and Landers 1999, pp. 272

273). The institutions of marriage, religion, colonial government, and the Spanish

colonial military were central organizing factors at Fort Mos. The significance of

Spanish religious influences, such as god-parentage, was also reflected in

archaeological remains such as rosary beads and a religious medallion. Archae-

ologists found that Fort Moss inhabitants became self-sufficient by relying

primarily on wild fauna for food. It remains to be seen if similar material evidence

exists at the Negro Fort,

where Maroons, free people of African descent, andNative Americans allied with the British on the Florida panhandle (18121816)

(Griffin 1950; Millet 2002; Poe 1963). Free Black towns in the Spanish Americas

were not burdened by the colonial rules that confined the administration and

construction of European or Native American communities. Afro-Spanish collabo-

ration did not preclude tensions. Fort Moss residents occasionally clashed with

Spanish authorities over their participation in African practices (Landers1990).

While previous writings on African-Seminole societies have laid important

groundwork by describing general features, social relations with Seminole Indians, and

settlement locations in Florida, most studies, outside of an analysis of

Angola

(alsocalled Sarrazota), have not focused attention on the life history of any specific location

(Brown 1990; Mulroy1993; Porter1996; Weisman1989). Another goal of this paper is

to illustrate the diversity of experiences, social formations, and world views that existed

across Florida African Seminole settlements. The emphasis of ethnogenesis theory on

cultural heterogeneity, and processes of destruction, formation, change, and fissioning is

relevant here because it counters static, synchronic tendencies that have plagued

historical applications of the culture idea (Hill 1996). Transformation is a core feature of

my approach because of the effective way it has been used to invoke balance between

cultural continuity and change, pre-existing traditions and creolization (Armstrong and

Kelly 2000; Gomez 1998; Levine 1993). Transformations of Africans and Native

Americans led to the creation of African Seminole places, beliefs, and social relations.

African Seminole Geography

From the earliest colonial timessome would argue earlier (Van Sertima 1992)

Africans and Native Americans engaged one another in slavery and freedom (Forbes

1993; Willis 1963). Africans interacted with Native Americans by joining their

societies, uniting with them in newly formed settlements, and by allying with them

against colonial forces (Perz2000; Price1979). This contact has been discerned by

archaeological research at Maroon settlements in Brazil, the Dominican Republic,

and Jamaica, where some sites bear Native American pottery and names (Agorsah

1994; Orser1996; Weik2004). Conversely, Africans and Native Americans served

colonial armies in their assaults on indigenous and African communities.



6/33

Africans played a variety of roles in Floridas history (Landers 1999). The

sixteenth-century Spanish expeditions that crossed Florida included Africans who

encountered indigenous people such as the Calusa (DuBois1915). By 1602, a royal

report described 56 Africans at St. Augustine, Florida. As in other American

slave societies, Africans probably worked alongside Native Americans at St.Augustine (Chatelain 1941; Miles 2002). Free Blacks and Mulattos, especially

male traders or soldiers, also inhabited St. Augustine. Outside of Spanish colonial

settlements, Africans worked on European ranches, where they came into contact

with various Native Americans. In the seventeenth century, an African helped a

Timucuan woman to escape from a mission in north Florida (Hann1992). From the

Carolinas, Africans fled by boat and land to Florida, where the Spanish colonial

government granted amnesty to Catholic converts and military enlistees (Meaders

1975, p. 288). During the eighteenth century, Africans encountered Seminole

Indians,

a group who migrated away from their more northern Muskogean kinbecause of the prospects of peace, the deer-skin trade, and subsistence opportunities

in Florida (Sturtevant 1971; Weisman 1989, 1999). From the eighteenth to the

nineteenth centuries, interactions between Africans and Seminole Indians took

different forms, including marriage, slavery, alliance, kidnappings, conflicts, and

friendships (Boyd1958; Rawick1976).

The impact of Seminole Indian socio-political practices and beliefs on residents of

Pilaklikaha should not be underestimated. Native Seminole groups were quite

independent, asserting their autonomy spatially in matrilineal, dispersed clan camps

(Craig and Peebles 1974; Weisman 1989). Some Seminole were organized likechiefdoms, in hierarchical societies that were ruled by a chief, who was advised by a

council of elders from different clans, as well as some warriors. Like their

Muskogean predecessors, some Seminole created towns with squaregrounds, central

meeting places composed of four ceremonial structures. It is unclear whether many

African Seminole in Florida participated in Seminole tribal councils the way that

their descendants did in twentieth-century Oklahoma, but their role as interpreters at

Florida treaty negotiations is reason further to consider this hypothesis.

The issue of how slavery and freedom were realized in Seminole territory is

complicated by a diversity of observations and relationships. Many Euro-American

observers saw all African Seminole as slaves of white or indigenous slaveholders.

Other Euro-American observers saw the African Seminole as relatively free, or as

influential in Seminole Indian international affairs. The Euro-American documents

that comprise the most accessible descriptions of relations in Seminole territory must

be used with caution (Weik 2007, pp. 313). Most chroniclers only spent short

periods visiting African and Indian Seminole settlements. Many carried Eurocentric

views, which held that Africans were inherently servile. Other observers owned

slaves, and may have seen places like Pilaklikaha as new opportunities to acquire

both land and slaves.

These chronicler criticisms do not negate the fact that there were cases of Creek

and Seminole slavery which were coercive like American chattel slavery (Cohen

1964; Weik 2002, pp. 161; B. Weisman, pers. comm.). However, it would be

simplistic to assume that all cases of African and Native American slavery were the

same as American chattel slavery, in terms of the types, amounts, and restrictions of

their labor requirements (Littlefield1977; Miers and Kopytoff1977). There was no



7/33

consensus among Southeastern Indians about African or Native American servitude

(Saunt 1998). Many Native American and African forms of servitude involved

prisoners of war. However, there were sometimes opportunities for social mobility or

integration into the slaveholders kinship structures. William Bartram noted that the

Seminole freed children of Yamasee Indians who they had enslaved in the eighteenthcentury (Landers 1999, p. 68). Free people of African descent may have found

Seminole territory an appealing alternative to the racism of Euro-American slave

societies, although not all Muskogeans or Seminole eschewed denigrating views of

Africans (Wright1986, p. 78). Evidence for labor, ownership and sales records need

to be examined systematically, before claims can be made about the proportion of

African Seminole who were enslaved or free.

Pilaklikaha was one of many places in Florida where people of African descent

lived during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. By the eighteenth century,

thousands of Africans and Muskogeans lived along the Apalachicola and Flintrivers. Later in the 1700s, African Seminole settlements formed in the Alachua

Prairie, an area ruled by Seminole leaders such as Cowkeeper and his successor King

Payne (Porter 1996, p. 5). From the late eighteenth century onward, slavery

expanded in Florida (Rivers2000). The chaos of the American Revolution and the

British policy of freeing some slaves as a war tactic, swelled the ranks of Africans in

Seminole territory. Decades later, the African Seminole leader Abraham escaped

from Pensacola and joined the British-African-Native American alliance at the

Negro Fort (Porter 1971). In 1813, invading Georgian militia forced Paynes

African Seminole to flee to the Suwannee River and to the Tampa area settlementssuch as Angola (Brown1990, p. 6,2005). A group of Creek Indians that assisted

the United States military in destroying the Suwannee River African and Seminole

settlements in the 18171818 war, took some African Seminole captives north to

Coweta. Some African Seminole eluded U.S. forces by sailing to the Bahamas,

where their descendants live today (Goggin 1946; Howard 2002; Vignoles 1977).

