Sample Cover Letter To Request Medical Records - Division Of: Fill & Download for Free

"Dig deeper."Avelino Tamala's green Ford Bronco cut through the crisp desert night, headlights revealing glimpses of scattered creosote bushes along the shoulders of State Route 238. He knew the sparsely traveled highway southwest of Phoenix from his days as a patrol deputy with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, before he became a detective.Anna Reyes, the mother of Crystal Reyes, in an undated police mug shot.Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeTamala still carried a gun, but no longer wore the badge — he abandoned that two years earlier for a romance with one of his confidential informants, Anna Reyes, the woman in the passenger seat that night.His knowledge of law enforcement and her connections to Mexican drug cartels now afforded the couple a lucrative career selling drugs smuggled into the United States. The green Bronco provided an ideal transport for bundles of marijuana.But that night the cargo in the trunk was much lighter, and to them, seemingly less valuable: Reyes' 3-year-old daughter lay lifeless behind them, wrapped in a white bedsheet, a shovel next to her tiny body for what would follow.The Bronco slowed as they passed milepost 26. Tamala maneuvered the vehicle about a mile along an unpaved passage intersecting the highway, surrounded by little more than a flat, undeveloped desert.Opening the back hatch, Tamala removed the shovel and clutched its red handle. He drove the blade into the earth.Reyes watched Tamala dig, holding a flashlight as she illuminated the unmarked grave. She broke the silence to utter two final words before they placed her daughter into the earth:"Dig deeper."Crystal Reyes, the 3-year-old girl buried that cold April evening in 1997, would have turned 23 this year. Her short life, marred by abuse at the hands of those who were supposed to care for her, is a brief chapter in a tangled narrative of crime and love, deceit and heartbreak.Hers is a case that stirred, for years, in the minds of those who investigated it, the details cemented in their memory after the initial investigation went cold, after it stagnated for more than a decade after it was reopened in 2013 — still today as the investigation continues nearly 20 years later.Whispered Secrets'In 1991, Darren Stockwell worked as a detention officer at the Maricopa County Durango Jail. He was 23, and one of his responsibilities was to oversee the hour of outdoor recreation allowed each day to inmates, including Anna Reyes, then 25 and serving a three-year sentence for trafficking marijuana.Darren Stockwell in an undated photo believed to have been taken in the 1990s.Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeReyes had thick, black hair, brown eyes, and full lips that hid her perfect teeth."She was an attractive lady," Stockwell said years later in court.Official records, deposition transcripts, and court proceedings described Reyes as a woman who wielded her beauty to manipulate the men around her.She took a special liking to Stockwell, a tall, good looking man with a light complexion and muscular build. The two played games of HORSE on the basketball court at the county jail, just the two of them because, for safety reasons, Reyes was separated from other inmates.Flirtation made its way into their brief interactions. Yet beyond the amorous poem "Whispered Secrets" that Reyes had passed along to Stockwell, they avoided crossing boundaries. The flirtations had to stay just that.Reyes was granted parole on March 26, 1992, just four days before her 26th birthday."It wasn't too long after she was released, I got a call at the jail," Stockwell said. "It was Anna."The purpose of the call came as no surprise — Reyes wanted to meet up, but jail policy bound Stockwell to wait a year before interacting with former inmates.They spared no time after the year had passed. For several months, they spent nearly every day together."Yeah, I fell in love," Stockwell said during trial testimony. "I was young and dumb, but I did."They discussed moving in together, which made even more sense to Stockwell the day Reyes came to his apartment with the news."I was overwhelmed, but sort of happy. I wanted us to get together," he said. "She was pregnant — I wanted to do it right."Reyes had other plans.She was still legally married to another man with whom she had three children, and her parole dictated that she lives in a stable home. Stockwell said Reyes told him she wanted to have sex with her husband one last time, to mislead him into thinking the pregnancy was his, divorce him, and then request money for child support."I was devastated," Stockwell said. "So I walked away."UnwantedCrystal was born Nov. 26, 1993, at a clinic in Nogales, Mexico — where her mother grew up, where her grandmother still lived.Sergio Cazares introduced Anna Reyes to Avelino Tamala while he worked for Tamala as a confidential informant. Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeWithin days, Reyes brought her newborn daughter back to the U.S. and immediately tried to give Crystal away.Reyes' longtime friends Sergio Cazares and his girlfriend Mayda Diaz were interested. They knew Reyes from Nogales but had since moved to Tempe.Mayda, barely able to speak in court as she fought back tears recalling the interaction, said she thought Reyes was joking when "she asked if I wanted her.""Of course, she's beautiful," Mayda replied.Mayda and Cazares had many children already, but they agreed to take Crystal as long as Reyes followed through on making the adoption official. They kept Crystal for about a week, and by then Reyes hadn't taken action on the adoption paperwork, so the couple gave the girl back to her mother, thinking Reyes simply didn't want to raise an infant."I knew she would eventually try to take her back," Cazares said. "That's why I wanted the (adoption) papers."Mayda Diaz.Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeReyes took Crystal to Mexico, where she would live with Reyes' mother.Reyes returned to Arizona in December 1993, but less than a year later, she was sent back to jail for violating her parole. Records detailing her violation have since been purged.Reyes wanted a way out. She called on her friend Cazares, who was working as a confidential informant for a narcotics detective at the MCSO Special Investigation's Division.The detective's name was Avelino Tamala.A detective and his informantAvelino Tamala began his law enforcement career as a transportation officer with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in 1985 when he was 22. Most people called him "Al."He moved up quickly within MCSO, working first as a detention officer, then patrol officer. By 1990, he had risen to the rank of detective within the agency's narcotics division.Tamala's superiors considered him a hard-working, effective lawman who kept to himself and produced results."He was the guy doing it all," said Sgt. Richard Rosky, Tamala's then-lieutenant. "He was one of my best detectives at the time."Avelino Tamala was convicted of murder on Nov. 8 for his role in the death and burial of 3-year-old Crystal Reyes.Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeCazares told Tamala about his friend, Anna Reyes, who was in jail but wanted to cooperate with law enforcement in exchange for a reduction to her sentence or charges. Tamala met with Reyes in 1993, and she told him about her family — the Somozas — and their heavy involvement in the Mexican drug trade.Darren Stockwell said years later that he remembered seeing Tamala visit Reyes in jail in 1991, but MCSO supervisors said they weren't aware of any visits. Investigators acknowledged there were conflicting accounts regarding when Tamala and Reyes first met.Still, the information Reyes gave Tamala in 1993 resulted in arrests and sizable drug seizures, which proved to Tamala's superiors that Reyes might be more useful out of custody.Capt. Steve Werner led the Special Investigations Division at the time and oversaw Reyes' release from jail. Their agreement stipulated that Reyes would work as an informant for MCSO, as well as several local, state, and federal agencies.MCSO records detail Werner's arrangement, which addressed one notable characteristic of Reyes that he thought could lead to problems."Werner said that [Reyes] had a reputation of becoming sexually involved with officers and that she was considered by many to be very attractive," records state. "To avoid problems of this nature Werner ordered that two officers be assigned to [Reyes] at all times."A second detective, Gary Eggert, was assigned to work with Reyes and Tamala. But Eggert quickly became frustrated by the arrangement, because most of the tips Reyes provided fell flat.One of those instances took place in October 1994, after Reyes told detectives about a sale of 200 pounds of marijuana. They arranged an undercover deal and made an arrest, but the drugs they seized came in 140 pounds lighter. Reyes later told Tamala she had "skimmed" the load and sold the rest herself. At the time, the payout would have been worth tens of thousands of dollars."Everybody in the office, I think, was expecting some, you know, us to bring down the Colombians or something," Eggert said at the time. "And it just wasn't happening."The results were warning signs to Eggert. He started noticing Reyes and Tamala were becoming close."I just kind of felt uncomfortable about the situation and I didn't ... if something happened bad, I didn't want to be a part of it," Eggert said. "You have a sixth sense that hey, you know, stay clear of something. And this could be something bad."Eggert went to Rosky, Tamala's then-lieutenant, asking to be reassigned and told him about Tamala's slipping performance and closeness with Reyes.Rosky questioned Tamala about Reyes, but Tamala assured him nothing was happening between them. Other co-workers eventually started speculating about Tamala's relationship with his informant. It became an "office joke," according to records.In 1995, the sheriff's office opened an internal affairs investigation. The resulting report accused Tamala of "fraternizing" with Reyes.Tamala admitted to investigators that since September 1994, just months after Reyes became an informant, he'd been periodically living with her.Werner, the investigation's division captain, brought Tamala into his office and gave him a direct order to end the relationship. Tamala refused, so Werner asked for his badge and resignation.In a subsequent letter to the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board advocating that Tamala never again be hired into law enforcement, Werner wrote, "The tragedy of this affair lies in the fact of his blatant, uncaring attitude and lack of remorse which was displayed to Sergeant Rosky and me at the time when I accepted his resignation."An office secretary, Rosanna Galindo, lamented Tamala's downward spiral, telling internal affairs investigators, "I just think it's kind of sad what happened to him because he's a real nice guy. And I don't know, you know, what's going to happen to him."I guess love can make you do anything."Shadow RockAlthough Tamala had walked away from his career and income, his relationship with Reyes brought a job prospect far more lucrative than the salary of a detective.Anna Reyes, left, poses with her niece, Annette Rodriguez, in an undated photo. Rodriguez witnessed parts of Crystal's abuse while living with Reyes and Avelino Tamala in the late 1990s.Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeBy August 1995, Tamala and Reyes started selling smuggled marijuana. Tamala logged their transactions — worth hundreds of thousands of dollars — in a ledger he kept in a storage locker.The couple could now afford to rent a two-story, five-bedroom house in a gated Ahwatukee community. It had a pool, and the backyard abutted a small mountain called Shadow Rock. The rent was $3,000 a month.The home had plenty of space for Reyes' three adolescent children — Juliana, Thalia, and Luis — who had lived with Reyes since her most recent release from jail. Reyes hired a live-in housekeeper to clean and care for the children while she and Tamala were away on trips to Mexico, Nevada, or elsewhere in Arizona.The 21-year-old housekeeper, Maria Gutierrez-Diaz, had recently moved to Arizona from Sinaloa, Mexico, and knew very little about America. It was easy for Tamala and Reyes to convince her that Tamala was still an undercover detective.Reyes' niece, Annette Rodriguez, believed the same when she moved to the home in September 1996. She was a sophomore in high school and had been going through a rough patch with her mother. She wanted to finish high school while living with her aunt.Nearly 20 years later, Diaz and Rodriguez would testify in court that they thought Tamala and Reyes, the three children and the big house in a wealthy Phoenix suburb indicated a stable family, normalcy.They didn't know about the double life Tamala and Reyes were living. The illusion of a suburban household evaporated when Reyes' youngest daughter, Crystal, came to live with them.CrystalCrystal had just turned 3 when her grandmother brought her back from Mexico to live in the U.S. with Reyes and Tamala in November 1996.Anna Reyes and her daughter Crystal.Crystal appeared happy, smiling often, Diaz said. She had a light complexion, amber hair in ringlets, and blue eyes — traits from her father. She seldom talked. When she did, she only spoke Spanish."She was a beautiful girl," Diaz recalled years later. "Very, very pretty little girl."Rodriguez thought the same, as did most who had met Crystal.But Rodriguez and Diaz thought it was strange that Crystal ate alone at the dinner table, only after everyone else had finished. Stranger still, without a bed of her own, the child slept in a closet, just sheets and pillows laid out on the floor.Diaz told police that Reyes once hauled the child into a bathroom after she heard Crystal bragging about being prettier than her sisters. Tamala and Reyes used a pair of hair clippers to shave off her curls, laughing as they did it. The other children joined in, Diaz remembered."Maybe they thought it was a joke or game," Diaz said. "But it seemed weird to me that someone would do that to a little girl."For Christmas that year, Reyes and Tamala rented a condominium in Colorado for a family skiing trip.During a snowball fight between cousins, Tamala and Reyes brought Crystal outside to join. She was barefoot and wore nothing but pajamas, Rodriguez later testified in court. The other children started throwing snowballs at Crystal. So did Reyes and Tamala.Rodriguez eventually went inside to shower and change. She then heard Tamala and Reyes yelling at each other. They were in another bathroom, with Crystal under a hot shower — her skin blue, her body shaking uncontrollably.Reyes and Tamala were arguing because they thought Crystal was going to die, Rodriguez said. The shower revived her.Several weeks after the Colorado trip, Rodriguez decided to move back home with her mother. She was scared of living in the Ahwatukee house — scared of Tamala and Reyes. She didn't see the abuse escalate.Diaz, the housekeeper, did."It was awful," Diaz said.Tamala and Reyes started binding Crystal's hands and feet, sometimes from one doorknob to another in the small utility room that provided access to the garage. Abrasions formed around the child's wrists and ankles.Her cries would go ignored by the family and, Diaz said, Tamala once stepped on the child, still bound, as he passed by.Crystal was soon confined to a small plastic dog crate, the inside just 20 inches wide. Sores began to develop on her body because she couldn't move away from the excrement and urine that soiled the floor. The crate was too small for Crystal to fit comfortably, forcing her to live in a perpetual bent position. Dark green bruises spotted her frail arms.Sometimes, Reyes and Tamala took Crystal and the kennel to the backyard so they could hose her down. They would spray the inside of the kennel, too, before putting the girl back inside to lie on the hard surface without a blanket or pillow.Crystal's cries, muffled slightly by the confines of the crate, soon turned to whimpers. They became softer as hours of captivity turned to days, then weeks.She stopped eating and, eventually, stopped urinating and defecating, Diaz recalled. Crystal's once-plump body had withered, her skin now clinging to her tiny bones.She began to starve.'Bury her'One chilly afternoon in April 1997, the sun began to take cover behind South Mountain, casting a shadow over the Ahwatukee Foothills neighborhood where Tamala and Reyes lived.According to witness testimony and police reports, 3-year-old Crystal Reyes was confined to this dog kennel for weeks before she died in 1997. Phoenix Police DepartmentThat evening marked the final act of Crystal's abuse, detailed to investigators years later during an interview with Tamala. His words would become the only account of Crystal's death.As the sun began to set and the three older children played in the driveway, Tamala and Reyes retrieved their bicycles for an evening ride.From her kennel inside the garage, wearing nothing but a pair of underwear, Crystal called out to her siblings."Cállate," Reyes yelled in Spanish as she pulled the child from the kennel.According to Tamala, Reyes placed a bath towel over the girl's head, then used clear packing tape to wrap her up, securing the towel around her face and binding Crystal's arms to her sides."Don't do this," Crystal pleaded, promising that she'd be quiet. But Tamala said Reyes then placed the starving child — bound and gagged — into a tall cardboard box.With Crystal silenced, Tamala and Reyes left the children at home while they rode their bikes for more than an hour.It was dark when they returned. Reyes went into the house. Tamala went straight to the box in the garage. Crystal was still standing, though slumped against one side.He frantically pulled her out, Tamala later told investigators, ripping away the tape and unwrapping the towel. The girl's arms and legs had turned blue — her eyes wide open even though she was already dead."There's something wrong," Tamala told Reyes after running inside to usher her downstairs and into the garage.Once there, Tamala said he knelt beside Crystal's body to revive her. Several minutes passed before he stopped the chest compressions, giving up."There's nothing else I can do for her," Tamala said. Reyes stared, expressionless, and told him to keep going."No, she's alive," Reyes said. "She's alive."Tamala said they argued over whether to call 911, but Reyes didn't want police and paramedics to come."Bury her," Reyes said in Spanish.An investigation opensBy the summer of 1998, the once-cozy life for Tamala and Reyes was unraveling. The couple left the Ahwatukee home in June for Tucson, but after a short time, Tamala moved in with his mother in Phoenix.Mile marker 27 along State Route 238 is near the intersecting dirt roadway where Crystal Reyes was buried. Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeReyes, along with her three other children, moved to Tempe with her friend Sergio Cazares, the informant who worked with Tamala in 1993.Cazares and his girlfriend, Mayda Diaz, having met Crystal just weeks after she was born, asked about the little girl. Reyes lied. She told them Crystal was living in Mexico.Reyes and her children moved out a few weeks later. But shortly after that, Tamala came looking for them. Cazares asked him about Crystal."From what I understood, he told me that she was no longer alive," Cazares said, adding that Tamala told him Crystal's body was in the desert — that it couldn't be found."If there's nobody, there's no death," Tamala told him.Cazares told a detective with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. That information was given to Phoenix Police Department Detective Don White, who was assisting several federal agencies in an ongoing narcotics investigation into Tamala and Reyes.White, along with the lead investigator in the federal drug case, Special Agent Joe Slatalla of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, had been close to securing indictments for Tamala and Reyes.The possible homicide case was handed off to another Phoenix Police detective, Michael Meislish, in February 1999.Meislish said his investigation was "somewhat unusual" compared to other homicides he had worked. For the first several months, he relied on secondhand, after-the-fact information brought to him from detectives on the federal drug case."I was kind of secondary to what was going on in the other investigation," Meislish recalled during Tamala's trial.His first hands-on work in the case came Dec. 16, 1999, two days after federal investigators interviewed Tamala under an agreement that protected him against prosecution for anything said during the interview. Tamala told federal investigators, in explicit detail, about Crystal's life at the home in Ahwatukee, her death, and the night he and Reyes buried her in the desert.Meislish and a group of other officers and detectives went to the site Tamala described. They came up empty-handed.But a call in January 2000 to the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office revealed that fragments of an unknown child's cranium were found more than a year earlier.In November 1998, 19 months after Crystal was buried, a quail hunter stumbled across what he suspected were pieces of human bone. He contacted police, who confirmed the fragments were human remains, but investigators didn't have any leads, and they didn't yet know of Crystal's death.By the time Meislish linked those fragments to Crystal, Tamala and Reyes had been indicted on federal crimes for conspiring to distribute and possess, with intent to distribute a controlled substance, making it easy for him to obtain a sample of Reyes' DNA.Without the father's DNA, however, the bones couldn't be positively identified as Crystal's.To bring charges against Reyes and Tamala, Meislish needed to prove that fact. He knew about Crystal's abuse, but only through interviews protected under the federal agreement with Tamala.Meislish tried to contact Maria Gutierrez-Diaz, the housekeeper who lived with the family in Ahwatukee, but he couldn't find her. Official records didn't detail why the biological father, Darren Stockwell, wasn't contacted or asked to provide DNA.The case went cold.Once silentATF Special Agent Joseph Slatalla, the former lead agent who helped convict Tamala and Reyes on drug charges, was about to retire. He knew about Crystal's murder — that the investigation into her death had gone dormant — and contacted cold case Detective Dennis Olson with the Maricopa County Attorney's Office in 2013.Maria Gutierrez-Diaz was a paid housekeeper for Avelino Tamala and Anna Reyes while they lived in the Ahwatukee home in Arizona. Diaz witnessed Crystal's abuse. Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeOlson agreed to revisit the case and started reading through dozens of police and investigative reports about Crystal's murder. He learned that no one ever talked with Diaz.New advances in law enforcement databases made it easier for Olson to find Diaz, who was living at her sister's home in Phoenix.Olson and a Spanish-speaking detective spoke with Diaz at her sister's home that year. It was the first time Diaz had talked with law enforcement officials about the case. But after a brief conversation, Diaz told the detectives that she hadn't witnessed Crystal's abuse.Again, the case stalled.A year passed before Diaz called the detectives."(Diaz) requested to speak with me about what happened to Crystal, because it was time for the truth to be known," Olson stated in his report about the call.Diaz told Olson about what she saw at the Ahwatukee home, explaining first why she didn't tell him the full story when they first met: She was afraid of speaking up — afraid of Tamala and Reyes. She thought the couple may have had something to do with an incident that hospitalized Diaz for several weeks in April 1997 — the same timeframe that Crystal was believed to have been murdered.Diaz recounted that evening on April 12, 1997, when Reyes dropped her off at a nightclub, on her weekend off, to meet her then-boyfriend and her sister. After a night of dancing, they left the club to find the window of her boyfriend's vehicle shattered. Nothing was missing from the car.While driving home, a car pulled up next to them. The people inside had guns."They started shooting and everything happened so fast. I bent down but they had already hit me," Diaz later recalled at Tamala's trial, barely able to speak through her tears. "I didn't realize at that moment that (my boyfriend) was dead."Diaz was shot in the neck and spent two weeks recovering in the hospital. She returned to the Ahwatukee home to continue working for Reyes and Tamala.Crystal wasn't there.Fragments of Crystal Reyes' cranium were found by a hunter in 1998 in a remote section of desert near Mobile, Arizona.Maricopa County Sheriff's OfficeAfter several weeks, Diaz quit. She said, "it didn't feel right being there." She moved in with her sister.More than 15 years after her boyfriend was killed, after she was shot in the neck, after she moved in with her sister, Diaz told Detective Olson her full story. She detailed the abuse in Ahwatukee. She told detectives about the time Tamala visited her sister's home after she had quit, subtly telling Diaz that her shooting wasn't random, warning her about Reyes.Diaz also told Olson, again recalling the details in court, that she thought she recognized one of the gunmen from April 1997. She thought it was the same man who Reyes had talked to shortly before the shooting, when she and Reyes stopped at a grocery store, when Reyes got out of the car and talked to the man while pointing at Diaz, when she and Reyes left the store without ever going inside.Diaz told detectives that she didn't think going to the police sooner about Crystal's abuse was an option. She thought Tamala was the police.A father and his DNAWith a witness to Crystal's abuse, Olson's renewed investigation into her murder had started to take shape. He continued tracking people down, including the man detectives believed was Crystal's biological father.Darren Stockwell, the former MCSO detention officer whose relationship with Reyes ended several months after it began, was living in north Phoenix. It had been more than 20 years since he met Reyes. He hadn't heard from investigators about the case since shortly after a detective left a business card on his front door in 1998.On Aug. 1, 2014, Olson visited Stockwell at his home.Stockwell was surprised to see the detective. He was "in shock" when Olson told him about bone fragments found in the desert, that the remains were likely his daughter's, he recalled in court.Police recovered around 17 fragments of Crystal Reyes' cranium in 1998. Those fragments were used to conduct a DNA analysis to identify the 3-year-old girl. Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeStockwell couldn't be certain that Reyes was telling the truth about her pregnancy in 1993. He didn't know that he actually had a child, let alone that she was dead.Olson asked Stockwell if he was willing to provide a sample of his DNA, to prove the bones were Crystal's. He initially refused, but provided a sample when Olson returned with a warrant."I didn't know what to think, I was overwhelmed," Stockwell said. "It was pretty earth-shattering news."In court, Olson described the emotional interaction with Stockwell, when his eyes filled with tears as he learned he did have a daughter, that she was dead. His eyes welled again when he saw an old photo of Anna Reyes.But Stockwell also had questions, Olson said, adding that, before the DNA test, "Stockwell asked why he wasn't contacted at the beginning of the investigation in [1998]."Olson simply told him, "I don't know."The DNA analysis, combined with Tamala's interviews and Diaz's statements, was enough to indict Tamala and Reyes on murder charges in December 2014.Tamala, who was on probation after serving 10 years in prison for the federal drug conviction, was arrested and booked into the Fourth Avenue Jail. His murder trial began on Oct. 18, 2016.One verdict, one wantedFor a month, jurors listened to testimony. The group of detectives that investigated Crystal's case described their interviews, their successes and failures. The housekeeper wept as she recounted Crystal's abuse and the whimpers of a starving child. Forensic experts offered differing views about how Crystal died, agreeing only that there wasn't enough evidence to determine a specific cause of death. Friends, family and acquaintances detailed their encounters with Tamala and Reyes. Crystal's father talked about his romance with Reyes, how their abrupt breakup devastated him.They all had stories to tell. Some contradicted others.The truth of exactly how Crystal died was elusive. The 17 fragments of bone weren't enough to determine whether fractures in Crystal's partially recovered cranium suggested more to her death than a towel taped to her head.But that's not what the jurors were instructed to decide. Their task was specific: Should they find Avelino Tamala guilty of murder?Police recovered about 17 fragments of Crystal Reyes' cranium in 1998. Those fragments were used to conduct a DNA analysis to identify the 3-year-old girl. Maricopa County Attorney's OfficeIt didn't take long for jurors to reach a verdict. The group moved into deliberations about 4 p.m. on a Monday. The notification that went out to legal counsels, asking them to return to court, came at 1:27 p.m. the following day.It was Nov. 8, 2016. Election Day.Seated in the front row, immediately behind prosecutors from the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Darren Stockwell stood as the jurors entered the room. Behind him, nearly a dozen law enforcement detectives and retirees involved with the case waited.Stockwell stared ahead as the verdict was read, exhaling as his shoulders fell.Guilty.One by one, the jurors exited and walked past Stockwell, some with nods and shallow smiles as they made eye contact with Crystal's father.As Avelino Tamala awaits his sentencing on Dec. 9, the search continues for the woman at the center of a tangled web of lies and deceit, manipulation and murder.Anna Reyes was deported to Mexico in 2008, after serving eight years of a 10-year prison sentence for the federal drug conviction. She was living in the U.S. illegally.Her whereabouts are unknown.

The answer is Haplogroup E of (Y-DNA).Yuya’s —DNA along with the rest of the ‘Amarna mummies’ is based on partial Y-chromosomal information on the amount of autosomal half-alleles.Yuya has equal amounts of foreign ancestryYuya was a Egyptian courtier during the Eighteenth dynasty of Egypt (circa 1390 BC). He was married to Tjuyu, an Egyptian noblewoman associated with the royal family, who held high offices in the governmental and religious hierarchies. Their daughter, Tiye became the Great Royal Wife of Amenhotep III.Yuya’s origins remain unclear, but HIS CORPSE STOOD OUT FROM THE OTHER EGYPTIANS. The study of his mummy showed that Yuya had been a man of taller than average stature and the anatomist Grafton Elliot Smith considered that his appearance was NOT TYPICALLY EGYPTIAN. Yuya and Tjuyu weren't royals, but their daughter Tiye married King Amenhotep III.While Yuya lived in Upper Egypt, an area that was predominantly native Egyptian, he could have been an assimilated descendant of Asiatic immigrants or slaves who rose to become a member of the local nobility at Akhmin. Yuya is believed to have died around 1374 BC in his mid 50s.Note: In Ancient Egypt we find a title courtier translated as high steward or great overseer of the house.YUYA Y-STR DATA SET RESULTSI’ve run the data sets from the Zahi Hawass; Yehia Z. Gad, Somaia Ismail, et al. study through popaffiliator2 (results below). Of all of the ‘Amarna Mummies’, Yuya has the least amount of (so-called sub Saharan ancestry), and carries significant amounts of both Eurasian and Asian ancestry.YUYA’S Y-STR DATA SETSAs it was released to the public ten (10) years ago. Yuya’s STRs appear on the second (2nd) row.Source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/185393/joc05008_638_647.pdfYou can verify the results of the Amarna mummies yourself, with the study’s data sets above. You can also access the rest of the family's data sets here:(https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/185393/joc05008_638_647.pdf)And with the Popaffiliator2 you can calculate the individual population affiliation assignment yourself..Here: (http://cracs.fc.up.pt/popaffiliator/index.php)About PopAffiliatorQuestion: What does popAffiliator do?Answer: Predicts an individual’s affiliation to a major population group based on information from a small set of autosomal STRs. The output will indicate the probability of assignment to the major population groups.Question: How accurate are the results?Answer: The accuracy of individual population affiliation assignment is approximately 86%. The probabilities are computed using a machine learning model built as described in:Pereira et. al. PopAffiliator: online calculator for individual affiliation to a major population group based on 17 autosomal STR genotype profile. International Journal of Legal Medicine. 2010. (in press)WHAT ARE STRS AND HOW DO THEY WORK?Short Tandem Repeats (STRs)The human genome is full of repeated DNA sequences. Short Tandem Repeats are the most common type of DNA profiling today for criminal cases STR or short tandem repeats occur when a pattern of two or more nucleotides are repeated and the repeated sequences are directly adjacent to each other. The pattern can range in length from 2 to 16 base pairs (bp) and is typically in the non-coding intron region. These sequences repeat a variable number of times in different individuals. Such regions are called "variable number short tandem repeats," and they are the basis of STR analysis. A collection of these can give nearly irrefutable evidence statistically of a person's identity because the likelihood of two unrelated people having the same number of repeated sequences in these regions becomes increasingly small as more regions are analyzed.Y-STRY-STRs are derived solely from the male sex-determining Y chromosome. Profiles based on Y-STRs are statistically weaker because only males have a Y chromosome and all males inherit their’s from their fathers, so all males in any paternal line have nearly identical Y chromosomes. Given enough Y-STRs, which scientists call loci, a Y-STR profile can offer substantial power to discriminate between individuals, but this type of profile is certainly not as powerful as an autosomal STR profile.Quote:“..autosomal STRs in standard DNA profiling, this approach is most suitable to trace close relatives (parents, children, and siblings)”.Citation Sources: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5418305/(Forensic use of Y-chromosome DNA: a general overview)**EFFICACY AND CLEAR ADVANTAGES OF USING Y STR DNA MARKERS**Quote:“STRs have PROVEN TO HAVE SEVERAL BENEFITS that make them ESPECIALLY SUITABLE FOR HUMAN IDENTIFICATION”.