Dec 26, 2021

Response to unjustified criticism of the Tall el-Hammam Scientific Report

The 62 page scientific research report on the destruction of Tall al-Hammam (also Tell el-Hammam, biblical Sodom), one of the largest populated sites in the Jordan valley in the Early Bronze and Middle Bronze period,  has been published online in a peer reviewed well respected science journal called Nature and is now the most downloaded/viewed scientific paper in the world. T. E. Bunch,  M.A. LeCompte, A.V. Adedeji, et al. "A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea." Scientific Reports 11, no 1 18632 (2021), 1-64. I have announced this in a previous blog post

Original version had some errors so the publishers added an addendum of all affected figures used in the article are reproduced at this link for the record and transparency. Updated report Feb 202. 

     The site in Jordan has been professionally excavated by an international team of archaeologists each season continuously since 2005 (no excavations for the last two years due to Covid restrictions). While I have excavated at the site of Tall el-Hammam since season one and  for ten of the 15 seasons I did my PhD at the University of Aberdeen and not at Trinity Southwest University and have no formal connection with the Trinity or Veritas University. Also, I am now retired from teaching at Liberty University who are not associated with the excavation at Tall el-Hammam at any point.

1. Scientists involved

The scientific tests and report were NOT carried out by the Tall el-Hammam team but by some 18 labs and independent scientists from around the world and then published independently from the Tall el-Hammam team. Dr. Phil Silvia (director of Scientific Analysis for Tall el-Hammam) whose name appears on the scientific report was the lead contact on the Tall el-Hammam team who provided the samples to the lab and some of the photographs for the report. Other photos were provided by Dr. Collins. 
     These scholars have also published other academic works in such prestigious scientific journals as Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. The report also deals with samples taken from the region around Tall el-Hammam by the scientific team not associated with Tall el-Hammam. I have no idea about their religious beliefs but regardless that would not affect the tests that were performed. The quantity of the proxies in the middle bronze age strata are what is so significant. At every level of the tall (IA, IB, MB, EB, Chal) samples were taken but it was the Middle Bronze Age strata that showed an unusually high number of proxies.
     Other air-burst phenomena have happened, not only at Tunguska, Russia (1908), but also regularly in recent times such as the Chelyabinsk meteor (2013). This is not some Alien conspiracy theory but a known and documented event being studied by the scientific community and rightfully so. NOTE: There is disagreement between Mark Boslough (who has criticized the report) and the Comet Research Group (CRG) group who published the paper. https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../06/the-mark-boslough-affair/   air-burst research is a relatively new field of research and some scientists are skeptical, thus the voice of some critics come from this perspective, but it is a growing and important field of study.
 
     The nineteen academic intuitions who were involved in the present scientific report who are not associated with TeHEP include the following:

2. Mention of Sodom

Such an important and popular scientific report, that in passing is connected to the Bible and Sodom (4 time, 3 on page 5 and once on page 57), would naturally garner criticism given the anti-Bible sentiment in the world today. 

The report begins with:

There is an ongoing debate as to whether Tall el-Hammam could be the biblical city of Sodom ( Silvia [Silvia, P. J. "The Middle Bronze Age civilization-ending destruction of the Middle Ghor." Ph.D. thesis, Trinity Southwest University (2015)] and references therein), but this issue is beyond the scope of this investigation. Questions about the potential existence, age, and location of Sodom are not directly related to the fundamental question addressed in this investigation as to what processes produced high-temperature materials at Tall el-Hammam during the MBA. Nevertheless, we consider whether oral traditions about the destruction of this urban city by a cosmic object might be the source of the written version of Sodom in Genesis. We also consider whether the details recounted in Genesis are a reasonable match for the known details of a cosmic impact event. [1] page 5-6.

Then much later, Sodom is mentioned one more time:

Regarding this proposed airburst, an eyewitness description of this 3600-year-old catastrophic event may have been passed down as an oral tradition that eventually became the written biblical account about the destruction of Sodom. There are no known ancient writings or books of the Bible, other than Genesis, that describe what could be construed as the destruction of a city by an airburst/impact event. This airburst/impact hypothesis would make Tall el-Hammam the second oldest known city/town to have been destroyed by an airburst/impact event that produced extensive human casualties, after Abu Hureyra, Syria at ~ 12,800 cal BP17. [2] page 57

So Sodom is only mentioned four times in a 62 page scientific paper.  Still anti-Bible critics do not like even that connection and what about the scientific research.