During the 1820s, a north Florida (Alachua) overseer complained that some of his

captive laborers escaped to Georgia (Charles1825). From northern and west-central

Florida, Africans and Seminole made their way to Pilaklikaha. African Seminole

mobility is exemplified by Abraham, who became a leader at Pilaklikaha. He made

trips to Washington D.C., various parts of Florida, and Oklahoma, as a part of

Seminole Indian delegations to whom U.S. Indian removal proponents offered land.

At the conclusion of the Second Seminole War (18351842), African Seminoles left

Florida, and began a series of migrations that led them to Oklahoma, Texas, and

Mexico (Mulroy1993; Porter1971).

While a set of dynamics is proposed for an African Seminole society, it is one of

many sociocultural scenarios for people of African descent who resisted slavery in

Florida (Fig. 2). Thus, generalizations about African Seminole living in separate

towns must be qualified to account for cases where Africans and Seminole lived

together (examples of this type of generalization appear in Brown 2005; Howard

2002, pp. 1819; Mulroy2004; Porter1996; Weik2002, pp. 168;2005, p. 5). In the

towns of Apilshopko and Apilchapoocha, negroes comprised approximately 40%

and 60% percent, respectively, of residents (Boyd 1958, p. 82). Angola represents

another end of the spectrum, where African rebels were the only inhabitants (Brown

1990).



8/33

Archaeology at Pilaklikaha

The archaeological record of the location that became known as Pilaklikaha, covers

centuries of human habitation. The place was first inhabited by pre-colonial Native

Americans who produced lithics and Pasco Plainpottery (Weik2002, p. 24). These

remains relate to the poorly-known, pre-colonial, Central-Florida borderlands, on the

fringes of Safety Harbor (1,100400 years ago) and St. Johns archaeological cultures

(1,000500 years ago). The stratigraphic distribution of the lithics underlays and

overlaps African-Seminole period remains. Seminole and other Native Americans

produced stone tools such as gunflints through the early nineteenth century (Johnson

1997; Neill1977, p. 15). It is worth considering whether stone tool production and use

at Pilaklikaha was continuous from antiquity to the Seminole period or confined to pre-

colonial times. In a later section, this paper will explore the possibility that African and

Indigenous Seminole recycled or created some of the lithics that were excavated at

Pilaklikaha. Some of the pottery and stone tools recovered from Pilaklikaha may have

been used during the colonial period by central-Florida societies such as the Guacozo,

Ocale, Mayaca or Jororo (Milanich 1995, p. 65). Maroons were not reported in this

region of Florida in the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries. However, Africans did

escape as far south on Floridas east coast, joining the indigenous Ays (or Ais) by 1603.

Pilaklikaha is located in a cow pasture, on a country road in Sumter County,

central Florida. The site is on an elevated oak hammock (hill), on the northern edge

Fig. 2 African Seminole, Maroon, and other settlements in Florida



9/33

of a boot-shaped ridge. Natural and man-made depressions and ponds ring the

location. Historic descriptions and a depiction of the town suggest that it was located

on a hammock. The soils of this hammock, and much of Sumter county, consist of

quartz sand, clayey sand and clay. These components range from several feet to

nearly 100 ft (30.5 m) below the surface (United States Department of Agriculture1988, p. 6). Jumper Creek, named for a Seminole Indian, former counselor to chief

Micanopy, is near the site. (see Potter, 1966, p. 456). Micanopy was a hereditary

indigenous Seminole ruler, though historians claim he did not have a strong impact

on Seminole Indian politics. He lived at both Pilaklikaha and another settlement

called Okehumpke (about 10 mi [16.1 km] north of Pilaklikaha).

The first African Seminole occupation of Pilaklikaha probably occurred after

north Florida Seminole settlements were destroyed by invading Georgia and

Tennessee militia, between 1813 and 1818. Mean ceramic dating done on pottery

from Pilaklikaha suggests a date of 1811 (Weik2002). Pilaklikaha is less than 10 m(16.1 km) from the Dade Battlefield State Historic Site, where African and Seminole

forces ambushed a U.S. military unit in 1835. African Seminole from central Florida

may have assisted in the Dade Massacreat the battlefield because they feared that

U.S. troop activities near their settlements would result in their enslavement. Not

long afterward, in 1836, General Abraham Eustiss troops destroyed Pilaklikahas

abandoned houses (Brown 1990, p. 42; Eustis 1836). J. H. Williamss homestead,

visible on an 1840s surveyor map and an Armed Occupation Act claim, was built on

fields that may have been cleared by inhabitants of Pilaklikaha. Post-African

Seminole-period Euro-American settlement is also evident in excavated artifacts suchas flat glass, an 1843 penny, and stoneware crock fragments (Weik 2002, p. 112).

Since the mid-nineteenth century, the land has been used for farms, a nursery, and

railroads. Building materials, ceramics, and other remains from a mid-twentieth-

century resident who lived on the western, adjacent property overlap with

Pilaklikahas African Seminole-period remains.

Since the 1990s, archaeological research has been conducted at Pilaklikaha. A

masters thesis identified over a hundred specimens from the surface of the site,

including many items of the type examined in this paper: European ceramics, Native

American pottery, glass, stone flakes, glass beads, and metal objects (Herron1994). A

pedestrian survey conducted by Bill Steele, who explored the site and its surroundings

for the Miami Historical Conservancy, confirmed that the property south of the main

study area of this paper did not have any Seminole period artifacts (Carr and Steele

1993; B. Steele, pers. comm.). Visibility was good during the pedestrian survey that

the author conducted on the southern, neighboring property in 1999, as large areas

were plowed (Weik2002). Shovel test pits placed on this adjacent southern property,

produced no African-Seminole period artifacts. No remains were recovered in the

southern, neighboring property by any surveys, except for an outlying, single, surface-

level, black glass shard. Previous surveys (B. Steele, pers. comm.) as well as a surface

inspection conducted by the author suggest that the adjacent, western property had few

artifacts of the Seminole period. During 1998, this western property was sold to a new

owner who denied access for further archaeological research.

Systematic and judgmental surface and subsurface samples were taken of the

archaeological record at Pilaklikaha, during field seasons from 1998 to 2002, as well

as during brief field visits in 2005 and 2006 (Weik 2002). Pedestrian surveys that



10/33

were conducted on properties within a mile radius of Pilaklikaha, did not locate any

additional sites. Prior to field work, a Cartesian grid was established on the main

study area. The grid was aligned according to a numbering system that centered on

the datum, which was placed at the coordinates 2,000 north, 2,000 east

(2000N2000E). The main distribution of material remains at Pilaklikaha was subjectedto over 200 shovel test pits (30 cm squared and 50100 cm deep). Based on the content

of these shovel test units, 23 larger judgmental test units (11 m, 12 m, and 22 m)

were excavated individually or in contiguous units (Fig. 3). Some gaps exist on the

shovel test grid because tree stumps, clay, or rock prevented excavation.