“STRs have become POPULAR DNA MARKERS BECAUSE THEY ARE EASILY AMPLIFIED by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) without the problem of differential amplification; that is, the PCR products for STRs are generally similar in amount, MAKING ANALYSIS EASIER”.“STRs AS THE MOST EFFECTIVE METHOD FOR HUMAN IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES”.“The smaller size of STR ALLELES MAKE STR MARKERS BETTER CANDIDATES FOR USE IN FORENSIC APPLICATIONS, IN WHICH DEGRADED DNA IS COMMON. PCR AMPLIFICATION OF DEGRADED DNA SAMPLES CAN BE BETTER ACCOMPLISHED with smaller target product sizes”.“STR alleles also have LOWER MUTATION RATES, which MAKES THE DATA MORE STABLE AND PREDICTABLE”.Citation Source: Forensic DNA Testing System (Forensic DNA Testing System).Quote:“…STRs with higher power of discrimination are chosen for human identification in forensic cases on a regular basis. It is used to identify victim, perpetrator, missing persons, and others”.“Beginning in 1996, the FBI Laboratory launched a nationwide forensic science effort to establish core STR loci for inclusion within the national database known as CODIS (Combined DNA Index System). The 13 CODIS loci are CSF1PO, FGA, TH01, TPOX, VWA, D3S1358, D5S818, D7S820, D8S1179, D13S317, D16S539, D18S51 and D21S11. These loci are nationally and internationally recognized as the standard for human identification”.Citation Source: https://ucr.fbi.gov/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/expanded-fbi-str-2015-final-6-16-15.pdf(https://ucr.fbi.gov/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/expanded-fbi-str-2015-final-6-16-15.pdf)CODIS (Combined DNA Index System)The Combined DNA Index System is the generic term used to describe the FBI’s program of support for criminal justice DNA databases as well as the software used to run these databases. The DNA database was created and maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Law enforcement agencies around the world also utilize the system. Personal genomic companies such as DNA Tribes and DNA Consultants use the very same system.Walter Smyth wrote this response in 2018, a full eight (8) years, 96 months or 2,029 days give or take, after the data from Ancestry and Pathology in King Tutankhamun’s Family was released to the public. It was one of the most highly anticipated results to date. However, when the results were released, it was done so with very little fanfare. Apparently, the results weren’t to the liking of the general ‘Eurocentered’ public and media. If we recall, the Abusir el-Meleq results were celebrated and garnered front page headlines across western media outlets worldwide. The misleading results even went viral.Apparently, you were aware that Tutankhamun’s Family and the Amarna Mummies are one in the same Walter. If you don’t know that much, why do even bother to speak on the topic?Design:From September 2007 to October 2009, royal mummies underwent detailed anthropological, radiological, and genetic studies as part of the King Tutankhamun Family Project. Mummies distinct from Tutankhamun's immediate lineage served as the genetic and morphological reference. To authenticate DNA results, analytical steps were repeated and independently replicated in a second ancient DNA laboratory staffed by a separate group of personnel. Eleven royal mummies dating from circa 1410-1324 BC and suspected of being kindred of Tutankhamun and 5 royal mummies dating to an earlier period, circa 1550-1479 BC, were examinedObjectives:To introduce a new approach to molecular and medical Egyptology, to determine familial relationships among 11 royal mummies of the New Kingdom, and to search for pathological features attributable to possible murder, consanguinity, inherited disorders, and infectious diseases.Results:Genetic fingerprinting allowed the construction of a 5-generation pedigree of Tutankhamun's immediate lineage. The KV55 mummy and KV35YL were identified as the parents of Tutankhamun.CONCLUSION: USING A MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENTIFIC APPROACH, we showed the feasibility of gathering data on Pharaonic kinship and diseases and speculated about individual causes of death.Citation Source: Ancestry and pathology in King Tutankhamun's family.The Tell El-Amarna royal mummies (1,300 BC), Ramesses III and Unknown man (believed to be Ramesses’ son, Pentawer) fall under Haplogroup is E1b1a.LEAD RESEARCHERS “ANCESTRY AND PATHOLOGY IN KING TUTANKHAMEN’S FAMILY”Controversial and disgraced “archaeologist” Zahi HawassThe questions and criticisms surrounding the study’s results are as much an indictment against Zahi Hawass as they are about the results. In the world of Egyptology, Hawass is seen as a self-serving, self-absorbed, self-promoting narcissistic despot, and there exist great distrust for him (in the scientific community), his methods and motives over the years. The former “Director General of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities” has been implicated in theft of ancient artifacts and mired by allegations of impropriety, corruption and was even convicted (along with two of his colleagues) of bribery. To many Egyptians Hawass was viewed as a bombastic government servant who frequently indulged in cronyism to further his own reputation and lining his pockets.An Egyptian official who chose to speak under the condition of anonymity:“Egyptology has been held hostage to the whims of one single tinpot bureaucrat by the name of Zahi Hawass”.Source: Anonymous Egyptian officialIt is common knowledge within Egyptology circles that the often combative Hawass was infamous for claiming credit for digs he had absolutely nothing to do with. He frequently withheld evidence such as the DNA results and haplogroups of Egyptians mummies. For example, Hawass has refused to release the mtDNA results for King Tut’s generational family.Quote:“WHEN THE RESULTS THREATEN EGYPT’S SELF-IMAGE, he hides behind 'national security', and expels Egyptologists from Egypt when he disagrees with their ideas”.Source: Anonymous Egyptian official.All of the research was led and conducted mostly by Egyptian scientists (at Zahi Hawass’ request). Hawass along with Yehia Z. Gad and Somaia Ismail from the National Research Center in Cairo were the lead scientists.Drs Hawass, Gad, Zink, and Pusch had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.YEHIA Z. GAD AND SOMAIA ISMAIL WERE THE LEAD SCIENTISTSYehia Z Gad of National Research Center, Egypt, CairoSomaia Ismail of National Research Center, Egypt, CairoCARSTEN PUSCH AND ALBERT ZINK OVERSAW THE RESEARCHAlbert Zink, Ph.D. Director of the Institute for Mummy Studies and the Iceman in Bolzano, Italy. Fields of Research (biological and biomolecular anthropology; nanotechnologies; paleopathology forensic studies).Carsten M. Pusch, Ph.D. Institute of Anthropology and Human Genetics, Eberhardt-Karls-University, Tubingen, Germany.THE OTHER SCIENTIST (et al.): Rabab Khairat, MSc; Dina Fathalla, MSc; Naglaa Hasan, MSc; Amal Ahmed, BPharm; Hisham Elleithy, MA; Markus Ball, MSc; Fawzi Gaballah, PhD; Sally Wasef, MSc; Mohamed Fateen, MD; Hany Amer, PhD; Paul Gostner, MD; Ashraf Selim, MD.RESPONSIBILITIESAuthor Contributions: Drs Hawass, Gad, Zink, and Pusch had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.Study concept and design: Hawass, Gad, Zink, Pusch. Acquisition of data: Hawass, Gad, Ismail, Khairat, Fathalla, Hasan, Ahmed, Elleithy, Gaballah, Wasef, Fateen, Amer, Gostner, Selim, Zink.Analysis and interpretation of data: Hawass, Gad, Ismail, Khairat, Fathalla, Hasan, Ball, Wasef, Fateen, Amer, Gostner, Selim, Zink, Pusch.Drafting of the manuscript: Hawass, Gad, Zink, Pusch. Critical revision of the manuscript for important in- tellectual content: Hawass, Gad, Ismail, Khairat, Fathalla, Hasan, Ahmed, Elleithy, Ball, Gaballah, Wasef, Fateen, Amer, Gostner, Selim, Zink, Pusch. Statistical analysis: Ball, Gostner, Zink, Pusch. Administrative, technical, or material support: Hawass, Gad, Ismail, Hasan, Ahmed, Elleithy, Ball, Gaballah, Fateen, Amer, Selim, Zink, Pusch.Study supervision: Gad, Ismail, Zink, Pusch.Initially, Zahi Hawass treated the idea of DNA testing with much skepticism. Hawass was reported as saying:Quote:"From what I understand, it is not always accurate and it cannot always be done with complete success when dealing with mummies. UNTIL WE KNOW FOR SURE THAT IT IS ACCURATE, WE WILL NOT USE IT IN OUR RESEARCH".Citation Source: The Tutankhamun ExhibitionIn December 2000, a team from Cairo's Ein Shams University and Waseda University in Japan were given permission to take tissue samples. However, the Egyptian Government withdrew permission at the last moment. The Supreme Council of Antiquities turned down the tests on the grounds that it was unlikely to produce results and it could damage the already fragile mummy. Hawass is also on record as saying that DNA analysis would not lead to anything and therefore the tests were out of the question.Apparently, that changed seven years later in 2007. Here, Hawass explains the reason for the change in his thinking..Quote:“In the past I had been against genetic studies of royal mummies. The chance of obtaining workable samples while avoiding contamination from modern DNA seemed too small to justify disturbing these sacred remains. But in 2008 several geneticists convinced me that the field had advanced far enough to give us a good chance of getting useful results. We set up TWO STATE-OF-THE-ART DNA-SEQUENCING LABS, one in the basement of the Egyptian Museum in Cairo and the other at the Faculty of Medicine at Cairo University”.Citation Source: King Tut’s Family SecretsFast forward to June 2008..FIVE (5) MILLION DOLLARS WAS DEDICATED TO BUILDING TWO STATE-OF-THE-ART FACILITIES, BUILT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE TESTING OF HAPSHEPSUT AND THE ROYAL ARMANA MUMMIES:A dedicated (5 million dollar) ancient DNA laboratory was established (built) in the basement of the Egyptian Museum in Cairo to test the DNA of the ancients. A second laboratory also exclusively dedicated to work with ancient DNA was established at the Faculty of Medicine, at Cairo University. A subset of the data generated in the Egyptian Museum laboratory was INDEPENDENTLY REPLICATED IN A SEPARATE LABORATORY BY ANOTHER RESEARCH TEAM (these data sets are indicated in the manuscript).Applied Biosystems Helps Build Egypt's First Laboratory for Ancient DNA AnalysisQuote:FOSTER CITY, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Applied Biosystems (NYSE:ABI), an Applera Corporation business, today announced its collaboration with the Discovery Channel and Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities in ESTABLISHING THE FIRST LABORATORY IN EGYPT DEDICATED TO TESTING ANCIENT DNA SAMPLES. The laboratory, which is located in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, began testing samples from ancient royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty in April as part of a project to identify the mummy of Hatshepsut, Egypt’s most famous female pharaoh.The primary purpose of the new DNA laboratory is to assist in the identification of this and other mummies that have been removed from their original tombs, and to clarify familial relationships within and between Egypt’s ancient dynasties. This is the first time DNA testing has been used to try to identify an ancient Egyptian pharaoh. DNA testing, combined with other forensic techniques, holds the potential to bring closure to unsolved mysteries and help Egypt fill in gaps in its significant history.“By providing this technology to Egypt, Applied Biosystems is helping to advance science and bring our dead pharaohs back to life,” said Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities. “A basement that was once a maze of artifacts is now a cutting-edge scientific lab, the first of its kind dedicated to revealing the mysteries of our mummies.”Applied Biosystems provided the Supreme Council of Antiquities with DNA analysis instrument systems, reagents, software, and training. This included an Applied Biosystems 9700 Thermocycler for DNA amplification and a 3130 Genetic Analyzer for DNA analysis, as well as forensic testing reagents including its newest advance in human identification technology, the AmpFℓSTR® MiniFiler™ PCR Amplification Kit. The MiniFiler kit is the world’s first commercially available reagent kit for generating genetic profiles from aged, compromised, or damaged DNA samples.“The analysis of ancient and degraded DNA samples provides significant challenges, but we are excited to bring our latest advances in genetic analysis to this and similar future projects in Egypt,” said Nicola Oldroyd, a senior forensic specialist at Applied Biosystems. “Initial results are very promising as both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA have been retrieved and amplified for these mummies. That in itself is a major accomplishment for the first project in a brand new lab. We are optimistic that the Egyptian scientific team now has everything in place to ultimately be successful in this project and future endeavors.”Citation Source: Applied Biosystems Helps Build Egypt's First Laboratory for Ancient DNA AnalysisFAUX CONCERNS RAISED BY EUROCENTRICS REGARDING CONTAMINATIONQuote:“To obtain workable samples, the geneticists extracted tissue from several different locations in each mummy, always from deep within the bone, where there was no chance the specimen would be contaminated by the DNA of previous archaeologists—or of the Egyptian priests who had performed the mummification. Extreme care was also taken to avoid any contamination by the researchers themselves. After the samples were extracted, the DNA had to be separated from unwanted substances, including the unguents and resins the priests had used to preserve the bodies. Since the embalming material varied with each mummy, so did the steps needed to purify the DNA. In each case the fragile material could be destroyed at every step”.Citation Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2010/09/tut-dna/Quote:“Regarding potential DNA contamination, it’s a red herring. Dr. Carsten M. Pusch of Germany's University of Tubingen (Division of Molecular Genetics) says the team took their samples from deep inside the mummies' bones, where modern contamination could not haveoriginated.When asked how the DNA could have survived, both Pusch and (Albert) Zink agree that DNA from a body simply buried in the sand would probably not survive from ancient Egyptian times. But they argue that in the royal mummies, the embalming process used by the Egyptians must have acted to preserve the DNA. This included drying out the body with a naturally-occurring mixture of salts called natron.” The Egyptians really knew how to preserve a body,” says Zink. “The worst thing for DNA is humidity”. They got rid of the humidity very fast, and then protected the body from the re-entry of humidity, by covering it with oil, wax and bandages." Pusch also believes that the embalming materials may themselves be acting to protect the DNA. “Nobody has thought about the components of the resin”. They also TESTED WITHIN THE BONES FOR ORIGINAL DNA, AS IT WOULD’VE BEEN DIFFICULT TO IMPOSSIBLE FOR HANDLERS TO GET INSIDE THE BONE IN AREAS IT HADN’T PENETRATED”.Citation Source: Is pharaoh DNA for real?, Jo Marchant, 20. January 2011.Samples checked for contamination by scientists:Quote:“DNA TYPING OF ALL LAB TEAM MEMBERS WAS PERFORMED (Y.Z.G., S.I., R.K., D.F., N.H., A.A., S.W., M.F.), AND RECORDS WERE USED FOR COMPARISON WITH THE DATA GENERATED IN OUR ANCIENT DNA STUDIES. IDENTICAL “MODERN-ANCIENT” DATA SETS WERE CONSIDERED AS NON AUTHENTIC AND WERE OMITTED FROM OUR STUDY. NO CONTEMPORARY UNKNOWN DNA SAMPLE WAS ALLOWED IN THE LABORATORIES. FOR EACH MUMMY, PCR EXPERIMENTS WERE REPEATED UP TO 30 TIMES USING VARIOUS BONE SAMPLES FROM DIFFERENT BODY AREAS (online interactive feature). MICROSATELLITES WERE MONITORED FOR SLIPPAGE, AND GENOTYPES WERE DETERMINED BY MAJORITY RULE”.Citation Source: Ancestry and Pathology in King Tutankhamun's FamilyThe results were independently replicated in the second laboratory:A dedicated (5 million dollar) ancient DNA laboratory was established (built) in the basement of the Egyptian Museum in Cairo to test the ancients. A SECOND LABORATORY ALSO EXCLUSIVELY DEDICATED TO WORK WITH ANCIENT DNA WAS ESTABLISHED AT THE Faculty OF MEDICINE, AT CAIRO UNIVERSITY. A SUBSET OF THE DATA GENERATED IN THE EGYPTIAN MUSEUM LABORATORY WAS INDEPENDENTLY REPLICATED IN A SEPARATE LABORATORY BY ANOTHER RESEARCH TEAM (these data sets are indicated in the manuscript)”.Applied Biosystems Helps Build Egypt's First Laboratory for Ancient DNA AnalysisContrary to Eurocentric lies, JAMA has only ever published ONE (1) letter critiquing the Hawass et al. results:The critique that was published in JAMA was written by Eline D. Lorenzen, formerly of the Centre for GeoGenetics, now a biologist at the University of California Berkeley and Eske Willerslev, Director of the Centre for GeoGenetics in Denmark expressed their concerns with the viability of the DNA and accuracy of the tests results which can be surmised in two brief sentences:Quote:“We question the reliability of the genetic data presented in this study and therefore the validity of the authors' conclusions. Furthermore, we urge a more critical assessment of the ancient DNA data in the context of DNA degradation and contamination”.Citation Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44695383_King_Tutankhamun's_Family_and_Demise.A reply from Yehia Z. Gad, Ashraf Selim, and Carsten Pusch was directed towards the concerns of Drs Eline D. Lorenzen’s and Eske.In Reply:“Drs Lorenzen and Willerslev are INCORRECT REGARDING INSUFFICIENT CONTAMINATION PREVENTION AND QUALITY CONTROL MEASURES during our study. In addition, authentic, adequately preserved DNA can indeed be obtained from Egyptian mummy tissue, but requires specifically adapted extraction protocols.Source: King Tutankhamun’s Family and Demise—Reply, Yehia Z. Gad, MD; Ashraf Selim, MD; Carsten M. Pusch, PhDThe following aspects SUBSTANTIATE AUTHENTICITY.