3. Doctoring Photographs

The next criticism is we are being accused of doctoring photographs, a criticism that has made it to the Wikipedia article on Tall el-Hammam. However, what was edited were the labels and not the scientific material in the Photographs. In the spirit of honesty and integrity the publishers have added an Addendum to publish the original photos and explain what had been changed. See Addendum

Comet Research Group (CRG) who produced the scientific report admits that:

 "Our graphic artist made minor, cosmetic corrections to five of 53 images. All of them were distant from any important scientific data and no changes were made to key data, such as bones or potsherds. . . .We have already submitted corrected images to Scientific Reports."[4]

Fig. 015b. The image was rotated to fit on the page better and the corners were filled.
Fig. 44c. The original image was unavailable, so we removed the text inset at bottom right.
Fig. 07d. The red directional arrow at right was removed.
Fig. 07c. The red directional arrow at bottom was removed. 

The original photographs have now been published for transparency and the report has also been peer reviewed a second time for accuracy. See Addendum

Comet Research Group

Human remains in the Middle Bronze Age.
destruction layer at TeH
Courtesy of TeHEP Michael Luddeni

     It is now clear that the images were touched up for publication as with all publications with no scientific research altered. I have published the image of the skeletal remains earlier in my book The Location of Sodom (2016) (see attached) and was present when the image was photographed. It is a red herring to suggest that the scientific data was altered to make a scientific conclusion. There is the real dishonesty in misleading the public in casting aspersion on the evidence claiming the photos were altered for science.

One of the photos had the north direction incorrectly imposed on the photo by some one unfamiliar of where it is (admitted by Dr. Collins who corrected them) but does not affect the direction of the blast nor the many tests done on the samples. We know where the north is as I used a compass and for 15 years we had a Jordanian Department of Antiquities (DOA) total station surveyor lay out our squares. Others may not be familiar with the direction on a photo. Not some conspiracy to alter the data!!  

Original version had some errors so the publishers added an addendum of all affected figures used in the article are reproduced at this link for the record and transparency. Updated report Feb 202. 

4. Pseudoscience

An extended critique published in Sapiens Anthropology Magazine states that the pseudoscientific claim has eroded scientific integrity and encouraged destruction of the site by looters. It also states that few knowledgeable archaeologists believe that the site represents Sodom or Gomorrah.[5]

Ms Kersel and Chesson, two of the authors of the article (whom I know and corresponded with for my book The Location of Sodom 2016) exudes in pride that they collaborated "with Jordan's Department of Antiquities to track how Early bronze Age ceramic vessels" were looted from their burial site at Bab ehd-Dhra.... and imply that only Christian's buy ancient artifacts, and inspired Pseudoscience. Not sure how a major scientific report that tested sample from various noted and respected US and International scientific laboratories can be considered Pseudoscience, and we did not pole the religious beliefs of any of the scientists who performed the tests. 

In addition, contrary to what they might think, the Tall el-Hammam excavation is not an illegal rogue dig but one accompanied each season by Jordanian archaeologists (two to three on location at all times) using legal DOA permits. Tall el-Hammam directors must purchase their excavation permits from the Jordan Department of Antiquities each year (15 seasons) under several different Jordanian directors over the years. It defies reason how this can be Pseudoscience other than an Ad Hominem argument meant to falsify our research.

They then claim that "Clickbait Cause Looting". Now we also acknowledge the unfortunate problem of looting at Bab edh-Dhra and many archaeological site, not just in Jordan. However, the publication of a scientific site can hardly be blamed for looting otherwise no one would publish their findings and as they should know, that unlike most sciences that base their research on experimental repetition, archaeology is a destructive science. Once the dirt and structures (i.e., stones, mudbrick) are removed all that is left is the documentation to rebuild the site. So if one does not publish their finds, then they are lost to humanity for further study and comparison. To ignore what we can learn from ancient texts would be foolish. It was not published as clickbait nor does clickbait cause looting, the sad state of the economy in many countries has contributed to looting and not Christians doing archaeology. And it is certainly not just Christians who buy ancient artifact or interested in antiquities. There are so many ad hominem arguments here that are similar to many people on the internet who create nonsense posts and replies. I would have expected better from professionals who ironically have created their own clickbait to promote their agenda against looting (there is no neutrality and everyone has a bias that I have dealt with on a previous post concerning this ad hominem argument).

5. Unaccredited Christian school

Wikipedia states that 
Since 2005, the site has been excavated by a joint project of the unaccredited Trinity Southwest University (Albuquerque, New Mexico) and the creationist Veritas International University's College of Archaeology & Biblical History (Santa Ana, California), headed by Steven Collins.

Physicist Mark Boslough, [he has a disagreement with the Comet Research Group (CRG) group who published the paper. https://wattsupwiththat.com/.../06/the-mark-boslough-affair/ ] a specialist in planetary impact hazards and asteroid impact avoidance, has undertaken a sustained critique in social media and in print of the hypothesis that an air burst was responsible for the destruction of human settlements at Tell el-Hammam. His critique calls attention to a perspective of biblical inerrancy that has been used in claims that an air burst destroyed the biblical town of Sodom.[6]

The terms "unaccredited" and "creationist" try to discredit the research because some of those involved are Christians as if Christians cannot do legitimate scientific research.

Dr. Steven Collens is Director of the School of Archaeology at Veritas International University, and serves as Consulting Research Professor in the College of Archaeology, Trinity Southwest University.

Trinity Southwest University (TSU) is an approved provider for The Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). Relative to traditional accreditation, TSU has chosen to remain non-aligned. It is our opinion that any governmental association or oversight (including that provided by default via all federally-approved “secular” and “religious” accreditation associations) is inappropriate for a faith-based organization or institution, and constitutes a fundamental violation of church/state separation. Therefore, TSU accepts no federal, state, or local governmental funding, nor do we participate in GSL or other government-based financial aid programs. TSU grants degrees under religious exemption as required by the Constitution of the State of New Mexico, USA.[7]

Veritas International University is a member of the Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS), having been awarded Reaffirmation of its Accredited Status as a Category IV institution by TRACS Accreditation Commission on November 5, 2019. This status is effective for a period of ten years. TRACS is recognized by both the United States Department of Education (USDOE), the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) and the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE).[8]

Both schools are accredited to grant degrees under government regulations although obviously do not meet the approval of everyone out there. Another ad homenum argument to try and discredit their research. 

Dr. Collins academic training is as follows:

  • 1972, B.U.S., University of New Mexico
  • 1975, M.Div., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
  • 1978, D.Min., Luther Rice University
  • 1983, Ph.D., Trinity Theological Seminary
  • 1985, Post-Doctoral Studies, Archaeological Methods, Tulsa Seminary
  • 1987, Post-Doctoral Studies, International Seminar in Theology & Law; University of Strasbourg, France
  • 1987, Post-Doc. Certificate, Int’l Law; International Institute of Human Rights, University of Strasbourg, France
  • 1989, Levantine Ceramic Typology, Jerusalem Center for Biblical Studies
  • 1997, Ph.D., Archaeology & Biblical History, Trinity Southwest University

Collins' response to these criticisms include a book published by TSU, The Kikkar Dialogues, which presents conversations he has had with other biblical archaeologists.

Another area of criticism is the fact that Dr. Collins is accused of being connected with an unaccredited Christian school (Trinity Southwest University) and they imply that they cannot possibly do scientific research (I guess there are no scientist who are Christians and if they are their research is suspect). 

6. ad hominem arguments 

While these ad hominem arguments do not deal with the science of the report many have chosen instead to spew nonsense in order to muddy the waters with the research. Sadly those who are minimalists and who do not accept the Bible as an historical text want to use disparaging comments to negate the results. Then on the other hand maximalists have also been critical because they do not agree with their early dates which they claim are biblical dates (no dates are given in the Bible for the Patriarchs and must be calculated on other evidence from the text). For the dates of the Patriarchs see my blog post and chart. Again, rather than dealing with the results of the science they wish to defend their biases and claim it is our bias that have influenced the science. I have responded to the Christianity Today's article in an earlier post. 

Then in a recent article When Biblically Inspired Pseudoscience and Clickbait Cause Looting Article they blame us for the looting of artifacts because of the popular nature of the report and because it was connected to the Bible (yes as ridiculous as this sounds). Let me respond.

Heinrich Schliemann,
Archäologe (1822–1890
Ed. Schultze Hofphotograph
Heidelberg Plöckstrasse 79
Wikimedia Commons

1. First, lets set the record strait, that even if you consider the Bible to be a myth (which I do not but many do), the Germen archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann used Homers Iliad, a myth, to locate the archaeological remains of Troy, the setting for the Greek myth of the Trojan War, so why cannot we use the Bible to find Sodom, even if you consider the Bible to be myth.[1]  It is common practice to use the geography in ancient texts (including the Bible) to locate ancient sites. It would be foolish and irresponsible not to use ancient texts to do so. They often claim that the Bible cannot be used because it is religious but what ancient text has not been influenced by their local religions? Such an argument just displays their ignorance of ancient texts and the role religions played in their culture.