Over 1,000 artifacts were recovered that relate to the African Seminole

occupation at Pilaklikaha (Weik 2002, pp. 112139). It is difficult to determine

how much of the artifact distribution represents house floor or yard areas, as features

such as postholes were found in few of the test units. The features that were found

varied in depth from less than 1 cm to 20 cm deep. No definite midden or well-defined Seminole-period ground layer was evident from plan or profile maps, photos

or visual inspections of the excavated site stratigraphy. Test excavation units

demonstrated that thin sheets of scattered artifacts exist from ground surface to a

depth of 60 cm below surface.

Building remainssandy-clay daub, wrought-iron nails, and brick fragments

make up less than 5% of all artifact fragments that were recovered. The very small

number of wrought iron nails at the site may indicate that metal fasteners were used

in some building construction. Most of the brick fragments in the test units were tiny,

and distributed in the first or second excavation levels (0

10 and 10

20 cm belowsurface), but not in close association with the features. Most larger brick bats, which

appeared to be modern, were found in the first excavation level (010 cm below

surface). Documents suggest that African Seminole residents lived in large cabins

Fig. 3 Test excavation blocks and Herrons(1994) surface collection area



11/33

and Seminole Indian thatch-roof chickees, constructed without metal fasteners

(Downs 1995; Simmons 1973; Waselkov and Braund 1995; Weisman 1989). We

should not rule out the possibility of African inspiration for timber, daub, and thatch

houses. According to one Tennessee volunteer who served in a military unit that

helped destroy Abrahams town,the settlement had small, pine houses, containingbeef and other items in the rafters (Irwin1836, p. 33).

A number of adjacent blocks were excavated in 10 cm levels, next to the most

western shovel test unit (2000N1979.8E), because it was the unit that contained the

greatest amount of African Seminole period artifacts. Test Units 2000N1981E and

2002N1981E contained the clearest examples of features (Fig. 4). Soil stains

illustrate their alignment, which could indicate the corners and walls of a structure.

Unfortunately, the property fence line and a tree prevented exploration of these

features in the northeast and western directions. Artifacts such as sand-tempered and

brushed earthenware pottery, blue-edged pearlware, and green glass were embeddedin some features. The nails that are depicted appeared to be wrought or cut, but high

levels of corrosion made it hard to be sure of their date or morphology.

Generally, the features and artifacts were most evident from 1925 cm below the

surface. Artifacts such as a bead, lithic flakes, green bottle glass, and ironstone or

Fig. 4 Test excavation block



12/33

whiteware pottery emerged in the test units at the same level as features, as well as

slightly above or below them. A number of faint soil stains, some with charcoal,

emerged in test units, such as in the middle of the southern half of test unit

2000N1983E. These stains quickly disappeared, within millimeters of their first

discovery. A feature in test unit 2000N1985E was more shallow than the others (1520 cm below the surface). It was unique because of its highly gritty consistency and

its uneven depth, ranging from 1 cm to 3 cm thick. The features in different test units

(see Fig.4) were discernable to the naked eye (using a Munsell chart) but they did

not emerge clearly in photos (Weik2002, pp. 130137).

The distribution and content of the archaeological record at Pilaklikaha has been

affected by a variety of factors. The settlement was destroyed by the U.S. military in

1836. According to General Abraham Eustis (1836) On my reaching Pilaklikaha, I

found the villages abandoned, and no sign of their having been occupied for several

weeks

cattle and ponies however were abundant in the neighborhood. The housesand fences were burnt by my order. It is not clear from Eustiss report why he

referred to multiple villages, as opposed to one settlement. A later section of this

paper will address neighboring settlements. African Seminole residents probably

removed many things of value as they evacuated Pilaklikaha. Modern land use has

created major archaeological disturbances. For example, agricultural (e.g., plowing)

and road building (paved and dirt) activities have altered a major strip of the highest,

most level parts of the site. Most artifacts and features were well within the plow

zone (Weik2002). These alterations may be one reason that relatively few postholes,

trash pits, or other features were found at Pilaklikaha. In addition, disturbances werecreated by two small stands of large oaks that demarcate the western and eastern

edges of the hammock. A slight depression forms a shallow pool of standing water,

in the central-eastern portion of the hammock, during rainy summers. Similar issues

and post-depositional processes characterize Seminole Indian sites (Weisman 1989,

pp. 137142).

Shovel test and surface finds are a primary form of evidence for the spatial extent

of the main activity areas of Pilaklikaha (Fig. 5). Positive shovel tests are defined as

units containing artifacts most likely to indicate African-Seminole material culture.

Positive, in this instance, means that at least one diagnostic artifact was present in

the unit. Brushed and Sand-tempered earthenwares, creamwares, pearlwares,

whitewares, green bottle glass, lead shot, and pipe fragments are items most

indicative of African Seminole occupation. Fourteen percent of the shovel tests bore

artifacts that are classified as positive. Ironstone, white and brown stoneware, and

porcelains were excluded from the shovel test map, as well as from Herrons (1994)

surface finds that are noted on the shovel test map. The exclusions have been made

because of the possibility that these modern Euro-American ceramics were produced

into the twentieth century, and may have been used by nineteenth- or twentieth-

century residents of the hammock. Twelve percent of the shovel tests contained

ironstone, stoneware, or porcelain, which are distributed mostly on the southernmost

test units of the 1990E and 2020E lines, or on the eastern end of the hammock. The

surface finds identified in the 19982002 fieldwork and in Herrons (1994) study,

confirm this generalization about modern Euro-American pottery distributions.

The distribution of positive shovel test units at Pilaklikaha, suggest that the main

archaeological remains are concentrated in a 5,000 m2 area on the western half of the



13/33

hammock. However, outlier artifact fragments (e.g., lead fragments, dark green

bottle glass) on the eastern end make it likely that the whole hammock was used byAfrican and Indigenous Seminoles. The most extensive concentration of African

Seminole-period artifacts is in the far western corner of the study area grid, and on

the 2,030, 2,060, and 2,100 east lines. Herrons surface findsbrushed and sand-

tempered plain indigenous pottery, and pearl, cream, annular and white waresseem

to aggregate on the southern ends of these three east lines. Together, the positive

surface find and shovel test locations seem to hint at lines or arcs that surround areas

relatively free of artifacts. Depressions, sinkholes and drainages, situated within 50

100 m of the African Seminole habitation area, probably limited much past

expansion or peripheral habitation. The standing water that is depicted (see Figs. 4

and5) was only present during a very wet summer visit (2006). A visit to Pilaklikaha

during a wet season provides one with an appreciation for how inundated the land

can get, down slope from the archaeological remains (Fig. 6). These hydrologic

features probably served a moat-like defensive function, like the Withlacoochee

Cove did on a macro scale. The environment was also conducive to rice agriculture,

which fed residents at Pilaklikaha (McCall 1974).

Pilaklikahas archaeological record has not produced the specific structural

remains that would suggest clear-cut spatial signatures of social differentiation,

ceremonial space, or other aspects of human organization. The gaps and clustering

are difficult to generalize from because the area encompassing them has not been

excavated as a continuous block (see Figs.3, 5). For instance, the shovel test units

were conducted at 10 m intervals. The site map is based on a variety of test

excavation strategies and recovery techniques that do not collectively guarantee

uniformity in artifact and feature distribution. However, only a small portion of the

total human occupation area has been excavated. Therefore, future testing could

Fig. 5 Shovel test excavation units and Herrons(1994) surface finds



14/33

further clarify the overall settlement layout of Pilaklikaha, and its range of

architectural forms and sizes. Field research could also determine whether the

remains represent a single, generation-long occupation of many houses, or a more

intricate process of building and demolition, immigration and emigration. It is

possible that Pilaklikaha was occupied seasonally or during intermittent occupations,

as were other African Seminole towns (C. Brown, pers. comm.; Kersey1981).