(1) All generally accepted criteria for ancient DNA authentication were strictly adhered to before, during, and after genetic analysis experiments, as described in our article.(2) Putative contamination by people handling the mummies before the sampling and during the experiments was monitored.(3) All female mummies were negative for Y-chromosomal markers.(4) All male mummies showed homozygous (ie, hemizygous) Y-chromosomal profiles.(5) The profiles and haplotypes of the whole set of mummies showed individual differences and therefore could not have originated from the same source of putative contaminant DNA.(6) The combination of nuclear data (Y- and autosomal chromosome–related markers) complemented each other.(7) Reproducible genotypes were obtained from different biopsies and extractions per mummy.(8) Subsets of the data were independently replicated in a second, separate ancient DNA laboratory staffed by a separate group of personnel, who reconfirmed the authenticity of the results.(9) DNA isolated from Egyptian mummies was highly informative when processed with next generation sequencing”.Source: King Tutankhamun’s Family and Demise—ReplyA study or article submitted to a scientific journal can be eligible for peer review by other expert scientists. In this instance, the study by Zahi Hawass; Yehia Z. Gad, Somaia Ismail, et al. “The Ancestry and Pathology in King Tutankhamun's Family”, was released on February 17, 2010.EUROCENTRICS HAVE BEEN STELLAR WITH THEIR DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGNS AGAINST DNA TRIBES AND DNA CONSULTANTSThe following must be understood, because the disinformation has been very effective:Contrary to popular belief, DNA TRIBES RESULTS ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR PEER REVIEW as Walter Smyth, Rita Maria Bargash formerly known as Rita de Maria and Majed Ahmed (Quora pseudo-egytologist and current incarnation, Lee Thomas) suggests. DNA TRIBES, USED DATA SETS FROM PEER REVIEW STUDIES, AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO PEER REVIEW BY ANY SCIENTISTS. IT’S ALREADY BEEN EXECUTED.Personal genomic companies such as DNA Tribes and DNA Consultants WERE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EXTRACTION OF DNA FROM ANY OF THE MUMMY SAMPLES. NOR WERE THEY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY LAB WORK. Genomic companies use peer review DNA data to process information and match it to existing populations in the database.To have to make the argument is just further evidence of the gross ignorance and sheer negligence that people speaking on this topic demonstrate regularly. DNA Tribes and DNA Consultants for that matter, were unfairly targeted and defamed by angry Eurocentrics for the results they published (which was produced by processing the DNA data into the PopAffiliator2). DNA Tribes not only confirmed the results from Zahi Hawass; Yehia Z. Gad, Somaia Ismail, et al., but because of their extensive database (the most extensive at the time with approximately 560,000 individuals from 1,200+ populations around the world, including 950+ indigenous populations), were able to point directly to ancestral regions of the Amarna mummies. This is what angered the Eurocentrics and why they continue to attack what they don’t know. Personal genomic companies basically are over-glorified data processing companies.A PEER REVIEW PUBLISHED IN THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY STUDY CONFIRMS THE FINDINGS OF ZAHI HAWASS, YEHIA Z. GAD, SOMALIA ISMAIL, ET AL.PEER REVIEW PUBLISHED IN THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY:The aim of this study is to review all available evidence for the identification of some of the most famous ancient Egyptian royal mummies. This overview of all methods used may help to identify more conclusive evidence for identification.Michael E. HabichtQuote:“For centuries, ancient Egyptian Royal mummies have drawn the attention both of the general public and scientists. Many royal mummies from the New Kingdom have survived. The discoveries of the bodies of these ancient rulers have always sparked much attention, yet not all identifications are clear even nowadays. This study presents a meta-analysis to demonstrate the difficulties in identifying ancient Egyptian royal mummies. Various methods and pitfalls in the identification of the Pharaohs are reassessed since new scientific methods can be used, such as ancient DNA-profiling and CT-scanning. While the ancestors of Tutankhamun have been identified, some identities are still highly controversial (e.g., the mystery of the KV-55 skeleton, recently most likely identified as the genetic father of Tutankhamun). The meta-analysis confirms the suggested identity of some mummies (e.g., Amenhotep III, Thutmosis IV, and Queen Tjye)”.Citation Source: Identifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsidered, M.E. Habicht A.S. Bouwman F.J. Rühli, 25 January 2016.Identifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsideredCONCLUSIONSQuote:“All presented methods (archaeology, blood group testing, facial resemblance, inscriptions) lead to the same conclusion, supporting the presented genetic results of Hawass et al. (2010)”.Citation Source: Identifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsidered, M.E. Habicht A.S. Bouwman F.J. Rühli, 25 January 2016.Citation resource: Identifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsideredIdentifications of ancient Egyptian royal mummies from the 18th Dynasty reconsidered.CREDIBLE PEER REVIEW SCIENTISTS (Jean-Philippe Gourdine, S.O.Y. Keita, Jean-Luc Gourdine and Alain Anselin) ran STR tests on the Armana mummies and replicated the results of the genetic tests performed by Zahi Hawass; Yehia Gad, Somaia Ismail, et al., Michael Habict, A.S. Bouwman, F.J. Ruhli, DNA Tribes and DNA Consultants, all found the ethnic group (affinity) probability to be SSA (sub Saharan African) using popaffiliator 1 http://cracs.fc.up.pt/.The popaffiliator ethnic group probability tests run by peer review scientists Keita, JP Gourdine, JL Gourdine and Anselin, show the Armana mummies regional ancestral breakdown at over 90% sub-Saharan for all of the mummies, with the exception of (3). KV35 (Amenhotep III) tests 71% sub-Saharan, 21% Eurasian and 6.3% Asian. KV35YLc is believed to be Nefertiti who tests at 68% sub-Saharan, 31% Eurasian and .05% Asian. KV55 Akhenaten (or Smenkhare) tests 41.7% sub-Saharan and 41.5% Eurasian and 16% Asian.Missing values=16Note: Of the 34 values expected, 16 were provided, meaning 16 were usable (47.058823529412%). In other words, only ~47% of the required STRs were provided. If more STRs are provided the reliability percentages will go up…..but based upon what is provided the result is accurate to greater than 90%. So, at the very least, we know the Armana family is 47% so-called sub-Saharan. Keep in mind, each geographic population i.e. “race” has STR profiles that are UNIQUE to them. So, results can’t be “faked” or “wrong” as has been moronically suggested by Quora’s pseudo-Egyptologist Majed Ahmed, Rita de Maria, and Walter Smyth.Conclusion“The paleolithic past has to be distinguished from the biocultural emergence in the Holocene of any society, including Europe. Egypt long before the pyramids was culturally and linguistically African as evidenced by numerous studies based on standard research which accept Egypt’s place in the Nile corridor as having local origins. The symbolism found in the Badarian or Naqadan graves, etc. nor the pyramids were brought from Asia (Near East). THE EGYPTIAN NEOLITHIC CANNOT BE SHOWN AS AN ENTITY TO HAVE COME FROM ASIA, although some domesticates were borrowed on local terms into a system of indigenous foraging in the Fayum. HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS SHOWS ANCIENT EGYPTIAN TO BE AFROASIATIC WITH BORROWINGS FROM OTHER AFRICAN LANGUAGE PHYLA. Archaeological data would seem to indicate an early integration of the eastern delta, in northern Egypt, by early Upper Egyptian rulers since Iry Hor from Abydos (~3,250 BC), who already wrote royal inscriptions in Egyptian in a script and symbolic system that used African flora and fauna. This region of Egypt, and northern Egypt had long had social intercourse with the Near East. THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS IN “ORIGIN” WERE NOT SETTLED COLONISTS AKIN TO THE EUROPEAN COLONISTS IN AFRICA. SCHUENEMANN ET AL. STUDY IS BEST SEEN AS A CONTRIBUTION TO UNDERSTANDING A LOCAL POPULATION HISTORY IN NORTHERN EGYPT AS OPPOSED TO A POPULATION HISTORY OF ALL EGYPT FROM ITS INCEPTION”.Citation Source: https://osf.io/ecwf3/Quote:“Other DNA data show substantial African affinity: “Results that are likely reliable are from studies that analyzed short tandem repeats (STRs) from Amarna royal mummies (1,300 BC), and of Ramesses III (1,200 BC); Ramesses III had the Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1a, an old African lineage. Our analysis of STRs from Amarna and Ramesside royal mummies with popAffiliator based on the same published data indicates a 41.7% to 93.9% probability of SSA affinities; most of the individuals had a greater probability of affiliation with “SSA” which is not the only way to be “African”- a point worth repeating.”Source: Ancient Egyptian Genomes from northern Egypt: Further discussion, Jean-Philippe, Shomarka Keita, Jean-Luc Gourdine, Alain Anselin, August 16th, 2018.https://osf.io/ecwf3/King Tut’s great-grandparents, Yuya and Thuya, have also been identified beyond doubt, while different opinions appear to circulate about the identity of almost all the other mummies.THUYAQuote:“One of the autosomal ancestry markers prominent in the Royal Egyptian families of the New Kingdom, this not-so-rare gene is Central African in origin and was passed to Thuya from her forebears, Queens of Upper and Lower Egypt and High Priestesses of Hathor, the Mother Goddess. Thuya passed it to her grandson Akhenaten and great-grandson Tutankhamun, among others, AS DOCUMENTED IN A FORENSIC STUDY OF THE AMARNA MUMMIES BY ZAHI HAWASS ET AL., head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, in 2010. Today, its highest incidence is in Somalians at nearly 50%. It is found in 40% of Muslim Egyptians. On average, 1 in 3 Africans or African-Americans carries it. It crops up in high concentrations in many places around the world such as the Basque region (41%) and in Melungeons (31%, similar to Middle Easterners), but is present at only low levels in East and South Asia, as well as Native America. Its lowest frequency is in the Chukchi of Siberia (3%)”.Citation Source: The Thuya Gene - DNA ConsultantsThe Thuya Gene IS SUB-SAHARAN AFRICAN with a low frequency in North Africa and the Old Near East and spotty distribution elsewhere except it is uniformly low in India and points east.Source: The Thuya Gene - DNA Consultants“Take the THUYA GENE, for instance. Like most of the other Rare Genes from History, it has an African origin in deep time. But it experienced its greatest expansion in ancient Egypt, where it was carried by the queens of Upper and Lower Egypt and High Priestesses of the temples. It was reported in the profile of Queen Thuya’s mummy, and we can see that she passed it to her children, grandchildren and descendants. King Tut was a great-grandson and has it, according to the new forensic evidence”.“Today, as many as one-fourth of all people on earth would test positive for the Thuya Gene. It is twice as common in Somalia as outside Africa and is found in 40% of Muslim Egyptians”.Citation Source: Rare Genes from Ancient DNA - DNA ConsultantsDNA Consultants results are also confirmed by DNA Tribes resultshttp://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdfWITH REGARD TO THE LEGITIMACY OF DNA TRIBES RESULTSMLI (Match Likelihood Index) score measures how common or frequent your DNA profile is in that population as compared to the world overall. MLI SCORES LOCATE THE ETHNIC GROUPS AND REGIONS WHERE YOUR DNA PROFILE IS MOST COMMON. TribeScores compares your MLI scores to members of each ethnic group and world region.removed sections, now in the Louvre Museum, Paris, France.Amenhotep III, Akhenaten (or possibly Smenkhare) and King Tutankhamen display identical ancestral origins (below). And as you can clearly see… they originate from tropical Africa which explains the ancient Egyptians tropical “SUPER NEGROID” body plans. I should add Levantine, Mediterranean and Arabian people have cold adapted body plans (not tropical). The percentage amounts are the only difference.Quote:“A new strain of ETHIOPIAN blood appears in this line through the NUBIAN QUEEN, METUMA, about 1400, B. C. HER SON, AMENHOTEP III, the Amenophis of the Greeks, covered the banks of the Nile with monuments remarkable for their grandeur and perfection”.Source: The History of Ethiopia: Nubia and Abyssinia, Vol. I., Preface, by Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, 1928, (p. 103).Note: According to E.A. Wallis Budge, Ahmenhotep’s mother was a Ethiopian.Charles Darwin (12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882) an English naturalist, geologist and biologist, best known for his contributions to the science of evolution.Darwin makes a reference to this statue on his Descent of Man:Quote(s):“When I looked at the statue of Amunoph III (Amenhotep III), I agreed with two officers of the establishment, both competent judges, that he had a STRONGLY MARKED NEGRO TYPE OF FEATURES." THE FEATURES OF AKHENATON (Amennhotep IV), ARE EVEN MORE NEGROID THAN THOSE OF HIS ILLUSTRIOUS PREDECESSOR. THAT THE EARLIEST EGYPTIANS WERE AFRICAN ETHIOPIANS (NILOTIC NEGROES), IS OBVIOUS TO ALL UNBIASED STUDENTS OF ORIENTAL HISTORY”.Source: The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, (1871).Temple of Amenhotep IV - EgyptAmenhotep IIIAkhenaten or SmenkhareTutankhamenQuote:“Southern Egypt, from which the genesis of Ancient Egypt civilization sprang, lies in the tropical zone. The Tropic of Cancer passes through Egypt at 23°26′N 25°0′E. The rest of Egypt lies in the subtropical or arid tropic zone, NOT the cold-climate zones of EUROPE OR ASIA”.Source: (Thompson and Perry, 1997; Griffiths, 1976).Humans from Southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shapes (Crognier 1981; Eveleth and Tanner 1976; Schreider 1975).THE TROPICAL ZONEGene flow into the Nubian area during the Neolithic was not from reputed "wandering Caucasoids" but from tropical, Sub-Saharan types.Quote:“The peoples of ancient Egypt, in the aforementioned tropical and semi-tropical/arid tropic zones show clear limb proportion characteristics of tropically adapted people, and MORE closely RESEMBLE OTHER TROPICALLY ADAPTED AFRICANS ON THE CONTINENT, THAN EUROPEANS OR MIDDLE EASTERNERS”.Source: (Raxter and Ruff 2008, Zakrewski 2003, 2007; Holliday et al, 2003, Kemp, 2005).Quote:The great ancient Nile Valley civilization arose from the ’DARKER’ MORE TROPICAL SOUTH, NOT the COLD CLIMATE OR COOL CLIMATE MEDITERRANEAN, EUROPE OR ASIA.Source: (Clark, 1982; Shaw 1976, 2003; Bard, 2004; Vogel, 1997; Kemp 2005).Quote:SEVERAL STRANDS OF CULTURE FROM RELIGION TO MATERIAL LIVING PUT THE EGYPTIANS CLOSER TO NEARBY AFRICANS THAN TO COLD-CLIMATE MEDITERRANEANS, EUROPEANS OR ASIATICS.Source: (Keita, 1996, 2004; Yurco 1989, 1996; Williams, 1980; Britannia 1984; Wilkinson 1999; Wendorf, 2001).Quote:“ANOTHER RELIABLE SOURCE OF SKELETAL DATA IS LIMB PROPORTIONS, WHICH TENDS TO VARY WITH DIFFERENT CLIMATIC BELTS. THE EARLY NILE VALLEY POPULATIONS POSSESSED MORE TROPICAL BODY PROPORTIONS, SUGGESTING THAT THE EGYPTIAN NILE VALLEY WAS NOT PRIMARILY SETTLED BY COLD-ADAPTED PEOPLES, SUCH AS EUROPEANS.A 2003 paper appeared in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology by Dr Sonia Zakrzewski entitled 'Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and Body Proportions', where she confirmed the results of previous studies, indicating that THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS HAD TROPICALLY ADAPTED BODY PLANS”. The raw values suggest that Egyptians had the ‘super-Negroid’ body plan described by Robins (1983).The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many ‘African’ populations”.Citation Source: S.O.Y. Keita & A. J. Boyce. Egypt in Africa, (1996), pp. 25-27.Cold adapted vs Tropically adaptedQuote:“Allen’s rule is a biological rule that says the limbs of endotherms are shorter in cold climates and longer in hot climates.Limb length affects the body’s surface area, which helps with thermoregulation. Shorter limbs help to conserve heat, while longer limbs help to dissipate heat”.Information Source: Holliday, Trenton W.; Hilton, Charles E. (2010-06-01). "Body proportions of circumpolar peoples as evidenced from skeletal data: Ipiutak and Tigara (Point Hope) versus Kodiak Island Inuit". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 142 (2): 287–302.Quote:“An attempt has been made to estimate male and female Egyptian stature from long bone length using Trotter & Gleser negro stature formulae, previous work by the authors having shown that these rather than white formulae give more consistent results with male dynastic material... When consistency has been achieved in this way, Predynastic proportions are founded to be such that distal segments of the limbs are even longer in relation to the proximal segments than they are in modern negroes. Such proportions are termed "super-negroid".