Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: blam

If you can make the argument that he was an indentured servant, you can tell that he had a hard life, what kind of diet he had, and that he may be representative of certain people of that time," Luckenbach said.

If, but that might not fit the reality of the event.
Convienient but not proven.


17 posted on 07/12/2004 4:49:46 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: tet68

It's more than likely that the kid died at a time of year when grave digging was impossible. And quite possible the remaining household died or moved before a proper burial could be performed. Its also possible that the family COULD have taken the kid in out of pity (maybe an orphan). And that he was already in poor health and not a victim of domestic torture.
I agree with your "not proven" statement and of course, people love a good story. It reminds me of a similar discovery showcased in a national magazine where the archeologists automatically assumed the skeleton of a female with a wide hip span was "probably a prostitute"!(just some BS tossed out for drama)


27 posted on 07/12/2004 6:35:13 PM PDT by two23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson