Theories
“What happened to the colonists in the years 1587-1590 is almost a matter for conjecture” (Quinn, 1984, p. 15). People have speculated about the possible fate of the Roanoke Island colonists for more than four hundred years. In another video that the History Channel provides it goes over what could have potentially happened to the colonists. There are dozens of theories about what happened to them. In the past forty years, scholars have discovered previously unknown records in the Spanish and British archives that may point the way toward a provable solution (Hause, 2010, p. 2).
David Beers Quinn, the leading scholar of Roanoke, has spent decades studying and sorting through the available evidence to come to a theory (Horwitz, 2008, p. 310). Quinn “advanced the most widely accepted modern theory” that the majority of the colonist left Roanoke Island to settle with the Chesapeake Indians and a smaller group waited for John White’s return (Horn, 2010). He states that “evidence will emerge in due course from archaeological searches, but the most we can do now is use our historical imagination, aided by what is known to be possible to make a tentative picture of the sequence of events” (Quinn, 1984, p. 15). In his books Set Fair for Roanoke Voyages and Colonies, 1584-1606 and The Lost Colonists Their Fortune and Probable Fate he describes, in depth, what he believes happened to the colonists.
Quinn proposes that shortly after White left, in the spring of 1588, the colonists split into two groups (Horn, 2010). He believes a bulk of colonist went to Chesapeake Bay and lived peaceful lives among the Indians. It is likely they moved there since the”Chesapeake Indians proved friendly and cooperative” (Quinn, 1984, p. 16). He also presumes that since no definite destination had been agreed on, “a holding party” would have stayed behind to direct White when he returned (Kupperman, 1984, p. 139). The small group of men ended up leaving markings for John White to follow when they left to live at Croatoan- though after being “separated for their friends for so long, it would have been easy for them to identify with the Indians” (Quinn, 1984, p. 20). James Horn opposes parts of Quinn’s theory. He points out that since the colonists knew that they needed to move and settle elsewhere, did the group have had to split up (Horn, 2010)?
Fred Willard, director of the Lost Colony Center for Science and Research, disagrees with many ideas Quinn proposes. Fred does believe that “whichever direction the colonists went, it was likely they’d settle among Indians” somewhere, not necessarily the Chesapeake Indians (Horwitz, 2008, p. 313). Since the colonists most likely moved in with and intermixed with Indians, the biggest question now is which Indian tribe did they settle with (Stick, 1983, pp. 240,241)?
In Peter Bosco’s book the concluding part of Quinn’s theory fits in with local Indian traditions and history (1992, p. 64). This is that the area around Chesapeake Bay was controlled by Powhatan and while he originally had no problem with “the people across the sea,” when more Europeans arrived he had the need to “destroy any potential enemies” (Bosco, 1992, p. 65). Quinn indicates that if the colonists were living with the Chesapeake Indians, then the massacre by Powhatan would have wiped out the colonists as well as the Chesapeake Indians (1984, p. 42).
David Beers Quinn, the leading scholar of Roanoke, has spent decades studying and sorting through the available evidence to come to a theory (Horwitz, 2008, p. 310). Quinn “advanced the most widely accepted modern theory” that the majority of the colonist left Roanoke Island to settle with the Chesapeake Indians and a smaller group waited for John White’s return (Horn, 2010). He states that “evidence will emerge in due course from archaeological searches, but the most we can do now is use our historical imagination, aided by what is known to be possible to make a tentative picture of the sequence of events” (Quinn, 1984, p. 15). In his books Set Fair for Roanoke Voyages and Colonies, 1584-1606 and The Lost Colonists Their Fortune and Probable Fate he describes, in depth, what he believes happened to the colonists.
Quinn proposes that shortly after White left, in the spring of 1588, the colonists split into two groups (Horn, 2010). He believes a bulk of colonist went to Chesapeake Bay and lived peaceful lives among the Indians. It is likely they moved there since the”Chesapeake Indians proved friendly and cooperative” (Quinn, 1984, p. 16). He also presumes that since no definite destination had been agreed on, “a holding party” would have stayed behind to direct White when he returned (Kupperman, 1984, p. 139). The small group of men ended up leaving markings for John White to follow when they left to live at Croatoan- though after being “separated for their friends for so long, it would have been easy for them to identify with the Indians” (Quinn, 1984, p. 20). James Horn opposes parts of Quinn’s theory. He points out that since the colonists knew that they needed to move and settle elsewhere, did the group have had to split up (Horn, 2010)?
Fred Willard, director of the Lost Colony Center for Science and Research, disagrees with many ideas Quinn proposes. Fred does believe that “whichever direction the colonists went, it was likely they’d settle among Indians” somewhere, not necessarily the Chesapeake Indians (Horwitz, 2008, p. 313). Since the colonists most likely moved in with and intermixed with Indians, the biggest question now is which Indian tribe did they settle with (Stick, 1983, pp. 240,241)?
In Peter Bosco’s book the concluding part of Quinn’s theory fits in with local Indian traditions and history (1992, p. 64). This is that the area around Chesapeake Bay was controlled by Powhatan and while he originally had no problem with “the people across the sea,” when more Europeans arrived he had the need to “destroy any potential enemies” (Bosco, 1992, p. 65). Quinn indicates that if the colonists were living with the Chesapeake Indians, then the massacre by Powhatan would have wiped out the colonists as well as the Chesapeake Indians (1984, p. 42).