“Robins (1983) and Robins & Shute (1983) have shown that more consistent results are obtained from ancient Egyptian male skeletons if Trotter & Gleser formulae for negro are used, rather than those for whites which have always been applied in the past..their physical proportions were more like modern negroes than those of modern whites, with limbs that were relatively long compared with the trunk, and distal segments that were long compared with the proximal segments. If ancient Egyptian males had what may be termed negroid proportions, it seems reasonable that females did likewise”.Citation Source: (Robins G, Shute CCD. 1986. Predynastic Egyptian stature and physical proportions. Hum Evol 1:313–324. Ruff CB. 1994.).Barry John Kemp, CBE, FBA is an English archaeologist and Egyptologist. He is Professor Emeritus of Egyptology at the University of Cambridge and directing excavations at Amarna in Egypt. His widely renowned book Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation is a core text of Egyptology and many Ancient History courses.Quote:“Population variability in Lower (northern) Egypt. As regards predynastic population, peoples of Lower or northern Egypt show a range of variability and types. SWEEPING CLASSIFICATIONS SUCH AS CAUCASOIDS OR A "MEDITERRANEAN RACE" DEPICTED UNDER OLDER ARYAN RACE MODELS ARE THUS PROBLEMATIC FOR THIS REGION. A number of influences were present from surrounding populations. According to one history populations around sites such as Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla have quite different characteristics from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, “SUGGESTED A LACK OF COMMON ANCESTORS OVER A LONG TIME. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. THE LIMB-LENGTH PROPORTIONS OF MALES FROM THE EGYPTIAN SITES GROUP THEM WITH AFRICANS RATHER THAN WITH EUROPEANS”.Source: Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation (Paperback) by Barry Kemp (Author) Publisher: Routledge; 2 edition (December 12, 2005); see also Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.Professor Trenton Holliday, Ph.D., Professor & Department Chair Anthropology, School of Liberal Arts, Tulane University, [email protected] received his B.A. in anthropology from Louisiana State University in 1988, and his M.A. (1991) and Ph.D. (1995) in anthropology from the University of New Mexico. A paleoanthropologist, he studies fossil hominins from a host of different time periods. He is particularly interested in the origins of modern humans (Homo sapiens), a topic which is intimately tied to the question of the fate of the Neandertals (H. neanderthalensis). He is also interested in late Australopithecus and the origins of the genus Homo, and in interspecific hybridization among extant mammals and its implications for human evolution. Professor Holliday teaches courses in human evolution, functional morphology, and modern human adaptation and variation.Quote(s):“What we can say, however, is that in the Holocene, HUMANS FROM SOUTHWEST ASIA DO NOT EXHIBIT TROPICALLY ADAPTED BODY SHAPE (Crognier 1981; Eveleth and Tanner 1976; Schreider 1975). In addition, while Levantine winters today are generally characterized as mild (Henkin et al. 1998), they are nonetheless quite often cold, with frequent snowfall—for example, the winter of 1992 was particularly cold and snowy in Israel (Vishnevetsky and Steinberger 19%). GIVEN THAT THE HOLOCENE IS A WARM PHASE, YET RECENT LEVANTINE HUMANS DO NOT EXHIBIT A TROPICALLY ADAPTED MORPHOLOGY, there is little reason to assume that in the (generally colder) Pleistocene epoch, natural selection alone could result in tropically adapted morphology in the region”.“Thus, the discovery of TROPICAL ADAPTED hominids in the region would therefore likely indicate population dispersal from the TROPICS, AND THE MOST LOGICAL GEOGRAPHIC SOURCE FOR SUCH AN INFLUX IS AFRICA. In this regard, Trinkaus (1981, 1984, 1995) and have argued that the high brachial and crural indices, narrow biiliac breadths, and small relative femoral head sizes of the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids suggest an influx of African genes associated with the emergence of modern humans in the region”.Source: Trenton Holliday (2000) Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia. American Anthropologist. New Series, Vol. 102, No. 1, 54-68.Research studies: Evolution at the Crossroads: Modern Human Emergence in Western Asiahttps://www.researchgate.net/pub...Climatic influences on human body size and proportions: Ecological adaptations and secular trends https://www.researchgate.net/pub...Near Eastern Late Archaic HumansMorphological adaptation to climate in modern and fossil hominidsStature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of statureNote: Humans from Southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shapes (Crognier 1981; Eveleth and Tanner 1976; Schreider 1975). In other words Asiatics, in other words Eurasians, in other words Near Eastern, in other words “CAUCASIANS, DO NOT EXHIBIT TROPICALLY ADAPTED BODIES LIKE THAT OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS”. In other words, it is impossible for the Egyptians to have originated from a group (Asiatics) that was not a tropically adapted like divergent.Quote:Where is the research/study that “shows” Yuya and Thuya were naturally fair-haired? You did not cite it, nor did you provide a link to the study. When was the study conducted, when was it released and who is the author?As for the article you attached, it’s much ado about nothing Mr. Smyth. It’s what is referred to as ‘click bait’. This “new” research confirms that blondes were “living” in Egypt during the Ptolemaic and Roman Periods. Ok.. where’s the news in that? Greeks and Romans invaded and occupied ancient Egypt and it's never been back in the hands of the autochthonous Egyptians. Large numbers of Greeks and later Romans emigrated to Egypt, as attested to in countless history books. No one would argue there weren’t blondes in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt. Eurocentrics will take any crumbs offered to them and magnify the absolutely insignificant to epic proportions. It’s the equivalent of making a big deal about discovering the skeleton of a European (‘white’) from the 1700s buried in North America. As usual, the headline is hyperbolic and an exaggeration of what is actually being stated. Nowhere does it state that the “blondes” were Dynastic Egyptians.Janet Davey, Monash University, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Post-Doc. Studies Egyptology, Ancient Egyptian Religion, and Education. Forensic Egyptologist.“Moreover, Davey SUGGEST THAT THERE WERE BLONDES LIVING IN EGYPT DURING THE GRAECO-ROMAN PERIOD (332 BC – 395 AD)”.Citation Source: Some ancient Egyptians were natural blondes.Excerpt from a Michael Broussard Dr. Davey interview:[Excerpt]Quote:“Don’t misunderstand.. no one is saying that all Egyptians were blue-eyed and blond people. HOWEVER, IT ALL TIES IN TOGETHER WITH THE CONTEXT OF THE TIME PERIOD ALL THESE FAIR-HAIRED MUMMIES CAN BE TRACED BACK TO. DAVEY NOTE THAT FAIR-HAIRED MUMMIES ARE, ACTUALLY, VERY RARE AND THAT SHE’S ONLY SEEN A LIMITED NUMBER IN HER ENTIRE CAREER. This actually fueled the theories that aimed to explain the color change by blaming it on natron and other substances”.“ALL OF THE FAIR-HAIRED MUMMIES UNEARTHED DATE BACK TO A TIME WHEN EGYPT WAS HEAVILY DOMINATED BY EXTERIOR INFLUENCES. Take the mummies of Fag el-Gamous for example – THEY DATE TO THE TIME OF ROMAN OCCUPATION. SINCE INTERACTIONS WITH GREEKS, ROMANS, AND OTHER FOREIGN CIVILIZATIONS, it was very possible that there was an addition to the pool of Egyptian genes”.“Whether it was as soldiers, or as slaves, MANY EUROPEAN-ROOTED NATIONS STARTED INTERACTING WITH EGYPTIANS DURING THE HEAVILY INTERNATIONALIZED PERIOD OF THE GRECO-ROMAN ERA. Some historians estimate that Scandinavian travelers are included as well”.“Regardless, the conclusion is thatTHE RESULT OF THE INTERRACIAL MIXES CREATED A NEW BRANCH OF EGYPTIAN PEOPLE WHICH CARRIED OUT THE FAIR-HAIRED GENES OF VARIOUS GREEKS, ROMANS, MACEDONIANS, OR SCANDINAVIANS”.[End excerpt]Citation Source: Michael Broussard, The Myth Of Blonde And Ginger Egyptians: What’s The Explanation?Note: Fair-haired mummies are, actually, very rareThis is much ado about nothing.Joann Fletcher (born 30 August 1966) is an Egyptologist and an honorary visiting professor in the department of archaeology at University of York where she specializes in the a Ptolemaic period in ancient Egypt. She has published a number of books and academic articles, including on Cleopatra, and made numerous television and radio appearances. In 2003, she controversially claimed to have identified the mummy of Queen Nefertiti.I’d understand if you took offense to this quote agent Smyth:Quote:“Fletcher (2002) in Egyptian Hair and Wigs, gives an example of what she calls “DISTURBING ATTEMPTS TO USE HAIR TO PROVE ASSUMPTIONS OF RACE AND GENDER” involving 18th century European researcher Flinder’s Petrie, who sought, when feasible, to use excavation reports to prove his theories of Aegean (Caucasians) settlers flowing into Egypt. SUCH DISTURBING ATTEMPTS CONTINUE TODAY IN THE USE OF HAIR FOR RACE CATEGORY OR PERCENTAGE CLAIMS INVOLVING THE ANCIENT PEOPLES, SUCH AS THE "RACIAL" ANALYSIS SEEN ON A GREAT NUMBER OF INTERNET BLOGS AND WEBSITES, SOME THINLY DISGUISED FRONTS FOR NEO-NAZI GROUPS OR SYMPATHIZERS”.Source: Joanne Fletcher (PDF) An Ancient Egyptian Wig: Construction and Reconstruction, 2017.Note: The internet blogs and websites Joanne Fletcher is referencing are the likes of Forum Biodiversity, Historum, Eurogenes, Final Crusades, Dieneke’s Anthropology Blog, Davidski, theApricity, Anthrogenenica, Anthroscape and the defunct apologist’s site, Mathilda’s BlogYuya and wife Thuya, King Tutankhamun’s great-grandparents died between the ages of 50–60. So, the likes of Walter Smyth actually believe that at 50 and 60, Yuya and Thuya sported were “natural blonds”? Lol. The hair in these photographs is not even blonde, but gold in color. These “hues” are not ‘natural’ and is likely the result of henna dye (a common ancient Egyptian practice).Quote:"The current colour of the hair is brown with reddish highlights, a common observation on many mummies, and probably originated through POST-MORTEM ALTERATION (Aufderheide, 2003; Wilson et al., 2001). SUN-EXPOSURE, BACTERIAL REACTION, AND EMBALMING METHODS ARE SOME OF THE FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT THE ORIGINAL HAIR COLOR. As a result, HAIR THAT WAS ORIGINALLY BLACK OR BROWN EXHIBITS REDDISH, ORANGE OR EVEN BLOND COLOR DUE TO POST MORTEN ALTERATIONS. All human hair, however, does not turn red over archaeological time-scales (Wilson, 2001). BASED ON THE HISTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE UNSTAINED HAIR SAMPLES, THE LIMITED FUNGAL INFLUENCE, AND THE MACROSCOPIC VIEW, IT CAN BE ASSUMED THAT THE ORIGINAL HAIR COLOR WAS BROWN. Similar cases of hair preservation have been reported in studies of both mummified and non-mummified human remains (Aufderheide, 2003; Brothwell and Dobney, 1986; Lubec et al., 1987; White, 1993; Wilson et al., 2002, 2007b)."Citation Source: C. Papageorgopoulou et al. 2008. Indications of embalming in Roman Greece by physical, chemical and histological analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science.Andrew Wilson and his colleagues at the University of Bradford have found that the chemistry of hair may change after centuries in the ground:Quote:“But in analyses of hair from 13 corpses, Wilson found that over time cavities appear in the shafts of the hair, allowing material to leak out and letting in foreign matters such as mineral salts and microorganisms”.Although the tough, outer shaft of ancient hair is robust, says Wilson, there is substantial decay of the cortex, the softer material inside.Examining hair with a sensitive chemical technique called Fourier transform Raman spectroscopy, Wilson discovered that the strong bonds in the keratin --- the protein that makes up the hair --- were often weakened.'This increased porosity raises the possibility of contamination,' he says. The team found hair that had been invaded by threads of fungus and in one case with iron salts from an iron coffin. This doesn’t show that isotopic signatures were changed, but they do reveal changes in the nature of the hair. “My hunch is that it would affect isotopic ratios,” says Wilson”.Citation Source: Hair today… Andy CoghlandQuote(s):“The reader must assume, as apparently do the authors, that the "coarseness" or "fineness" of hair can readily distinguish races and that hair is dichotomized into these categories. Problematically, however, virtually all who have studied hair morphology in relation to race since the 1920’s to the present have rejected such a characterization .. Hausman, as early as 1925, stated thatit is "not possible to identify individuals from samples of their hair, basing identification upon histological similarities in the structure of scales and medullas, since these may differ in hairs from the same head or in different parts of the same hair". Rook (1975) pointed out nearly 50 years later out that NEGROID AND CAUCASOID HAIR ARE “CHEMICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE”.Citation Source: Tom Mieczkowsk, T. (2000). The Further Mismeasure: The Curious Use of Racial Categorizations in the Interpretation of Hair Analyses. Intl J Drug Testing 2000; vol 2.Quote:“Two British anthropologists, Brothwell and Spearman, have found evidence of cortex keratin oxidation in ancient Egyptian hair. They held that the mummification process was responsible, because of the strong alkaline substance used. THIS RESULTED IN THE YELLOWING AND BROWNING OF HAIR AS WELL AS THE STRAIGHTENING EFFECT. THIS MEANS THAT THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE HAIR ON MUMMIES CANNOT DISGUISE THEIR RACIAL AFFINITIES”.Reference: ScienceDirectQuote:Hair studies of mummies note that color is often influenced by environmental factors at burial sites. Brothwell and Spearman (1963) point out that reddish-brown ancient color hair is usually the result of partial oxidation of the melanin pigment. Other causes of hair color "blonding" involve natron and its alkaline in the mummification process. Color also varies due to the Egyptian practice of dyeing hair with henna. Other samples show individuals lightening the hair using vegetable colorants. Thus variations in hair color among mummies do not necessarily suggest the presence of blond or red-haired Europeans or Near Easterners flitting about Egypt before being mummified, but the influence of environmental factors.Information Referenced: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256381670_Preliminary_note_on_the_ultrastructure_of_the_hair_from_an_Egyptian_mummy_using_the_Scanning_Electron_MicroscopeQuote:“Potential change to hair color can be explained more scientifically by examining the chemistry of melanin which is responsible for hair color in life. All hair contains a mixture in varying concentration of both black-brown eumelanin and red-yellow phaeomelanin pigments, which are susceptible to differential chemical change under certain extreme burial conditions (for example wet reducing conditions, or dry oxidising conditions). Importantly, phaeomelanin is much more stable to environmental conditions than eumelanin, hence THE REACTIONS OCCURRING IN THE BURIAL ENVIRONMENT FAVOR THE PRESERVATION OF PHAEOMELANIN, REVEALING AND ENHANCING the RED/YELLOW COLOR OF HAIRS CONTAINING THIS PIGMENT. Color changes occur slowly under dry oxidising conditions, such as in the burials in sand at Hierakonpolis. Whether the conditions within the wood and plaster coffin contributed to accelerated color change, or whether this individual naturally had more phaeomelanin pigmentation in his hair is hard to say without further analysis”.Citation Source: www.archaeology.org/interactive/hierakonpolis/field/hair.htmlQuote:“Strouhal (1971) microscopically examined some hair which had been preserved on a Badarian skull. The analysis was interpreted as suggesting a stereotypical tropical African-European hybrid (mulatto). However, THIS HAIR IS GROSSLY NO DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF FULANI, SOME KANURI, OR SOMALI AND DOES NOT REQUIRE A GENE FLOW EXPLANATION ANY MORE THAN CURLY HAIR IN GREECE NECESSARILY DOES. EXTREMELY "WOOLLY" HAIR IS NOT THE ONLY KIND NATIVE TO TROPICAL AFRICA”.Source: S.O.Y. Keita. (1993). "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54).Strouhal thus concluded:Quote:The red hair, on the contrary, seems represented, at least by some individuals, in all known races, whether equatorial or boreal... From what precedes, WE ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION THAT THE COLOR OF THE HAIR ALONE IS INSUFFICIENT TO CHARACTERISE A RACE.. p 73–74Source: Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 6 (1877), pp. 71-92 titled On the Human Hair as a Race Character.NOTE: About 1 to 2 percent of the human population has red hair. Redheads have genes to thank for their tresses. Research shows red hair usually results from a mutation in a gene called MC1R, which codes for the melanocortin-1 receptor. The pigment found in red hair that gives it red is called pheomelanin.On Ramesses IIThe analysis on Rameses II also did not show classic “European” red hair but hair of a light red to yellowish tinge. Black haired or dark-skinned populations are quite capable of producing such yellowish-red color variants on their own, as can be seen in today's east and northeast Africa (see child's photo below). Nor is such color variation unusual to Africa. Native dark-skinned populations in Australia, Melanesia and Madagascar routinely produce people with blond or reddish hair. As noted above, ultra diverse Africa is the original source of such variation.