See Can the Bible Be Used in Archaeology?



7. Some have suggested the we have gone in with an a prior agenda to find what we are looking for. I have previously addressed this Fallacy in THE FALLACY THAT THE A PRIORI METHOD IS BAD SCIENCE on page 71 of Digging up the Bible.

If archaeology is a dialogue, then each excavation must begin with a question or hypothesis, and in this sense we begin with an a priori approach. [2] The a priori approach is a standard method used by archaeologists for all sites (not just Christian sites). All good scientists, including archaeologists, begin with a working hypothesis and then excavate to test their hypothesis against the data collected.

For example, James K. Hoffmeier, the Egyptologist and professor of Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern History at Trinity International University, Divinity School (Deerfield, IL ), illustrates this method for his research on Migdol. He argues: “We believe that Gardiner’s proposed association of Migdol of Egyptian texts with Migdol of the Exodus narratives is a reasonable one, and thus accept it as our working hypothesis.”[3] At Tall el-Hammam our working hypothesis has been proposed that it meets the location (right place), destruction (right stuff), and Middle Bronze Age (right time), for biblical Sodom. And the Scientific Report now provides the evidence for the right event which corresponds to the biblical account.

To ensure that we do not affect the conclusions of the evidence, the pottery is put through a triple blind read in two different countries (Jordan and USA) and by experts in ancient pottery from their respective countries. Thus, the methods used in the Field are directed by the hypothesis, though there must be guards in place to stop them imposing answers on the research. This is a delicate dialogue, but one that must be followed and is also followed at Tall el-Hammam.[4]

I am disheartened by those who do not understand the scientific and archaeological process to make the finds available to the public.

All I ask is for honesty and integrity in research by all parties but these days that is just too much to ask.

__________________

Footnotes

[1] T. E. Bunch,  M.A. LeCompte, A.V. Adedeji, et al. "A Tunguska sized airburst destroyed Tall el-Hammam a Middle Bronze Age city in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea." Scientific Reports 11, no 1 18632 (2021), 5.

[2] Ibid, 57.

[3] Bik, Elisabeth . "Blast in the Past: Image concerns in paper about comet that might have destroyed Tall el-Hammam". Science Integrity Digest. (2 October 2021). 

[4] Ibid. Source: https://cosmictusk.com/pebblegate/ – archived: https://archive.is/XGhgm 

[5] Kersel, Morag M.; Chesson, Meredith S.; Hill, Austin "Chad" (15 December 2021). "When Biblically Inspired Pseudoscience and Clickbait Cause Looting". Sapiens.

[6] Boslough, Mark (2022). "Sodom Meteor Strike Claims Should Be Taken with a Pillar of Salt" (PDF)Skeptical Inquirer46 (1): 10–14.

[7] https://trinitysouthwest.com/about-tsu/

[*]

[1] Edwin M. Yamauchi, ‘Historic Homer: Did It Happen?’, Biblical Archaeology Review 33, no. 2 (2007): 28–37, 76; Edwin M. Yamauchi, ‘Homer and Archaeology: Minimalists and Maximalists in Classical Context’, in The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions, ed. James K. Hoffmeier and Alan R. Millard (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 69–90.

[2] The Webster’s New World College Dictionary defined a priori as a theory which is determined “before examination or analysis.” Michael E. Agnes, Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 4th ed. (Cleveland, Ohio: Webster’s New World, 1999), op. cit.

[3] James K. Hoffmeier, “The North Sinai Archaeological Project’s Excavations at Tell El-Borg (Sinai): An Example of the ‘New’ Biblical Archaeology?,” in The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions, ed. James K. Hoffmeier and Alan R. Millard (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 61.

[4] Thomas W. Davis, “Theory and Method in Biblical Archaeology,” in The Future of Biblical Archaeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions, ed. James K. Hoffmeier and Alan R. Millard (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 27.

__________________

Research

Dr. Collins responds:

Troweling Down:  Episode 21: The Airburst is Official!
Troweling Down:  Episode 21: Evidence Supporting An Airburst Event Part 1
 
I have responded to several criticism of the Scientific Report that was published by a peer reviewed journal recently.