The sole painting of Pilaklikaha suggests that there were over ten structures that

resembled log-cabins by 1836 (Fig. 7). This depiction was one of several sketches

from the U.S. war with the Seminoles that was advertised in the Charleston Mercury

on July 11, 1836, under the title Illustrations of Florida.The depiction was drawn

by J. F. Gray (1836), a South Carolina soldier who volunteered for service in

Florida. According to the Charleston Mercury, the picture was to be engraved by

Mr. W. Keenan. Besides the simple mention of houses, General Eustis described

the presence of fences at Pilaklikaha (Weik2007, p. 327). Micanopy lived in a two-

story house at Pilaklikaha (Cohen 1964). Contrary to Grays depiction, which

suggests that structures covered the hammock, archaeological remains are

concentrated on high ground in the western section of the rise. This discrepancy is

probably the result of the shallow clay and limestone deposits on the east part of the

hammock, which prohibited building in this less-well-drained area. It is not known

exactly how much effort that Gray put into trying to replicate the actual sizes and

distribution of buildings. The structures, people and animals are drawn in a

simplistic manner. Grays depiction is a part of a series of images that portray

mundane and dramatic images of the war (see commentary by Bird 2005,

Fig. 6 Pilaklikahas main concentration of physical remains and local environment



15/33

). The depiction may have been intended to showcase

U.S. victory more than preserve a realistic memory of the final moments in the life

history of Pilaklikaha.

A description of Pilaklikaha suggests that it was laid out like the towns in a

civilized country

(Irwin 1836, p. 33). It is possible that this quote connoted thatthere was some kind of symmetry, as a number of European and U.S. towns featured

rectilinear layouts. African Seminole may have based their ideas about the social

organization of space on African compounds that they inhabited before becoming

enslaved (Weik 2004, pp. 4042). It would seem that those people who had

memories of life in slave rowswould not have sought to recreate a rigidly defined

community. Depictions and descriptions of Maroon towns in the Americas suggest

that they had both rectilinear and unaligned settlement layouts (Weik2004, p. 42).

The Muskogean squareground is another possible spatial arrangement that may

have been manifest at Pilaklikaha (Weik2004, p. 42). Powells Town, located 13 mi

(20.9 km) west of Pilaklikaha, makes for a good archaeological comparison that

speaks to the relationship between sociocultural organization and space. Weisman

(1989, p. 142147) argued that the Powells Town site was constructed in a manner

similar to Muskogean towns or indigenous Seminole domestic compounds, which

featured a central squareground or space surrounded by four structures. Powells

Towns central square, which is devoid of artifacts, is surrounded by four main clusters

of surface and subsurface artifacts. The fact that no features (e.g., postholes) were

found adjacent to the artifact clusters at Powells town leaves room for speculation

about the structuresexact positioning. However, the overall site plan conforms to the

general artifact distribution that one would expect for a layout of human activity

remains that surround a central open area. There may be multiple reasons why artifacts

were scarce in the central area of Powells town. Cleanliness, which may have

motivated residents to perform regular yard sweeping (as in African American historic

places), was both a virtue and a pragmatic means of minimizing refuse that

might attract vermin or wild animals. There may have also been political and

Fig. 7 Burning of Pilak-Li-ka-ha by Gen. Eustis (Gray1836)

http://www.johnhorse.com/http://www.johnhorse.com/


16/33

spiritual reasons why this area was devoid of artifacts. More will be said on this theme

and Weismans interpretation of it, later in this paper.

Demographic Features of an African Seminole Settlement

There are few eyewitness descriptions of specific African Seminole Towns. The

Seminole Indians did not freely disclose information about African Seminole. U.S.

government agent John Logan discovered this type of resistance to documentation

when he was denied information for an 1830 census (Bell 1952). During the 1820s,

George McCall and Horatio Dexter made the most extensive descriptions of

Pilaklikaha (Boyd 1958; McCall 1974). There are other possible sources of

information about this settlement, such as the lists of negro prisoners from the

Second Seminole War that the U.S. military sent to Congress that span the period183638 (United States 25th Congress 1838). These lists feature the names of

captives along with their presumed town, owner, or nation. Ninety-nine African

Seminoles are listed with chief Micanopy as their owner. These African Seminoles

linked to Micanopy, and listed on the government inventories of prisoners, almost

match exactly in number the 100 runaways from Georgia that McCall claimed

lived at Pilaklikaha in the 1820s (McCall 1974). Many runaways escaped from

Georgia to Florida on well-worn routes through the Okefenokee Swamp (Nelson

2005, pp. 2439). Two other figures for Pilaklikaha160 by Dexter (Boyd 1958)

and 75 in

Lieut. Yanceys Notes

(United States Indian Affairs 1824

1853)

areworth considering. These different population counts may have resulted from

different estimation methods, errors, speculation, or actual population fluctuations.

Nonetheless, it is possible that the prisoner lists represent at least some of

Pilaklikahas former inhabitants.

However, it is hasty to assume that all of the African Seminoles that were

identified as Micanopys slaves on the congressional documents resided at

Pilaklikaha (United States 25th Congress1838). The population estimate of 99 that

was derived from the list is a snapshot, not a full account of all the people who

resided or interacted there over time. If we were to consider the number on these

government lists that were not born when McCall and Dexter passed through

Pilaklikahathe individuals who were born after 1823then it would be necessary

to account for at least 40 other individuals that were not there during the days that

McCall and Dexter visited the settlement. Some leaders mentioned by McCall are

not on the lists. Several people on the lists are not matched with their spouse(s) or

mate(s). The missing mates may have resided at Pilaklikaha temporarily or lived at

another settlement. Likewise, Micanopy, his two wives, and other African Seminole

lived at both Pilaklikaha and a nearby settlement called Okehumpka (Boyd 1958).

This type of trans-settlement migration was also common in other indigenous and

Maroon communities (Bateman1990; Perz2000; Worth2000).

An examination of the African Seminole list suggests that the population was

undergoing growth (generated from United States 25th Congress 1838). Almost 56%

of the population was female, in contrast to the high male-to-female ratio that

impeded reproduction among Maroon societies in their formative stage. Fifty-five

percent of the residents were less than 15 years old, and 1/3 of the population was



17/33

less than10 years old. Children probably contributed economically, as they did on

plantations, Seminole Indian settlements, and later tenant farms (King 1995;

Weisman 1999, p. 108). The average age of these African Seminole is 18.6 years,

closer to the average age of female (19) rather than male (26) runaways in the South.

The average age of nineteenth-century Florida runaways was 29 (Franklin andSchweninger1999; Rivers2000). If 1550 years old is any indication of the period

of productive adulthood, then 42 of 99 African Seminoles constituted the parents,

soldiers, farmers and leaders of Pilaklikaha. Two elders, who were 55 years and

60 years old, and three unidentified individuals comprised the rest of the list.

Names listed on the congressional documents (prisoner lists) present opportunities

to hypothesize about identity, cultural affiliation, and traditions (United States 25th

Congress 1838). Most (89) of the names on the list appear to have Anglo origins.

