The 1559 Spanish Luna Colony: A Questionable Claim of Its Discovery.
by Caleb Curren and David Dodson
Contact Archeology Inc.
(CAI) June 2020
The University of West Florida (UWF) claims that they have found the archeological remains of the first multi-year European colony in the current United States known as the Luna Colony. That claim is inaccurate based on the current data.
What would be the archeological proof of the existence of the 1559 Spanish Luna Colony? There would be numerous Spanish burials, structural remains, firehearths, and refuse pits. UWF excavations over years have produced none of these requisite archeological features despite over approximately a thousand excavations at the 8Es1 site (see map on next page).
UWF has given numerous presentations at archeological conferences as well as postings on social media and many newspaper articles to support their claim. None of these media releases can match technical scientific reports. There is no doubt that UWF has found a wide array of 16th-Century Spanish artifacts on an aboriginal site (8Es1). The Native village with two burial mounds was first discovered by the Smithsonian Institution in 1883. UWF has claimed to have defined the horizontal distribution of the Spanish colony. In truth, they have redefined the expanse of the Native village previously defined by members of Contact Archeology Inc. (CAI) in the 1990s. Why does UWF neglect to focus on the Native occupation of site 8Es1 even though the Spanish artifacts are mixed with Native artifacts?
The primary question now is, how did the Spanish artifacts come to be present on the Native site? Did the Natives trade for the Spanish artifacts or salvage the Spanish artifacts from the three Spanish shipwrecks blown onto a shallow sand shelf adjacent to the Native village by the hurricane in 1559 or is the site really the Luna Colony of 1559?
Strangely, a technical report from UWF has not been produced. It is traditionally expected in scientific professional circles that technical reports are provided for peer review. UWF has failed to produce a technical report after years of operating on public funding. Blogs and newspaper articles are not comparable to professional scientific technical reports.
The true story of the history and prehistory of 8Es1 is not known. There is still data being held in secret by UWF not subject to peer review. Until that information is released we can only rely on periodic blogs and newspaper articles by UWF. That situation needs to be corrected by UWF by providing technical reports of their excavations at 8Es1.
This map demonstrates an incredible amount of UWF excavations on a relatively small aboriginal archeological site (8Es1).
16th-Century Spanish features such as numerous burials, structures, firehearths, and refuse pits have not been found but UWF still claims to have found the 1559 Spanish Colony. There was a Spanish presence at the Luna Colony for over 2 years, therefore, there is no doubt that these types of features are present at the Luna Colony site, based on the archeological features found on other 16th-Century Spanish settlements in the New World.
That lack of hard scientific data clearly indicates a premature claim of the location of the Luna Colony by the University of West Florida.
About the Authors:
Caleb Curren graduated from the University of Alabama with advanced degrees in archeology and has published hundreds of articles, reports, and books over decades of research.
David Dodson graduated from Vanderbilt University with a degree in history and has been investigating and translating both Spanish and French documents related to the Luna Expedition since 2002.
- Article
-
The University of West Florida (UWF) claims that they have found the archeological remains of the first multi-year European colony in the current United States known as the Luna Colony. That claim is inaccurate based on the current data.
What would be the archeological proof of the existence of the 1559 Spanish Luna Colony? There would be numerous Spanish burials, structural remains, firehearths, and refuse pits. UWF excavations over years have produced none of these requisite archeological features despite over approximately a thousand excavations at the 8Es1 site (see map on next page).
UWF has given numerous presentations at archeological conferences as well as postings on social media and many newspaper articles to support their claim. None of these media releases can match technical scientific reports. There is no doubt that UWF has found a wide array of 16th-Century Spanish artifacts on an aboriginal site (8Es1). The Native village with two burial mounds was first discovered by the Smithsonian Institution in 1883. UWF has claimed to have defined the horizontal distribution of the Spanish colony. In truth, they have redefined the expanse of the Native village previously defined by members of Contact Archeology Inc. (CAI) in the 1990s. Why does UWF neglect to focus on the Native occupation of site 8Es1 even though the Spanish artifacts are mixed with Native artifacts?
The primary question now is, how did the Spanish artifacts come to be present on the Native site? Did the Natives trade for the Spanish artifacts or salvage the Spanish artifacts from the three Spanish shipwrecks blown onto a shallow sand shelf adjacent to the Native village by the hurricane in 1559 or is the site really the Luna Colony of 1559?
Strangely, a technical report from UWF has not been produced. It is traditionally expected in scientific professional circles that technical reports are provided for peer review. UWF has failed to produce a technical report after years of operating on public funding. Blogs and newspaper articles are not comparable to professional scientific technical reports.
The true story of the history and prehistory of 8Es1 is not known. There is still data being held in secret by UWF not subject to peer review. Until that information is released we can only rely on periodic blogs and newspaper articles by UWF. That situation needs to be corrected by UWF by providing technical reports of their excavations at 8Es1.
This map demonstrates an incredible amount of UWF excavations on a relatively small aboriginal archeological site (8Es1).
16th-Century Spanish features such as numerous burials, structures, firehearths, and refuse pits have not been found but UWF still claims to have found the 1559 Spanish Colony. There was a Spanish presence at the Luna Colony for over 2 years, therefore, there is no doubt that these types of features are present at the Luna Colony site, based on the archeological features found on other 16th-Century Spanish settlements in the New World.
That lack of hard scientific data clearly indicates a premature claim of the location of the Luna Colony by the University of West Florida.
- About the Authors
-
About the Authors:
Caleb Curren graduated from the University of Alabama with advanced degrees in archeology and has published hundreds of articles, reports, and books over decades of research.
David Dodson graduated from Vanderbilt University with a degree in history and has been investigating and translating both Spanish and French documents related to the Luna Expedition since 2002.
- Download PDF Version