Historically the Spanish American War in 1898 set the foundation for the US Navy to replace the Royal Navy as a worldwide naval force.Spanish-American WarCONTENTSRemember the Maine!War Is DeclaredSpanish-American War BeginsTreaty of ParisThe Spanish-American War was an 1898 conflict between the United States and Spain that ended Spanish colonial rule in the Americas and resulted in U.S. acquisition of territories in the western Pacific and Latin America.Remember the Maine!The war originated in the Cuban struggle for independence from Spain, which began in February 1895.Spain’s brutally repressive measures to halt the rebellion were graphically portrayed for the U.S. public by several sensational newspapers, and American sympathy for the Cuban rebels rose.The growing popular demand for U.S. intervention became an insistent chorus after the still-unexplained sinking in Havana harbor of the American battleship USS Maine, which had been sent to protect U.S. citizens and property after anti-Spanish rioting in Havana.War Is DeclaredSpain announced an armistice on April 9 and speeded up its new program to grant Cuba limited powers of self-government.But the U.S. Congress soon afterward issued resolutions that declared Cuba’s right to independence, demanded the withdrawal of Spain’s armed forces from the island, and authorized the use of force by President William McKinley to secure that withdrawal while renouncing any U.S. design for annexing Cuba.Spain declared war on the United States on April 24, followed by a U.S. declaration of war on the 25th, which was made retroactive to April 21.Spanish-American War BeginsThe ensuing war was pathetically one-sided, since Spain had readied neither its army nor its navy for a distant war with the formidable power of the United States.Commo. George Dewey led a U.S. naval squadron into Manila Bay in the Philippines on May 1, 1898, and destroyed the anchored Spanish fleet in a leisurely morning engagement that cost only seven American seamen wounded. Manila itself was occupied by U.S. troops by August.The elusive Spanish Caribbean fleet under Adm. Pascual Cervera was located in Santiago harbour in Cuba by U.S. reconnaissance. An army of regular troops and volunteers under Gen. William Shafter (including Theodore Roosevelt and his 1st Volunteer Cavalry, the “Rough Riders”) landed on the coast east of Santiago and slowly advanced on the city in an effort to force Cervera’s fleet out of the harbour.Cervera led his squadron out of Santiago on July 3 and tried to escape westward along the coast. In the ensuing battle all of his ships came under heavy fire from U.S. guns and were beached in a burning or sinking condition.Santiago surrendered to Shafter on July 17, thus effectively ending the brief but momentous war.Treaty of ParisBy the Treaty of Paris (signed Dec. 10, 1898), Spain renounced all claim to Cuba, ceded Guam and Puerto Rico to the United States, and transferred sovereignty over the Philippines to the United States for $20 million.The Spanish-American War was an important turning point in the history of both antagonists. Spain’s defeat decisively turned the nation’s attention away from its overseas colonial adventures and inward upon its domestic needs, a process that led to both a cultural and a literary renaissance and two decades of much-needed economic development in Spain.Documenting United States Naval Activities During the Spanish-American WarSpring 1998, Vol. 30, No. 1By Richard W. PeuserFor many people, the conflict known as the Spanish-American War is a little understood episode in U.S. history. It evokes gripping images such as the explosion of the battleship Maine in Havana Harbor on February 15, 1898, or Teddy Roosevelt and the Rough Riders charging up San Juan Hill on July 1, 1898. But few scholars examined the subject at the fiftieth anniversary in 1948, and as the centennial anniversary of the war approaches, there is still a relatively short bibliography. This is unfortunate, since the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) holds hundreds of thousands of pages of records covering U.S. military activities during this period, many untapped by the research community. It is impossible to cite every series in all navy-related record groups relating to the Spanish-American War, but this article will mention the obvious and some not-so-obvious holdings that document United States naval activities during this period.The United States emerged from the Spanish-American War with a global empire, having acquired the possessions of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. It was a popular war with both the public and the press. The victories were glorified by newspapers, popular magazines, and veterans' own accounts published after the war. Songs, poems, and dirges written by the general public romanticized the exploits of ships, soldiers, and sailors. The following poem written by J. L. Miller of Denver, Idaho, entitled Our War Cry Is "The Maine" was sent to the secretary of the navy with the request that it be used as an "official" poem for "Sampson's Fleet":Our War Cry Is "The Maine"Air: "Rally Round the Flag, Boys"Our Court has found that Spain,By her treachery has slainOur brave and noble sailors,By blowing up the Maine.And now our Uncle Sam is plainIn dealing with the same.He calls us "come on, boysWe'll soundly whip old Spain!"[chorus]Old Glory forever, hurrah, boys, hurrah,Down with the Spanish; and up with the stars!While we rally round old glory, boys,Rally once again,Shouting the battle cry: "The Maine, boys."1Despite tensions with Spain dating back to 1895, the McKinley administration only reluctantly went to war. The explosion that destroyed the USS Maine did not convince the cautious McKinley to take immediate aggressive action. Instead he studied all available options short of declaring war. But the public clamor for war was very strong, and newspapers such as the New York World and the New York Journal exerted incredible pressure on both Congress and the White House. Eventually, both bowed to this pressure, and McKinley asked Congress for a declaration of war, which was granted on April 25, 1898. Recent scholarship portrays McKinley as a fully competent commander in chief who grasped the strategic objectives and coordinated policy through both the Navy and War Departments.2Administration of the Navy Department in 1898In order to understand the types of documentation relating to U.S. naval operations, it is important to understand the organization of the naval establishment in 1898. The Department of the Navy was headed by a presidentially appointed civilian secretary. Under him was an assistant secretary and the department's "legal adviser," the Judge Advocate General. In addition, the U.S. Marine Corps fell under naval jurisdiction. The basic organization of the department was the bureau system, which had been implemented in 1842. The bureaus were Construction and Repair, Equipment, Medicine and Surgery, Navigation, Ordinance, Steam Engineering, Supplies and Accounts, and Yards and Docks. Each bureau was further divided into offices. For example, the Naval Academy and the Office of Naval Intelligence were placed in the Bureau of Navigation. The Naval Observatory was administered by the Bureau of Equipment. The navy also created and appointed temporary and permanent boards. Examples of "temporary" boards were the board of inquiry concerning the destruction of the Maine and the Naval War Board, the latter organized by Secretary of the Navy John Long as an informal policy and strategy group accountable directly to him for the duration of the war.3 Examples of "permanent" boards were the Judge Advocate General's promotion and retirement boards which were set up to measure the "fitness" (both mental and physical) of officers serving in the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps.Like the War Department during this period, the navy had organizational flaws. Two major obstacles were lack of coordination among the bureaus and of a centralized policy or planning apparatus to prepare the department for future wars. The latter problem was partially addressed by the creation of the General Board in 1900.4 Despite its organizational flaws and shortcomings, the navy performed capably in the war with Spain. The vision of men such as Capt. Alfred T. Mahan, Rear Adm. Stephen B. Luce, and Secretary of the Navy Benjamin F. Tracy, as well as technological innovations developed after the Civil War, made a strong enough foundation for the navy's preparedness and successful conduct of war. The outcome was never in doubt. Anchored around the newly developed armored battleship advocated by Mahan, the "Steel Navy" of the United States defeated the outdated, outmanned, and outclassed fleet of the Spanish navy in every battle from the opening guns at Manila Bay, May 1, 1898, to the ultimate destruction of the Spanish fleet at Santiago de Cuba, July 3, 1898.The war with Spain involved naval operations in both the Atlantic and Pacific. Documentation concerning operations, training, administration, and personnel as well as other subjects relating to the naval establishment in 1898 are abundant among the holdings of the National Archives. Before conducting research at the National Archives, individuals are strongly encouraged to examine the variety of the published documentation that is available.Published DocumentationSignificant published primary sources consist of annual reports of the Navy Department (for specific years) and selected published proceedings such as the Report of the Naval Court of Inquiry Upon the Destruction of the United States Battleship Maine in Havana Harbor, February 15, 1898, Together with the Testimony Taken Before the Court (U.S. Senate document 207, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) and Record of Proceedings of a Court of Inquiry in the Case of Rear-Admiral Winfield S. Schley, U.S. Navy (2 volumes, 57th Cong., 1st sess). The Register of the Commissioned and Warrant Officers of the Navy of the United States, and of the Marine Corps (for specific years) is also a fine source for information concerning the names and duty stations of the officers that staffed the navy for given years. These published documents are part of the congressional serial set and are indispensable for researching U.S. naval activities during the conflict. In many instances, testimony of officers and supporting documentation such as "extracts" from a decklog or ship movement orders are included. The Government Printing Office (GPO) published these reports and registers, and they are available at designated depository libraries throughout the United States.A unique resource for the study of U.S. Navy operations during the war with Spain is the Annual Reports of the Secretary of the Navy for the Year 1898. All executive branch agencies are required by law to submit an annual report to Congress explaining actions taken during the previous year. Under the direction of the secretary of the navy, who produced his own report on the overall "state of the navy" and his office's activities, each bureau and administrative office, such as the Judge Advocate General and the commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), produced reports concerning its own specific activities. The Annual Reports for the Navy Department for the Year 1898 consists of two volumes of administrative reports by the bureaus and "independent" offices and a separate volume, Appendix to the Report of the Chief of the Bureau of Navigation, relating to "fleet" and other operational components of the navy in the war with Spain. The main volume consists of orders, maps, statistical summaries, and battle reports. The appendix contains the list of officers and enlisted men killed, drowned, and saved from the USS Maine and the findings of the United States and Spanish naval courts of inquiry concerning the destruction of the Maine. It also includes battle reports, orders, and other documentation relating to operations of the U.S. naval forces in Cuban waters and the Philippines. These printed reports compiled as the "appendix" were extracted and transcribed from the General Correspondence File, 1897–1926 (Entry 19), General Records of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, Record Group 80. All the entries include the "Sec. Nav." file number.Archival ResearchRecords in the custody of the National Archives are divided into "record groups," which maintain the same arrangement the creating agency used. Conducting research at the National Archives and Records Administration can be quite challenging, especially for first-time researchers. The depth of research depends on the researcher and the topic. The Guide to Federal Records in the National Archives of the United States is the first step for individuals conducting research on broad subjects, particular agencies, or getting general information on the holdings of the National Archives. It is available at most large reference and university libraries and is also available online through the "Research Room" section of the NARA home page on the World Wide Web at http://www.archives.gov/research/. Descriptions include administrative histories, record types (i.e., general correspondence, photographs), and dates covered. The Guide also provides the next step for archival research by listing the pertinent inventories for individual record groups.An "inventory" is a listing designed to tell the researcher both the quantity and nature of the records in a particular record group. Inventories contain a brief administrative history of the agency in question and a series-by-series description of the records. Inventories may also list related records available in other record groups (and in some cases, other repositories) and records that have been made into National Archives microfilm publications. Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel (Record Group 24) even lists the "Chiefs of the Bureau of Naval personnel and of the Predecessor Bureau of Navigation, 1862–1959" (p. 4), and the Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (Record Group 38)includes as an appendix a "List of the First Naval Attachés, 1882–1919" (p. 105).One important source not to be overlooked is the Guide to Materials on Latin America in the National Archives of the United States, compiled by George S. Ulibarri and John P. Harrison. It includes descriptions of various naval record groups that contain information or documentation on a variety of subjects relating to the Spanish-American War. The guide is arranged by branch or function of government, thereunder by record group. A subject index is included at the back of the volume.Records DescriptionThis section describes record groups and pertinent finding aids relating to naval activities during the Spanish-American War. Many significant series of records are available as National Archives microfilm publications. All National Archives microfilm publications are listed in National Archives Microfilm Resources for Research: A Comprehensive Catalog.Record Group 19, Records of the Bureau of ShipsFinding Aid: Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Bureau of Ships (1961).(Bureau of Construction and Repair, 1898; Bureau of Equipment, 1898)Functions in 1898: Responsible for ship designs, building, fitting, and repairing all U.S. Navy ships and ship equipment.These records relate to the design and construction of U.S. naval battleships and auxiliary craft. Some general correspondence files concern steel construction of ships and include blueprints and specifications. One of the entries, "Returns of the New York (December 1898–September 1900)" includes cruising information, places sailed, weather conditions, and information on the physical features of the flagship of the North Atlantic Station, which was commanded by Capt. William T. Sampson.Other series include information on coaling stations and coaling equipment, in particular the U.S. naval coaling stations at Honolulu, Hawaii (1885-1899), and Pichilingus Harbor, La Paz, Mexico (1885–1897). One fascinating series, "Records Relating to Homing Pigeons (1896 - 1899)," contains, in addition to correspondence to the U.S. Navy Department, sample packets of pigeon food and one packet labeled "feces." These packets were sent by pigeon experts in Dijon, France, to show the quality of carrier pigeon produced in that region. (The navy experimented with the idea of using messenger pigeons especially for ship-to-ship service.)Record Group 24, Records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel(Note: To avoid duplication, this segment will not discuss records relating to U.S. Navy personnel since "Genealogy Notes" in this issue will cover records relating to individuals.)Finding Aid: Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Bureau of Naval Personnel (1960).(Bureau of Navigation, 1898)Functions in 1898: Responsible for personnel, i.e., recruiting training, staffing (enlisted men and officers), and movement/operations of ships. Perhaps the most powerful bureau within the naval establishment during the war with Spain, the Bureau of Navigation had jurisdiction over personnel decisions of the Department of the Navy, including those relating to officers, enlisted men, and civilians who worked for the department. It administered the United States Naval Academy, the Office of Naval Intelligence, and the Coast Signal Service.A very popular series records is the "Logs of United States Naval Ships and Stations. 