One name, Ishmael, may be of southwest Asia (Arabic or Judaic) derivation. A

young teenager named Wan,

probably could trace his name from the Spanish Juan,as did Juan Caballo (John Horse), the famous leader who had an African (or African

American) mother and Seminole Indian father (Porter 1996, p. 100; Rivers and

Brown1997). Caballo married the daughter of July,a leader at Pilaklikaha. July is

a name of a month, but it may also relate to African practices of naming people for

significant events, ancestors, or times, such as the Akan practice of day-names (e.g.,

Cudjo) (Mulroy1993; Turner2002; Weik2005).

A female on the government lists (United States 25th Congress1838) named Tena

may have been able to trace her name to Africa, from Twi and (or) Kongo languages,

based on Lorenzo Turners(2002) study of Gullah names. Linguistic studies and thelong history of African escape from low-country North America to Florida, support

my use of comparative data from the Gullah. Turners detailed twentieth-century

investigation of Gullah language and names was one of the most tangible

illustrations of cultural linkages between descendant communities in the United

States and their African heritage. Turners study illustrated how many names had

similar forms that could be found in more than one African society. It is necessary to

account for the differences between the African societies from which the Gullahs

first enslaved ancestors were taken and Turners African sources, mostly late

nineteenth- and twentieth-century ethnographic cases and missionary writings.

Historic migrations of ethnic groups, the nature of the slave trade (circulating

people through numerous transportation routes, destinations and departure points)

and various cultural changes complicate the delineation of the African origins of

enslaved people (Lovejoy1997).

Family groupings are visible in this sample of African Seminole prisoners of war

(United States 25th Congress1838). Family size ranged from two to 11. Six families

had the modal family size of four individuals. Defining family and kinship is

complicated by a variety of issues: the extent to which members are blood or

intermarried kin; adoptive, fictive or symbolic kinship; the ways that roles and

identities are gendered; the relationship between family and household. Kinship

networks have been a primary force in the creation of Black Seminole identities

and communities (Bateman1990, p. 17).

Fourteen family units appear on the congressional documents (United States 25th

Congress1838). These records define family units minimally, identifying one or two

(mates) adults and any of their children. It appears that there are ten families related



18/33

to at least one other family. Extended family and interfamily ties may have played an

important role in fostering linkages across the society, as they did in Oklahoma

descendant communities. Husband, wife and children are listed in ten families.

Oklahoma African Seminole and Black Carib (Garifuna) communities featured

characteristics such as fluid household composition, diverse family forms, andfemale headed households. The existence of polygamy in African Seminole

descendants in Oklahoma precludes a conclusion that Pilaklikahas inhabitants were

all monogamous (Bateman 1990, pp. 2627). It is likely that African (central or

west) or Seminole Indian polygamy and matrilineality influenced the African

Seminole (Miller 1988; Vansina 1990; Wilks 1993). The disruptive impact of

enslavement (e.g. rape, sale of kin) must also be factored into an explanation for the

diversity and fluidity of family patterns.

The model of African Seminole demography and family relations that has been

constructed in the preceding paragraphs must be viewed with caution as it is onlyone of various scenarios that can be constructed from the 25th U.S. Congressional

Document (1838) upon which it is based. The congressional record and official

military reports are subject to various filters or censors that limit what kinds of

information is released for public viewing. It is likely that some of the Anglo names

that have been recorded were Anglicized (e.g., Wan was probably the Spanish

word Juan). It is also likely that chroniclers only recorded one of many names by

which individuals were known to their peers. Chroniclers cultural lenses affected

the ways they assigned names to people.

Leadership and Government

One way that many societies define rights and responsibilities, and ensure stability is

to assign, elect, or allow the self-appointment of leaders. Autonomous African

Seminole settlements were probably organized in ways similar to other Maroon

societies. Local military and kinship concerns were primary factors in the

organization of Jamaican Maroon societies. The Aluku of Guiana participated in

more regional clan and chiefdom systems (Bilby1996). At Pilaklikaha, documented

leaders included Abram, July, and August, and a subchief named Billy John.

The above-mentioned congressional documents list some other Indian Negro

leaders who can be linked to Pilaklikaha (United States 25th Congress 1838). Ino

and Ben were important and influential military commanders who were

allegedly owned by Micanopy. It is likely that many of the names of the Maroon,

African Seminole, and Seminole Indian towns on historic maps refer to leaders

(McCall1974; Mulroy1993).

There is evidence that certain African Seminole leaders had disproportionate

influence in their communities. According to historian Kenneth Porter, Abraham was

the leader of over 500 African Seminole in Florida (Porter 1971). Abrahams

authority derived from his role as the interpreter for chief Micanopy, during the

Seminole Indians treaty negotiations with the U.S. government, as well as from his

role as a religious and military leader. Around 1818, Captain Hugh Young (U.S.

military engineer) described Neros Town, an African Seminole settlement on the

Suwannee River (Young1953). Young concluded that the leader at that town ruled



19/33

only through the respect and affectionof his peers. Youngs comments suggest that

it may have been hard for Pilaklikahas leaders to impose authoritarian rule over

residents, as many had escaped slavery to be free of violence and coercion.

In light of the other influential leaders mentioned above, there is no reason to

assume that only one African Seminole led affairs at Pilaklikaha. Decentralized,settlement-based governments with numerous leaders would have been beneficial for

different communities. If a leader was killed, captured, or bribed by enemies, others

could lead resistance maneuvers. Conversely, if leadership failed and collective

strategies were not implemented, the group would have faced starvation, capture, or

death. In Florida, Native American and African leaders, soldiers, and interpreters

were captured, and coerced or convinced to aid U.S. troops in finding settlements of

other U.S. foes (Porter1996, pp. 68, 82; Rivers and Brown1997). However, as one

officer noted, certain guides became unreliable, escaping at the first opportunity

(McCall1974).It is possible that factions developed within the community, based on political and

economic interests, family ties, or personal ideologies, as they had within Creek,

Seminole and African societies. Interpersonal disputes were also capable of

disrupting communities, as in a historical example of an African who lost a

competition over a mate, and got revenge by giving colonial authorities the location

of the maroon settlement where he had lived.

All of the individuals mentioned above as leaders were identified by Euro-

American chroniclers, whose biases and motives must be considered when assessing

leadership at Pilaklikaha. Euro-Americans worked to simplify and manipulatenegotiations so that they could convince Native Americans to sell land and move

west. Similar colonial tactics were used against the Black Carib and the Cherokee

(Fabel 2000). Major gaps exist in our understanding because documents are silent

about how people became leaders, thought about leadership, made decisions, and

harnessed power at Pilaklikaha. Women are absent from most chroniclers

discussions of African Seminoles, except in cases where they and their children

were moved to evade U.S. troops, or in cases where women and their children were

being held by U.S. troops during wars. Nineteenth-century maps allude to Mulatto

Girls town, suggesting female and perhaps biracial leadership existed at some

locations (Mulroy1993).

There is little documentation or material expression of Seminole Indian socio-

political organization at work in African settlements, outside of claims that the

African Seminole gave tribute to Seminole Indians. Chroniclers claimed that tribute

ranged from 1/3 of livestock and crops at Pilaklikaha, to ten bushels of crops given

by African Seminole settlements in general, to 23 bushels given by African

Seminole living at Canadian Fork (1840s), Oklahoma (McCall 1974; Porter 1996,

p. 112). It is unclear whether these tribute payments were taken from each resident or

whether the amounts represented a collective contribution from the whole settlement.

