Hence growing cane on the old village site was more efficient that growing it on the new village site.Plot of mean ceramic dates (MCD) against CA dimension-1 scores for New River STPs.The dots represent individual shovel-test-pits and allow us to isolate the temporal differences between the two villages Preliminary research has focused on dating the villages.The gap between these two spans is small, and may be the expected outcome of the time-averaged character of the assemblages.Clarification of this point requires larger samples from New River II. The first is that the change was implemented by New River's owners as part of a larger strategy to increase the efficiency and scale of sugar production.We have used a variety of statistical methods to accurately pinpoint the beginning and ending dates of each settlement and chart change in the intensity and location of occupation within settlements over time.With dates in hand, we then chart how the use and discard of Afro-Caribbean wares changed over the course of the village occupations.
We tentatively conclude that New River II was occupied when New River I was abandoned and that there was a single massive shift of slave housing from one site to the other. Archaeology shows the terraces that traverse the old village site post-date the slave occupation.This implies the area was put into cultivation after it was abandoned.The location of these new sugar fields adjacent to the mill and boiling house complex minimized the costs of transporting sugar to them.The new village location was more distant from the mill complex.
The occupation span for New River II runs from about 1800 to 1830.
This implies that the site was abandoned at emancipation.