__________________

Books

_________

 
Updated Feb, 2024 


Dec 10, 2021

The Abduction of Two Keith Girls by Mi'kmaq Indians May 16, 1816

 

Memorial Plaque, Havelock,
New Brunswick
Used with permission
Photo by Sheila L. (Graves) Bampton

Given the recent media coverage of the sad events surrounding the Canadian Indian residential school gravesites I felt it necessary to document other sad events that the media does not cover. I do not condone either of these sad events from history, but I wish the media were more transparent and balanced with their coverage, but understand that some events are not politically correct regardless of their historicity. Still the events must be understood in their historical context.

    I have been revisiting the descendants and genealogy of my Grandparents (Leland Dimock [Sept 22, 1905–Nov 7, 1975] and Mary Agnes (Thorne, 1908–2001) on my mothers (Hilda Luella Graves) side to publish my great aunt, Georgia Luella Dimock, memoirs. In the process, I have once again come across the account of the abduction of the two Keith girls (distant relatives) by Mi'kmaq Indians on May 16, 1816,[1] which I have heard from my relatives over the years.

    Their names were Eliza Keith (b. 1808 ca. 5–7 years) and Mary Ann Keith (b. 1809/10–ca. 1824; ca. 7–9 years) and were the daughters of George Ezra Keith (born 1784 in Long Reach, Kings County, New Brunswick–died 1831 New Canaan, NB) and Abigail (Clark) Keith (1788–November 27, 1862), the oldest son of Daniel Keith (1761–1830) married to Elizabeth (Disbrow, 1765/1767–1838) of Havelock, New Brunswick.

    I am related to the Keith girls through my Grandmother (Mary Agnes Thorne) and trace the connection back to Daniel Keith and his 9th son Josiah [2]. The two lost girls are descendants of Daniel Keith's first son.

     An account of the incident is confirmed, documented and published in “The Story of the Two Little Lost Girls” [3] by Margaret Keith, (Margaret Disborough Keith,1837–1927) widow of Ezra Keith (James Ezra Keith (February 3, 1828–November 28, 1903), who was the youngest brother of the two little lost girls who also recounts the story. I also recall my mother (Hilda Luella Dimock), grandmother (Mary Agnes Price) and Aunt (Georgia Luella Dimock) telling me the story and who knew the family well.

    The account I am reproducing here was compiled in 1905 by the pastor Rev. J. W. Brown the eighteenth pastor of the Baptist Church in Havelock, New Brunswick (May 1900–1903) and published in his An Historical Sketch of the Early Settlement of New Canaan [N.B.] and the Histories of the New Canaan, Havelock, and Albert Baptist Churches, 1905, 12. It is consistent with the account by the girls youngest brother's wife, Margaret Keith.



These early settlers as a rule had large families, it being not uncommon for a mother to have twelve children “to rise up and call her blessed.” Daniel Keith could rejoice in twelve sons grown to manhood, besides a few daughters. It is said on one occasion that these twelve sons were mowing in a large field with the father leading off. The father was moved with a pardonable pride on the occasion, and was afterwards accustomed to refer to it with considerable elation. The name of the oldest son was George. He settled afterwards on Butternut Ridge, on what is now known as the Ezra Keith Place. Shortly after he settled here, he met with a very sad and peculiarly distressing experience, an account of which is being handed down to successive generations. He had at the time two children — girls — Eliza and Mary Ann, aged respectively 9 and 7 years.[4] Just north of his house was a spring near a wood, where the children were accustomed to play.

     One day while the children were out to this place, a neighbor’s child — May Price — came over to play with them, and their mother went to the door and called them. She received an answer to the call, and after waiting some time for them to come in, she called again; receiving no answer to this call she went in search of them, but a most careful search failed to discover their whereabouts. She then called her husband, who joined in the search, but with no better success. Appeal was made to the neighbors and a general search was instituted which continued through the days and nights for a considerable time without avail. The only trace found was the imprint of a child’s hand in the soft sand on the bank of a brook some considerable distance in the woods, as if a child had stooped to drink. It was at last surmised that the children had been carried off by Indians, of whom there were then a large number to the east of the New Canaan Settlement. 
     After a while, stray reports would reach the parents of white children being seen with [Mi’kmaq] Indians at different places, which would move Mr. Keith to make journeys to these places that he might ascertain whether the children thus reported were his.

[2] These journeys were all fruitless. The last journey made seemed to have satisfied Mr. Keith that it was useless to make any further attempts to recover them. His peculiar reticence concerning this particular journey aroused suspicion in some that he had received some tidings from them, but as they would then be grown to young womanhood he had found it impossible to induce them to return home; however this might have been only a suspicion.