Specific evidence for tribute payment has not been closely examined or presented for

other African Seminole settlements in Florida. We also need to consider if Africans

living in Seminole-controlled towns gave tribute, and if some African slave labor(as

Euro-American chroniclers saw it) was considered as tribute by the Seminole Indians.

Cultural and historical nuances make it hasty to assume that all African Seminoles

gave tribute or gave the same amount. The Native American precedent for tribute in



20/33

the Southeast, like Africa and other places in the world, involved vanquished warriors

being forced to provide prestige goods or crops (Dye 1995, pp. 289316; Martin

1991). Further, Muskogean groups gave a portion of their crops to their chiefs

periodically, for communal storage or as gifts. During the late eighteenth century,

Bartram observed that the Seminole Indians of Alachua had family plots that theycultivated. They gave a small portion of their crops to the public granary (Spellman

1948). Thus, in some cases, African contributions may have not varied greatly from

the Seminole Indians contributions to the communal storage sheds (Weik2002).

A final political issue that begs for attention is the extent to which African

Seminole towns were integrated within overarching governments. Pilaklikaha (also

called Abrahams Old Town) was located within 5 mi (8.0 km) of Abrahams

New Town and Charlies town, two African Seminole settlements that

archaeologists discovered in archival sources (Carr and Steele 1993). To date, no

evidence for regional or multi-settlement African Seminole political integration, suchas accounts of meetings which established the Seminole Nation from the three

tribes, has been brought to light (McCall 1974, p. 152). African Seminole

descendants who lived in different Oklahoma settlements were autonomous. They

met in political bodies to discuss issues of their band, their representational unit at

Seminole Indian government meetings (Bateman 1991). Conversely, it is possible

that Abrahams New Townwas founded after an ethnogenetic fissioning event that

began at Pilaklikaha. Fissioning was a type of ethnogenetic process that created new

cultural groups, as in the case of the Seminole Indians who branched off from

ancestral Muskogean populations (Sturtevant1971).

Exchange, Labor, and the Politics of Economics

People of African descent impacted the politics and economics of Florida in various

ways (Rivers 2000; Simmons 1973, p. 137). Slavery did not become a primary

economic mode in Florida until the eighteenth century (Schafer 1995). The brief

transition from Spanish to British colonial rule (176383) and concurrent Anglo

immigration brought thousands of enslaved Africans to Florida. Free people of

African descent worked as domestics, cowboys, scouts, pilots, and militia (Landers

1999). In the Seminole territory, the economy was shaped by subsistence strategies

and various forms of exchange. The indigenous Seminole permanently settled in

Florida during the eighteenth century, taking advantage of the colonists demand for

animal skins and cattle. Spanish and British colonists allocated gifts of dishes,

clothing, food, and manufactures to indigenous Seminoles and their African allies, in

exchange for military, economic, and political support (Covington 1960, p. 71;

Landers 1999, p. 7273). British traders such as the Panton and Leslie Company

operated in Florida during the colonial period. Regional goods have been recovered

from archaeological sites such as the trade post called Spaldings Lower Store. Euro-

American towns such as Micanopy, and older colonial establishments at St.

Augustine, St. Marks, and Pensacola were key loci of economic activity (Lewis

1969; Sturtevant1971).

Many of the artifacts that were excavated at Pilaklikaha were probably acquired at

urban markets, transitory bartering encounters, or trade posts (Weik 2002, p. 112



21/33

121). However, the dangers of (re)enslavement, may have prohibited some African

Seminoles from directly shopping in Euro-American settlements (B. Weisman, pers.

comm.). Instead, they could have relied on Seminole Indian middle-men (and

women) who visited traders and urban markets. Like the self-emancipated African

inhabitants of the settlement called Angola, Pilaklikahas residents also had access toarms, rum, and molasses that were supplied by traders and Spanish fishermen

working around Tampa Bay (Boyd 1958, p. 92). The above-mentioned items were

sought by indigenous southeastern people, but songs, herbs and ritual knowledge

were also much valued in their exchanges. Both African Seminole and Seminole

Indians used herbs and wild plants to feed and heal their people (Duffner 1973;

McCall1974, p. 60; Martin1991; Snow and Stans2001).

By 1818, exchange was dramatically altered in Florida. The U.S. destroyed

indigenous Seminole and African settlements in north Florida during the so-called

Georgians Patriot Invasion

(1813), the First Seminole War (1816

1818), and the

bombardment of Negro Fort(1816). The Spanish conceded to U.S. political control

over eastern North America in 1821. As a result, U.S. forts, plantations, and settlers

expanded in Florida. Individual and collective conflicts were stimulated by raids, debts,

and land disputes. A group of Seminole Indian leaders, aided by their African Seminole

interpreters, signed the Moultrie Creek treaty (1823), which ceded millions of acres to

the U.S. government in return for money, an agreement to return all new runaways,

and their acceptance of a central Florida Seminole Indian reservation (Mahon1967). A

major result was that African and indigenous Seminole communities were prevented

from accessing coastal trade networks. The U.S. officials who helped facilitate the treatyhoped to confine the Seminole to areas with such poor agricultural land so that they

would become dependent on Euro-Americans for subsistence (Brown 1995, pp. 2122).

These forms of attack, containment and pressure may have impacted the way

Africans and Native Americans thought about Euro-American cultural items and

economic influences. As Weisman (1989, pp. 121122, 130) suggests, the Nativist

sentiments that existed in Seminole territory resulted in a rejection of European

(American) ceramics by more militant groups such as the followers of Asi Yahola

(also called Powell or Osceola). Redstick Creek soldiers and refugees, who

fled after their defeat at the hands of the U.S. military (in modern Alabama), infused

the ranks of Seminole after 1814. The Redsticks may have helped stimulate the

Seminoles to organize their resistance to various forms of European material and

martial influence. The Withlacoochee Cove sites, which formed a nucleus of

nineteenth-century Seminole resistance around leaders such as Asi Yahola, contained

no Euro-American-made ceramics (Weisman 1989, p. 121). Settlements like Asi

Yaholas (the archaeological site called Powells Town) differed from many earlier

and later Seminole Indian sites, which did employ a much larger proportion of Euro-

American ceramics (Table1).

The material record at Pilaklikaha does not suggest that European ceramics were

prohibited or avoided. Euro-American ceramics that may have been used by the

inhabitants of Pilaklikaha made up 44% of all ceramic sherds that were recovered

from Pilaklikaha, compared with 51% which were of Seminole or indigenous

production. Euro-American and Native American ceramics were distributed across

different parts of Pilaklikaha, which may suggest that there were no intra-community

differences in ceramic usage that reflected a rejection of Euro-American ceramics



22/33

(Weik 2002, p. 112121). An important caveat here is that the ironstone, white

stoneware, porcelain, and whiteware ceramics that comprise the Euro-American

portion of Pilaklikahas ceramics have periods of production that range from the

early decades of the nineteenth century until the twentieth century. The nineteenth-

and twentieth-century inhabitants of the location may have also contributed to the total

proportion of Pilaklikahas Euro-American ceramics. The difficulty of interpreting

these ceramics is compounded by the fact many are small and undecorated. Therefore,

the proportion of Euro-American sherds that were used by African and indigenous

Seminole at Pilaklikaha was probably less than the 44% stated above.

The issue that then arises, concerns what these artifacts reflect about Pilaklikahas

inhabitants attitudes toward their foreign- and indigenous-made objects. CharlesFairbanks (1978) suggested that people of African descent who lived in Seminole

territory may have acted as cultural brokers in Florida, because many had been

socialized through enslavement, forced to speak European languages and accept

Euro-American laws. Native Americans intermarried with Whites and participated in

plantation economies (Weisman2000). Thus, African cultural brokers were not the

Table 1 African- and indigenous Seminole-period assemblages (from Weik2002, pp. 134147)

Artifact Pilaklikaha Powells Town

POTTERY

Brushed 386 0

Sand-tempered 164 96

Pearlware 7 0

Creamware 106 0

Annular ware 3 0

Porcelain 16 0

Stone Ware 100 1

Trailed Slipware 1 0

Whiteware 34 0

Ironstone 204 0

OTHER ITEMS

Brick 71 0

Green glass 191 2

Pipe 8 0

Rose glass 21 0

Wrought Nail 27 0

Lead 3 1

Bridle Bit 0 1Iron Kettle 0 1

Peach Pits 0 3

Cow bone 0 1

Total 1,342 106



23/33

only agents of Euro-American cultural and economic influence. The presence of

Euro-American goods at Pilaklikaha is not necessarily indicative of African and

Indian Seminole assimilation into Eurocentric beliefs, consumptive patterns, or

material preferences. Lightfoot et al. (1998, pp. 199200, 209) have criticized North

American colonial and contact period archaeological studies which claim that highratios of Euro-American to Native American artifacts or the presence of Euro-

American artifacts indicate assimilation. The foreign items were interpreted through

indigenous peoples preexisting world views, motives, and structuring principles

(Lightfoot et al. 1998). Wilkie (2000, p. 11) has proposed a similar argument for

Afro-Bahamians, that they used African aesthetics to derive meaning from Euro-

American material culture that they possessed. Similarly, the meanings and uses that

any group of African Seminole applied to both European and Native American

pottery may have derived from African, as well as European and Native American

cultural frameworks.The political transitions that led to U.S. territorial claims on Florida (1821) did

not immediately change the role of free and enslaved people of African descent in

running a cattle raising system in Florida that had been the main source of the

Spanish colonial meat supply (Parker 2000, pp. 150167). An overseer named

Reuben Charles managed Moses Levys Pilgrimage Plantation, in northern Florida,

during the 1820s. Charles sought runaway and for-sale cattle from Pilacklicaha,

which was nearly 100 mi (160.9 km) south of the plantation. In 1825, he instructed

his agent concerning cattle purchases: Jumper is now directed to send them [Levys

runaway cattle] by Abraham with three or four other cowes for which youll paywhat is reasonable (Charles1825).

Cattle raising was one of many activities that constituted the division of labor in

African Seminole communities such as Pilaklikaha (Bateman1991, pp. 6667; Boyd

1958, p. 88; Gallaher1951; Porter1996; Weisman1989, p. 46). African Seminole

men hunted, raided plantations, raised livestock, traded, and fought wars. Women

were the main farmers and wild food collectors as they were in African, maroon, and

Seminole Indian societies. Enslaved women in the Americas often escaped to urban

areas more than men, and were merchants in cities. Thus, we should not

underestimate their role in obtaining non-local goods at Pilaklikaha. Both women

and men may have been potters. It is not possible to tell from documents who were

woodcarvers and weavers of items such as baskets.

African Seminole engaged in a variety of collective labor activities. They

subsisted by communal agriculture (Mulroy1993). Travelers referred to crops such

as groundnuts, beans, melons, and pumpkins. A chronicler claimed that their corn-

cribs were full and that they had livestock (Cohen1964). Figure7features evidence

for collective labor, including structures, fencing, and areas cleared of trees. Again,

we must always be wary of the artistic license, the intentions, and cultural biases of

the soldier who sketched Pilaklikahas landscape. General Eustis (1836), whose

troops burnt Pilaklikaha, described houses and walls, which involved group labor. It

is hard to say how residents chose or were selected to perform these labor tasks. In

classic anthropological and historical scholarship, large-scale public works and

surplus-generating agriculture were indicators of government administration, and

coerced, compensated, or voluntary labor. Perhaps kinship relations structured

African Seminole labor, as they did among Oklahoma descendants (18801920),



24/33

where co-wives and families cooperated in subsistence tasks or during hard times

(Bateman1991, pp. 24, 67).

The documentary record of the Second Seminole War, describes other coordinated

activities (McCall 1974, p. 403). Lieutenant Henry Prince encountered stone walls

built by the negroes that he fought (Prince1998). The evacuations of women andchildren from African and indigenous Seminole settlements under attack also hint at

group cooperation. In the Americas, Africans and Native Americans conducted

effective guerilla warfare against slavers and colonists. Raids on plantations and the

U.S. military brought livestock, arms, money and new recruits to African Seminole

communities (Mahon 1967; Porter 1943, pp. 390421; Simmons 1973, pp. 117,

xxxviii). In one case, a group of African Seminoles was captured who had been

supplied with cloth, needles, tobacco, and arms from St. Augustine. Perhaps the

tobacco pipe fragments, bullets, and porcelain 4-hole buttons discovered at

Pilaklikaha, were acquired through similar raids or underground economic activitiesinvolving free or enslaved people (Porter 1943; Usner 1999, pp. 2437). African

Seminoles amassed currency and took part in overt cash economies. For example, John

Horse accumulated cash from his sale of game and fish to U.S. soldiers. John bartered

his game and services to Euro-Americans in exchange for hooks and fishing line.

Abraham made a claim for $100 in lost silver coins in the Second Seminole war. It is

possible that Euro-American travelers paid cash to their Indian-Negro guides in

Florida. It is unclear what proportion of resources or money was acquired through each

respective method of resource acquisition (e.g., raids, paid labor, or cattle-dealing).

From a broader, comparative perspective, Maroon-European economic exchanges andmilitary alliances occurred from time to time, throughout the Americas (Parris1983).

African and indigenous Seminole people engaged in production and acquisition

within the local economy on a scale that allowed them to be self-sufficient. Goods

that they made in local settings included things that rarely preserve in the

archaeological record, such as baskets, wood spoons, or canoes (Downs 1995;

Howard2002, p. 76; Kersey1981, p. 171; McCall 1974, p. 222). Pottery is a more

durable and common artifact that was used for transporting goods (e.g., honey) to

markets, or for domestic (storage, cooking, or serving) and sacred practices. The

most abundant artifact category of the African Seminole occupation at Pilaklikaha is

a hand-made, sand-tempered, plain or brushed, grey-brown pottery (Fig. 8). This

pottery is common in Florida Seminole sites, as well as at those of their Creek

ancestors and contemporaries in Alabama and Georgia (Carr and Steele 1993;

Waselkov and Smith2000). Much work remains to be done to understand better the

production and distribution of these wares in hundreds of Florida sites.

Most low-fired earthenwares at Pilaklikaha with identifiable features appear to

have been globular, round-bottomed, small (e.g., 7 cm rim diameter), and thin-

walled (58 mm thick) bowls and pots (Weik 2002, p. 112121). Archaeologists

have taken notice of the dominance of bowls (and hollow-ware vessels) over

plates (and flat wares) in ceramic sub-assemblages across African American sites,

and the sole presence of hollow-wares(bowls, jars, and globular pots) in Seminole

Indian sites (Goggin1958; Weisman1989).