1801–1946." The National Archives has custody of all decklogs of U.S. Navy ships commissioned during the Spanish-American War. Decklogs and station logs were standardized records maintained by a specific ship or shore unit. They include a daily narrative of the unit's activity and record weather and hydrographical data. They were usually handwritten by the officer of the day. Each log begins with the name and rank of the officers and the dates covered by the log.Generally, the more active the ship or station, the more information is provided. In some cases, especially during action or by accident, the decklog was lost. Most notably, the decklog of the USS Maine was lost in the explosion in Havana Harbor, Cuba, February 15, 1898. A few of the Spanish-American War-era ships whose decklogs are in the custody of the National Archives are USS New York, USS Iowa, USS Marblehead, USS Brooklyn, USS Texas, USS Montgomery, USS Oregon, USS Massachusetts, and the USS Olympia. Logs were gathered together and bound, and each volume consists of two or three years of entries. Researchers will find an abundance of information in these logs including narratives of battles; instructions; orders; ship movements; ordnance, cargo, and personnel (including, in some cases, Spanish prisoners of war) taken aboard; and other documented day-to-day activities of navy commissioned ships.The best source to locate the names of the ship and shore units whose logs are in the custody of the National Archives is Special List #44, List of Logbooks of U.S. Navy Ships, Stations, and Miscellaneous Stations, 1801–1947. Special List #44 lists all ship and shore units alphabetically with the accompanying years covered by the logs.Beginning in 1885, the Navy Department created a general file by registering incoming and outgoing correspondence with a serial number, which was then registered with the date received or sent, the file number, name of correspondent, subject, and action taken.5 In the series "General Correspondence, 1889–1913," can be found a variety of actions and decisions made by the bureau chief (Arent Schuyler Crowninshield in 1898) concerning ships, shore establishments, and men. To locate specific documentation for the year 1898 in this series, a researcher would have to examine another entry,"Subject Registers of Letters Sent and Received ("Correspondence/Subjects"), 1896–1902" (8 volumes), which is arranged by the subjects "Persons, Vessels, Miscellaneous."6 The registers give the name of the subject, division, brief (description of incoming correspondence), writer, number, and action taken. If a researcher knows that an officer on the USS Iowa was transferred in 1898 to the USS Brooklyn, it is possible, for example, to search under the officer's name to locate the orders that sent him to the Brooklyn.Among the records of the general correspondence file is an interesting file concerning Commodore George Dewey. It acknowledges the receipt of multiple telegrams from Secretary of the Navy John Long announcing Dewey's rank as "admiral": "Hoist flag as Admiral— (signed) Long." Another telegram passes congratulations from President McKinley, Congress, and the entire Department of Navy to Dewey on his promotion to admiral.7 Other subjects within the registers include the names of executives of the U.S. governrnent, foreign dignitaries, and heads of state.Record Group 38, Records of the Office of the Chief of Naval OperationsFinding Aid: Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (1966).(Office of Naval Intelligence, 1898; Office of Naval Records and Library, 1898)Functions in 1898: Responsibilities for the Office of Naval Intelligence included the collection of technical and scientific data on foreign navies, usually by written reports and newspaper clippings compiled by the various naval attachés staffing European posts. This office was placed administratively under the Bureau of Navigation when war was declared.Intelligence and intelligence-gathering activities conducted by the U.S. Navy in the war with Spain were adequate, at the least. Naval attachés stationed at U.S. consular posts abroad and commercial agents acting on behalf of the department or the U.S. government forwarded information to the department.8 This information was transmitted in the form of letters, reports, cables, or messages (sometimes in code); analyzed for content; and disseminated to appropriate offices within the department or passed onto other U.S. government agencies whose interests were represented.Letters from attachés in RG 38 are bound into twenty-five volumes covering the period October 28, 1882–December 29, 1900 (entry 90). These "letterbooks" are arranged by the name of post, including the name of the naval attaché stationed there, thereunder chronologically. The volumes covering the period of the Spanish-American War are:London (October 28, 1882–March 31, 1900), 9 volumes.Berlin, Rome, and Vienna (January 10, 1889–September 29, 1900), 6 volumes.Paris and St. Petersburg (September 6, 1892–May 30, 1900), 6 volumes.Tokyo, Madrid, London, Paris, and St. Petersburg (January 5, 1895–December 29, 1900), 1 volume.9Many of these letters include enclosures such as newspaper clippings, technical pamphlets, maps, charts, summaries, and diagrams. These letterbooks are a great source of information concerning foreign navies and merchant fleets, foreign technological developments, and in some instances, the attitude of a particular country towards the United States. They are indexed by a separate series of registers arranged by year, thereunder by subject (entry 89).Communications from the department to naval attachés are also available in this record group. "Cable Correspondence with U.S. Naval Attachés During the Spanish-American War (January 20, 1898–November 1, 1900)" consists of letters, cables, and instructions from the secretary of the navy to attachés stationed at London, Rome, Berlin, St. Petersburg, Tokyo, and Madrid. This series is arranged by post, thereunder chronologically, and consists of letters, bound in two volumes, detailing some of the actions the U.S. Navy took leading up to the actual declaration of war. Many of these letters are the instructions sent by Secretary Long and Assistant Secretary Theodore Roosevelt during March 1898 requesting information on Spain's naval preparations for possible war. Another topic with which the department concerned itself was the condition, preparation, and movements of the Spanish fleet. Accordingly, cables and letters are included in this series, instructing the naval attachés to provide related intelligence. One cablegram, written by Roosevelt to the U.S. attaché in Madrid, Spain, urged caution while instructing him to keep fully abreast of the situation:Alusna, Madrid.March 5, 1898Keep informed state of affairs and report fully by navy secret code preparation and movement Spanish navy. Exercise discretion.Roosevelt10The Navy Department was also concerned about its own overall readiness for a possible war with Spain. Researchers can find a wealth of information in this series concerning the various steps taken by the department such as the purchasing of guns, ordnance, and other weaponry.Record Group 45, Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and LibraryFinding Aid: Preliminary Checklist of the Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library (1945).(Office of Naval Records and Library, 1898)Functions in 1898: Administered the Navy Department Library; continued the publication and distribution of the Official Records of The War of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion.The records collected by the Office of Naval Records and Library cover the period 1775–1927 and document virtually every aspect of U.S. Navy history. The scope and depth makes it the most important record group for the study of U.S. naval history for the nineteenth century. Researchers who intend to study the U.S. Navy during the Spanish-American are strongly urged to start with this record group. The records that make up this collection were gleaned from other naval bureaus, offices, boards, and functions. They were placed into an artificial filing scheme created by the navy's historical section between the years 1923 and 1942.11 Two series are especially important.Entry 464, Subject File, 1775–1910. These records are arranged by an alpha-subject designation. An index lists the subject designations and the titles of the files in chronological order. All of the individual files are either in folders or envelopes, each clearly labeled with the contents and dates of the records inside. Information relating to the U.S. Navy during the Spanish-American War is scattered among these records. Some of the file designations and accompanying document titles are:File HA (Engagement with Enemy Vessels)"July 3,1898, Description of Battle of Santiago written by Lt. Thomas A. Kearney immediately after battle.""1898, Battle of Manila Bay—miscellaneous material. Also, a translation of a Spanish book relating to the battle.""July 3,1898, Spanish Account of the Battle of Santiago, Cuba. List of Spanish Personnel included."File HF (Fires, Explosions, Etc.)"Correspondence Relating to the loss of the USS Maine."File O1 (Reports of Inspection— U.S. Ships)File OO (Operations of Large Groups of vessels)These are the operational records of the fleet and squadron components of the U.S. Navy during the Spanish-American War, including auxiliary crafts. Some of the document titles include:"1898, Battles and Capitulation of Santiago, Cuba, including data concerning the sinking of the USS Maine from a Spanish point of view.""Activities of the German Squadron in Manila Bay, told by Chief Boatswain Ernest Heilman. Other data relative to Dewey and the German Fleet.""1898, Diary of Commodore George Dewey (Manila Campaign, January 1898–May 1898), (photostat).""1898, Narrative of Manila Campaign, preparation at Hong Kong— Battle of Manila Bay, enforcement of blockade and operations resulting in the surrender of Manila."Under the file designation VN (Naval Policy), there are two attaché reports concerning the effects or influence the Spanish-American War had on Europe, in particular, Germany and Great Britain. One report, dated September 16, 1899, written by U.S. naval attaché to Great Britain Lt. Comdr. John C. Colwell, concluded with the remark that, in respect to Her Majesty's Navy, the late war was of little interest since the "professional aspects" and outcome were already known. The second report, dated October 30, 1899, written by U.S. naval attaché to Germany Comdr. William H. Beehler, concerns the effect of the war on German naval policy. It discusses such topics as ship design, armored coast defense vessels, cruisers, and communications (telegraph). These two files reveal some general prevailing attitudes of Europe's navies to that of the U.S. Navy after the end of hostilities.12Entry 464, Area File, August 1775–December 1910. These records are arranged by geographic region, thereunder chronologically. The geographic divisions are further divided into eleven subdivisions. These records have been microfilmed as National Archives Microfilm Publication M625, Area File of the Naval Records Collection, 1775–1910 (414 rolls). The descriptive pamphlet accompanying M625 contains the administrative history of the collection; a description of the geographic locations or areas, including date or time period covered; a map of the divided areas; and a roll-by-roll list of contents.Two examples of the kind of documentation found in this collection are the famous "Sigsbee Telegram," written while the Maine's captain, Charles Sigsbee, was aboard the SS City of Washington, informing the department of the explosion of his vessel, February 15, 1898 (Area #8), and Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt's instructions (in code) to Commodore Dewey to take action against the Spanish fleet in Mirs (Manila) Bay, April 1898 (Area #10).Record Group 52, Records of the Bureau of Medicine and SurgeryFinding Aid: Preliminary Inventory of the Records of the Office of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery (1948).(Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, 1898)Functions in 1898: One of the original bureaus since 1842, it concerned itself with naval medicine, including the overall health and welfare of officers and enlisted men of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. It administered U.S. Navy ship and shore medical facilities.As the title indicates, the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery was the medical arm of the naval establishment in 1898. Included in this record group are personnel-related series, including individual personnel histories of medical officers; records relating to the history of naval medicine; and a general correspondence file, 1885–1912, which has an alphabetical subject index. Under the subject heading, "Maine, USS, Disaster the," researchers can locate records relating to casualty lists, lists of survivors, Marine Corps casualties, final disposition of survivors, permission from the secretary of the navy for the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery to give copies of death certificates to next-of-kin, and death certificates forwarded to the commissioner of pensions.13A thin volume entitled "Casualty Book—War with Spain" includes a statistical summary of total strength, casualties from battle, deaths from battle, and deaths from all causes. The volumes contain an alphabetical listing of men, nativity (residence or origin), where enlisted, and date and place of death. In the back of the volume is an envelope that contains correspondence concerning both U.S. Navy and Marine Corps casualties in the war with Spain. Some of the documents are annotated with additional names and dates of death. The volume and accompanying correspondence are dated 1903.14Record Group 80, General Records of the Department of the Navy, 1798–1947Finding Aid: Preliminary Checklist of the General Records of the Department of the Navy, 1804–1944 (1945).(Office of the Secretary of the Navy, 1898)Functions in 1898: The secretary of the navy (John D. Long in 1898) has charge of all duties connected with the U.S. Naval Establishment including setting policy, creating and abolishing boards, and fiscal matters.The records of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy were filed numerically by subject for the period of the Spanish-American War. The "General Correspondence File, January 1897–August 1926," has an index, arranged alphabetically by name or subject. It is available on microfilm as National Archives Microfilm Publication M1052, General and Special Indexes to the General Correspondence of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, July 1897–August 1926 (119 rolls). This publication's descriptive pamphlet contains an administrative history, notes on recordkeeping practices of the Navy Department in the late nineteenth century, and a roll-by-roll list of contents. Appendix B of the preliminary inventory for RG 80 contains an alphabetical list of the main subject headings in the file (entry 19), 1897–1926. Since the records were maintained by the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, information on a wide variety of subjects ranging from personnel actions within the department to shipbuilding programs in the navy's many shipyards may be found in this series.The Naval War Board, a policy organization whose members were Assistant Secretary of the Navy Roosevelt, Capt. Alfred Thayer Mahan, Adm. Montgomery Sicard, Capt. Arent S. Crowninshield, and Capt. Albert S. Barker, was crucial in providing coherent strategy and war planning for the navy in the war with Spain.15 Under this file heading are handwritten references to five documents whose titles are "Spanish Vessels" (file 7332-3-9), "Light Buoys" (file 7736), "Coaling Stations" (file 6951-6), "Papers from Board" (file 8153), and "Dept. directs Capt. A. T. Mahan to prepare a history of the work of the Board: The Causes leading to its organization, etc., etc., for the General Board" (file 22132). A further annotation remarks that this last document was filed in the records of the General Board. The records of the General Board (1900–1951), also part of RG 80, contain the original manuscript of "History of Naval War Board, 1898," written by Alfred T. Mahan in 1906. Attached to the manuscript are letters written by Captain Mahan to former Secretary of the Navy John D. Long and other members of the Naval War Board and a letter from the president of the Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island, dated January 26, 1940, requesting a copy of Mahan's work for the college. No organized body of records exists for the Naval War Board, however.16Examples of other documentation in RG 80 are records of various boards commissioned during the Spanish-American War including the Board on Construction, 1889–1909, and the Board on Auxiliary Vessels, 1898. Records of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Theodore Roosevelt during the period, April 1897–May 1898) also exist. There are eight volumes of letters sent by Roosevelt to other officers of the navy and to private and public individuals. Many letters relate to the formation of the First U.S. Cavalry ("Rough Riders"), the unit he and Col. Leonard Wood formed after he resigned from the position of assistant secretary in May 1898. Letters sent to the attaché in London concern the purchase of naval war stores and auxiliary vessels, and letters to various congressmen concern the push for naval preparedness. 17Record Group 313, Records of Naval Operating ForcesFinding Aid: Preliminary Inventory of the Records of Naval Operating Forces (1963).