   Years afterwards a supposed Indian woman came into the place with some of her tribe, and it was at once surmised — although she had taken on almost the Indian hue — that she was one of the missing children. This surmise she gradually and reluctantly admitted was true. She at once recognized her grandmother when brought into her presence, whom she knew well before her abduction, and of whom she had been very fond, and in other ways removed all doubt as to her identity. In a moment of confidence she told the story of their capture by the Indians: She said they were suddenly seized, their cries stopped, and they were quickly carried away. For a time the horns and guns of the searching parties could be heard, but gradually died away. At one place the Indians halted and attempted to kindle a fire by igniting the powder in the pan of a musket; but by some miscalculation the gun went off which greatly alarmed the Indians; whereupon they hastily caught up the children and travelled a considerable distance further. She said they were kindly treated by the Indians, but that her sister never took kindly to them, but despite all their efforts to win her she persisted in pining for home.

     This woman Eliza was at the time married to an Indian and had a family of children. She was very anxious to rejoin them but was hindered by her new-found folks from doing so. On one occasion she escaped and took a straight course through the woods to the place where her Indian friends were encamped, which she reached only to find that they had removed to an other place; guided as if by instinct she took a direct course to the place where they had gone. She was however, missed, tracked and found before reaching the place and brought back to the home of her parents. She told them that it was useless to detain her for that when spring opened and the snow disappeared they would be unable to track her and she would get away. Her father had long since passed away. It was generally believed that his death was caused by his long continued anxiety and grief for his lost children. Her mother was most anxious that she should remain with her, but when spring opened, yielding to her persistent entreaties, consent was given that she should visit her family and the Indians to whom she had become attached. These were then encamped in the vicinity of Shediac [New Brunswick]. She promised to return to the home of her youth after she had made this visit. She was taken a long way on her journey and then left to herself. She never returned. Whether she chose to stay, or was prevented from coming back it is not known. The other child Mary Ann also returned but in such a demented condition that she was unable to give any intelligent account of herself. She wandered at large and remained an oddity until her death.

Margaret Keith, widow of Ezra Keith, who was the youngest brother of the two girls recounts: 

She [Eliza] answered so readily to the name Eliza” that the mother was deeply impressed, although it was difficult to get her to say anything about her former life, or how she came to be with the Indians. One day she was sitting with her elbows on her knees and her resting on her hands, as that was the position she seemed most comfortable in, several old ladies came in, her mother drew attention to them and asked her if she knew them. She looked up and said No, me don’t know them.” At last her grandmother came in, her mother said Do you know this old lady, Eliza?” She looked up with such surprise, put her arms around the old lady and said, Dat my dear old grandmother”, and burst out crying. That was proof enough that she was the same little girl who used to visit her grandmother and stay for weeks at a time . . . After that she did not seem so distant, and would sometimes enter into conversation with the family, and talk of what little she could remember of her being lost. At one time when talking with one of her uncles who had been telling her how they had searched for them, she joined right in and said, Did you hear the gun go off”. [5]


Footnotes

[1] The date is May 10 in M. Frederick Amos, Myrtle K. Perry, and Gerald Keith, The Descendants of Daniel and Elizabeth (Disbrow) Keith: Loyalists to New Brunswick in 1783 (Burlington, Ont.: M.F. Amos, 1981), 18; and the Memorial Plaque in Havelock, NB (see photo).

[2] M. Frederick Amos, Myrtle K Perry, and Gerald Keith, The Descendants of Daniel and Elizabeth (Disbrow) Keith: Loyalists to New Brunswick in 1783 (Burlington, Ont.: M.F. Amos, 1981), 18.

[3] Mary Keith, Bernice Plume, Myrtle Perry, and Pauline Steeves. Butternut Ridge-Havelock Our Proud Heritage 1809-1988. Havelock Women’s Institute (Sackville, New Brunswick: The Tribune Press, 1990), 4-6 

[4] Eliza Keith (b. 1808 ca. 5–7 years) and Mary Ann Keith (b. 1809/10 ca. 7–9 years) were abducted in May 10, 1816. J. W. Brown, An Historical Sketch of the Early Settlement of New Canaan [N.B.] and the Histories of the New Canaan, Havelock, and Albert Baptist Churches, 1905, 12.

[5] Mary Keith et al., Butternut Ridge-Havelock Our Proud Heritage 1809-1988, Havelock Women’s Institute (Sackville, New Brunswick: The Tribune Press, 1990), 5. 

___________

Updated Dec 11, 2021.



_________

 
Updated Feb, 2024