Leland Ferguson(1992, pp. 96100) argues that pots on low-country plantations

were used to make meat and vegetable stews and rich sauces, that derived from both

African and Native American food traditions. Large vessels were used for communal



25/33

stews and smaller vessels were used for dipping sauces or drinking beverages. He

sees colonowares as a creolized, multi-ethnic potting tradition having multiple

cultural origins, just as the creolized foodways were a blend of cooking methods,ingredients, and eating conventions from different cultural groups. Similarly, African

Seminoles probably employed African, Seminole Indian, and creolized foodways.

One traveler observed that indigenous Seminoles and African Seminoles shared a

cooking pot of Seminole soffkee, a soup-like dish, containing ingredients such as

corn (Weisman1989, p 123). Another dish was made from the roots of a wild plant

called Koonti (Sleight1953, pp. 4652). This culinary communion has been used as

a metaphor for the intimacy of African and indigenous Seminole relations (McCall

1974, p. 222; Porter1996). While the complexities of African and Native American

relations cannot be captured in a pot of soup, food was an important part of humaninteractions, such as sacred observances and ceremonies.

Communal Socialization and Ceremony

Cultural beliefs in rituals and participation in ceremonies were as significant as any

other factors that created affiliation, stability, and longevity at Pilaklikaha. African

Seminole cultural beliefs were marshaled by creolized Black, African, and Native

American residents. Contrary to views that privilege the influence and power of

Seminole Indians over African Seminole, is the position that skills, cultural practices

and traditions moved in various directions, between African Seminole and Indian

Seminole. Like their descendants in Oklahoma, the Florida African Seminole

participated in indigenous Seminole culture by speaking their language (as well as

that of an Afro-Seminole Creole language), eating a dish called soffkee, burying their

dead like Seminole Indians, and taking names. Africans influenced Seminole Indian rice

farming, words, stories, and coiled basketry (Bateman1991, pp. 6667; Opala1980).

Few rites of passage have been discussed for Florida African Seminole. In

African and Native American historical contexts, rites marked time and enculturated

society members as they took on the responsibilities and identities of their agecohort, engaged deities, and underwent (meta) physical transformations. Black

Seminole descendants practiced several marriage forms, including bride capture

and a ceremony with the Bible. Jumping-the-broomwas probably common among

the Florida African Seminole, as it was among African Americans in the South

(Mulroy1993; Porter1996, p. 147).

Fig. 8 Punctated, brushed

pottery excavated from

Pilaklikaha resting on a wrought

iron nail



26/33

Within family and public spheres, oral traditions-songs, adages, stories,

prayers, and genealogies-helped people declare their identity and enact spiritual

principles. For centuries, African Seminole, and Seminole and Creek Indian oral

traditions have taught history, critical thinking, and morality (Heart and Larkin

1999; Jones 1990; Howard 2002, p. 43; Jumper and West 2000; Porter n.d.;Sturtevant1954). Seminole healing songs and prescriptive verses have been used to

diagnose and cure illnesses.

Central and West African and Native American beliefs were familiar to some

members of African Seminole populations. Africans and Native Americans

recognized divinity in cosmic forces, the environment, and ancestors (Martin

1991; Thornton2001). Some wore charms and obtained medicine to ensure success

during battles and hunting, or to protect themselves from evil spirits and harm (Boyd

1958, pp. 84, 92; Smith1976, p. 49). For millennia, Central and West Africans built

shrines for ancestors and divine spirits (Ray2000; Thornton2001). In the Americas,Maroons reconstituted African principles in shrines and ancestral graves, which

served as physical markers of genealogy and territorial claims (Agorsah 1994; Bilby

1996). The indigenous Seminoles constructed sacred physic houses and shrines,

which they hid during conflicts (Boyd1958, pp. 84, 92).

Priests, herbalists, conjurers, healers, and medicine men (and women) cured

ailments and dispensed wisdom in historic Africa and southeastern North America

(Hall1990; Kelton2004; Thornton2001). Military engineer Hugh Young observed

that there were few prophets in Seminole territory. Besides a man named Francis

or Hillishija, there was a

negro girl

who

commenced the process of divination bywrapping herself in a blanket, in which she made singular whistling sounds for

several minutes (Young 1953, p. 94). Young said she claimed to communicate

about the future with invisible beings. Divination guided Seminoles in major

decisions during war (Prince 1998, p. 60). Youngs description matches modern

ethnographic and historic descriptions of divination. Modern studies see divination

as a system of spiritual guidance, as well as a repository of cosmology, values, and

healing traditions (Winkelman and Peek 2004). Oral histories of African Seminole

descendants, praise John Horses healing powers, though it is unclear whether he

practiced divination (Portern.d.). One story describes Uncle Monday, a religious

and military leader who was said to have performed ceremonies and transformed

himself into an alligator (Duffner1973).

Divination was practiced in public ceremonies such as Busks that affirmed

world views, defined the social order, and enacted transformative events (Howard

and Lena1984; Hudson1976, p. 365). Busks (from the Muskogean word poskita,

meaning to fast), also known as the Green Corn Ceremonies, are purifying

events conducted by southeastern Native Americans. The ceremony celebrated the

appearance of new (green) corn, and may have had similarities with historic

African first fruit (e.g., yams) ceremonies, such as prohibitions on consuming the

newest crops, recognition of divinities, and affirmation of the political order.

Seminoles from different settlements came together to celebrate busks for several

days during May or June. One Florida W.P.A. oral narrative stated that enslaved

plantation workers participated in the Green Corn Dance. African Seminole may

have been even more likely to participate in Busks than enslaved Africans (Gomez

1998; Rawick1976).



27/33

In preparation for the Busk, the indigenous Seminole squareground was swept

clean and a layer of white sand spread on it (compare with historic Muskogean

practices in Martin 1991). Cleansing rituals were performed, including the

destruction of older items such as fires and pots, and the creation of new ones.

Historic African and indigenous Seminole pottery use for medicinal preparations oras receptacles for sacred offerings present us with hypothetical spiritual functions for

pottery use at Pilaklikaha. Weisman (1989, pp. 111, 1999, pp. 6365) argues that

fragments of a globular, brushed pot that were buried in the clean white sand layer at

Flying Eagle Ranch were part of a Busk ground.

Beads and clay pipe fragments like the ones discovered at sites like Pilaklikaha,

were sometimes transformed from secular to sacred by their consecration in

medicine bundles, revered elements at Busks. Priests performed divination during

Busks, by consulting medicine bundles on the well-being of the community (Hudson

1976; Sturtevant 1954). Medicine bundles contained other items such as crystals,bones, and roots that were used in divination. Medicine bundles had explicit powers

that were invoked in reference to war. Ethnographic studies of indigenous Florida

Seminole show that some medicine bundles contained spark-generating stone flints.

It is worth considering whether stone items found at certain sites (as well as beads

and pipes) ever were part of early nineteenth-century sacred bundles or if the

presence of stone items in medicine bundles was strictly a twentieth-century practice

(compare with Weisman1989, p. 148). If stone inclusion in bundles was an ancient

practice, then we might inquire into whether stone flakes like the kind discovered at

Pilaklika