(Bureau of Navigation, 1898)Functions in 1898: Responsible for ship operations and movements. Records of the components of the U.S. Fleet include North Atlantic Squadron, Eastern Squadron, Asiatic Squadron, European Squadron, and the Flying Squadron (1898).Researchers examining the finding aid for RG 313 will find that the records described within its pages are almost exclusively of Spanish-American War vintage. There is a wealth of documentation concerning operations of the fleet, including squadrons and flotillas. Included are operational reports, journals, orders, and instructions issued by commanders of the various naval forces for the Spanish-American War. Historically, the Navy Department operated five geographically organized squadrons from immediately after the Civil War until 1906–1907: North Atlantic Squadron, European Squadron, Asiatic Squadron, Pacific Squadron, and Training Squadron.18 Accordingly, the records are arranged by squadrons thereunder by type of record and date. Included in this record group is the journal of Rear Adm. William T. Sampson, Commander, North Atlantic Squadron, March–August, 1898. Reports of action during the Battle of Santiago de Cuba can be found in the journal.There are records of the "Flying Squadron," commanded by Commodore Winfield Scott Schley, March 28–November 11, 1898, and records of the United States Auxiliary Naval Force, 1898, which had been organized for the coastal defense of the United States. Other series include correspondence with bureaus of the Navy Department (entry 47) and correspondence with Commodore John C. Watson (entry 51) and Commodore George C. Remey (entry 53). These series are letters sent to the officers by other commanders in the field and the Navy Department in Washington, D.C.These are examples of the kinds of documentation available in the National Archives relating to the U.S. Navy in the "Age of Empire." There is much more. Some of the record groups not covered in this essay includeRecord Group 37, Records of the Hydrographic Office;Record Group 71, Records of the Bureau of Yards and Docks;Record Group 74, Records of the Bureau of Ordnance;Record Group 125, Records of the Office of the Judge Advocate General (Navy);Record Group 127, Records of the U.S. Marine Corps;Record Group 143, Records of the Bureau of Supply and Accounts (Navy);and Record Group 181, Records of Naval Districts and Shore Establishments.Researchers are encouraged to explore these sources as well.One final note for researchers to keep in mind: as mentioned previously, many records in these record groups were removed and placed in Record Group 45, Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library. If records cannot be found in the above record groups, chances are they were refiled in RG 45.Archival research takes time and patience. Both staff and scholars have compared it to detective work. It is important to remember that this kind of research is a layered process, going from the general to the specific. One of the best strategies for archival research is to know and understand the secondary sources relating to a topic before consulting primary documents. Checking footnotes and bibliographies cited by other authors and specialists in the field may help individuals open doors into the world of archival research. The "Suggested Readings" list contains several excellent secondary works concerning U.S. naval operations during the Spanish-American War written in the past thirty years.Researchers are also encouraged to consult with the NARA reference staff archivists who are familiar with the pertinent records and finding aids relating to the U.S. Naval Establishment at the turn of the century. NARA archivists who work with military records can help map out research strategies for prospective researchers.19 Letters of introduction and intention are especially useful prior to a visit to the Archives.This is not the first time a call has been made for more research in this period of U.S. naval history. David F. Trask, in his essay entitled "Research Opportunities in the Spanish-Cuban-American War and World War I," delivered at the National Archives Conference on Naval History, May 29–31, 1974, concluded with "a plea for efforts to stimulate use of the National Archives collections (for this period)." He further stated that, "if and when these sources are properly exploited, we will assuredly process more of the illusive 'new naval History,' about which we hear so much and which indeed is attainable in our time."20 These words echo as loudly today as they did when he first issued the call twenty-three years ago.War Plans and Preparations and Their Impact on U.S. Naval Operations in the Spanish-American Warby Mark L. Hayes, Early History Branch, Naval Historical CenterPaper presented at Congreso Internacional Ejército y Armada en El 98:Cuba, Puerto Rico y Filipinas on 23 March 1998.The United States Navy, much like the nation itself, was in a state of transition in 1898. Traditionally the navy embraced a defensive strategy with an emphasis on commerce raiding. In contrast, the navy was asked during the Spanish-American War to gain control of the waters around the Philippine Islands and the Caribbean Sea. After twenty years of rapid decline into obsolescence following the American Civil War, the navy was in the process of re-equipping itself with steel warships of modern design. The implications of these changes for the conduct of war at sea were not lost on America's naval leadership, who had spent the years and months prior to the war with Spain preparing for conflict with a European power. However, the war itself revealed the growing tactical and logistical complexities of modern naval warfare, and the U.S. Navy, like all navies, was in the process of overcoming the challenges presented by the technology of the new steel warships.The U.S. Navy had in commission over 600 vessels at the close of the American Civil War. Nearly all of the new ships were wartime purchases, hasty constructions, or made from unseasoned timber. After the war, most were sold off or destroyed. In spite of international crises such as the Virginius Affair in 1873, contention with Great Britain over the Alabama Claims, and problems with France over a projected canal in Panama, the strength of the navy continued to decline. By 1879 only forty-eight of the navy's 142 vessels were available for immediate service, and these were obsolete wooden or old ironclad ships. Naval technology had stagnated in the U.S., illustrated by the fact that there was not a single high-power, long-range rifled gun in the entire fleet. In 1884 the U.S. Navy's newest ships were wooden-hulled steam sloops built in the previous decade.1Modernization began during the administration of President Chester Arthur in the early 1880s. Rapid growth in overseas markets and a foreign policy aimed at U.S. control of communications across the isthmus of Central America drove the country towards naval expansion. President Arthur addressed a receptive Congress in his first annual message when he concluded, "I cannot too strongly urge upon you my conviction, that every consideration of national safety, economy, and honor imperatively demands a thorough rehabilitation of the navy."2 Two years of debate on the nature of this expansion culminated with the Navy Act of 1883, authorizing the construction of the steel cruisers Atlanta, Boston, and Chicago, and the dispatch vessel Dolphin. Congress continued the process by approving additional steel warships, including the New Navy's first armored ships, USS Texas and USS Maine. Toward the end of the decade the U.S. Navy still embraced a defensive oriented strategy with cruisers designed for commerce protection and raiding. Even the armored ships under construction were designed to counter the threat of similar vessels in South American navies.3It was during the administration of Benjamin Harrison (1889-93) that the navy's strategy and policy began to change. In his inaugural address, President Harrison called for the continued and rapid construction of modern warships, and the acquisition of bases to maintain the U.S. fleet in foreign seas. Later he urged Congress to authorize construction of battleships, giving support to Secretary of the Navy B.F. Tracy's goal of making the U.S. fleet strong enough "to be able to divert an enemy's force from our coast by threatening his own, for a war, though defensive in principle, may be conducted most effectively by being offensive in its operations."4 Tracy proved to be an excellent administrator, and he marshaled allies for his expansionist policies in both Congress and the navy, including Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan. Their work bore fruit with the Navy Bill of 30 June 1890, authorizing construction of three battleships later named Indiana, Oregon, and Massachusetts. Along with the battleship Iowa, authorized in 1892, this force formed the core of a new fleet willing to challenge European navies for control of the waters in the Western Hemisphere.While civilian leadership and U.S. industry prepared the navy materially for an offensive war, a new institution, the Naval War College, prepared the service intellectually. Founded in 1884 and placed under the direction of Commodore Stephen B. Luce, the War College contributed greatly to the professionalization of the U.S. Naval Officer Corps at the end of the nineteenth century. Explaining to the Senate the reason for creating the institution, Secretary of the Navy William E. Chandler stated that "the constant changes in the methods of conducting naval warfare imposed by the introduction of armored ships, swift cruisers, rams, sea-going torpedo boats, and high- power guns. . .render imperative the establishment of a school where our officers may be enabled to keep abreast of the improvements going on in every navy in the world."5By the 1890s the curriculum at the War College included training problems where students drafted plans for operations in the event of war with specific countries under particular circumstances. Beginning in 1894 the War College, and later special boards convened by the Secretary of the Navy, examined the possibility of war with Spain over trouble in Cuba. When Secretary of the Navy John Long formed the Naval War Board in March 1898, the Navy Department and the McKinley administration had the benefit of four years of planning for such a conflict. The first plan to emerge from the Naval War College was a paper prepared in 1894 by Lieutenant Commander Charles J. Train who was assigned to write on "Strategy in the Event of War with Spain." Train believed that the first priority of the U.S. Navy was the destruction of the Spanish fleet which should be accomplished at the earliest possible date. The plan called for the seizure of Nipe Bay on Cuba's northeast coast as an anchorage and coaling station to support a blockade of the island's principal ports. It was expected that a Spanish expedition from Cadiz would attempt to relieve Cuba via Puerto Rico, but would be met by a concentrated U.S. fleet ready to defeat it.6When the Cuban insurrection broke out the following year, the officers in charge at the Naval War College believed that it was important to undertake a full-scale study of a Spanish-American conflict. They gave the class of 1895 a "special problem" concerning war with Spain where the objective was to secure independence for Cuba. The plan, submitted to the Navy Department in January 1896, called for an early joint operations against Havana. Thirty thousand regulars would be landed near the colonial capital from a staging area in Tampa, Florida, fifteen days after war was declared, followed by 25,000 volunteers two weeks later. The U.S. fleet, based out of Key West, would intercept any Spanish expedition attempting to reinforce the defenders in Cuba. Such a relief attempt was expected thirty days into the conflict.7The Office of Naval Intelligence entered the planning effort later in 1896. Lieutenant William Kimball prepared a plan that focussed on a tight naval blockade of Cuba as the primary means of persuading Spain to release control of her colony. Supporting attacks against Manila and the Spanish coast would, it was believed, further induce Spain to negotiate an end to the conflict. According to Kimball's plan, only if these efforts failed to bring about peace, would the army land in Cuba and operate against Havana. The Naval War College criticized the plan on the grounds that it dispersed U.S. naval strength to a dangerous extent, and warned that a blockade alone would be insufficient to bring Spain to the negotiating table. The proposed expedition to Spanish waters was thought to be counter-productive as it might harden Spanish resolve and invite unwanted diplomatic pressure from other European countries. However, Captain Henry Taylor, president of the War College, endorsed the idea to use the Asiatic Squadron against Spanish forces in the Philippines, and this element would reappear in later plans.8Admiral Francis M. Ramsay, chief of the influential Bureau of Navigation, had long been an strong opponent of the Naval War College, and it is likely that he was the one who persuaded Secretary of the Navy Hilary Herbert to convene a board in the summer of 1896 to draft a separate plan for war with Spain. Like the Kimball plan, the Ramsay Board focused on the a naval blockade, but added the deep water ports of Puerto Rico to those of Cuba. The destruction of crops in Cuba by both sides led the Board to believe that the Spanish garrison needed to import food in order to survive. A relief force from Spain would consume most of its coal simply in crossing the Atlantic and thus would be in no position to engage American naval forces. Although the present strength of the U.S. Navy was sufficient to meet and defeat any fleet arriving from Spain, the Board called for the purchase of a number of small fast steamers to enforce the blockade. Finally, the European Squadron should be reinforced by ships from the U.S. and the Asiatic Squadron, and together operate against the Spanish coast after capturing the Canary Islands as an advance base. Captain Taylor strongly dissented from the views of the Board stating that large operations in Spanish waters were too dangerous, and that a naval blockade would not be sufficient to subdue Spanish forces in Cuba.9Perhaps confused by the different positions in the existing plans, the new Secretary of the Navy, John Long, convened his own War Planning Board under Commander in Chief of the North Atlantic Station, Rear Admiral Montgomery Sicard, in June 1897. Chief Intelligence Officer Lieutenant Commander Richard Wainwright was the only member who had served on the previous board. The Sicard Board endorsed the War College idea that joint operations against Havana would be necessary to end the war. Therefore, the plan called for the early seizure of Matanzas, sixty miles east of Havana, to serve as a base of operations against the latter, and to deliver arms to the Cuban insurgents. Purchased or chartered merchant steamers were to be armed and sent to the Caribbean to enforce a swift and strong blockade. This would also free the heavier ships to intercept a relief force from Spain. The members emphasized the need for colliers to refuel the fleet on blockade rather than forcing vessels to return to coaling stations. Although the Board rejected the idea of trying to capture the Canary Islands, it recommended the formation of a flying squadron consisting of two armored cruisers and two commerce destroyers to operate on the coast of Spain in order to detain Spanish ships in home waters. The plan called for the reduction and garrisoning of the principal ports of Puerto Rico as soon as circumstances permitted. The Board also returned to the idea of using the Asiatic Squadron against Spanish forces in the Philippines. As in the previous plans, the objects of these operations were to tie down or divert enemy ships and to give the United States' a stronger bargaining position at the peace settlement.10When war between the United States and Spain appeared unavoidable following the destruction of USS Maine in Havana harbor on 15 February 1898, the Navy Department had a solid body of plans and documents honed by four years of debate by its leading officers. Although the realities of war would force several modifications, many of the concepts laid out in the Sicard Plan were implemented: a strong blockade of Cuba; support for the insurgents; operations against Spanish forces in the Philippines and Puerto Rico; and the formation of a squadron to operate in Spanish waters. Perhaps more importantly, nearly every plan called for the purchase or charter of merchant vessels to serve as auxiliary cruisers, colliers, and transports. The data furnished in appended lists and the inspiration to act quickly served as a basis for decision making in those crucial weeks prior to war.At the beginning of 1898 the fleet of the United States Navy consisted of six battleships, two armored cruisers, thirteen protected cruisers, six steel monitors, eight old iron monitors, thirty- three unprotected cruisers and gunboats, six torpedo boats, and twelve tugs.11 Noticeably absent from this list are colliers, supply vessels, transports, hospital ships, repair ships, and the large number of small vessels necessary for maintaining an effective blockade of Cuba's numerous ports. As the Navy Department's war plans clearly indicated, the government would need to purchase or contract for scores of ships in the event of war with a naval power. The destruction of the Maine propelled the department into action. Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt organized a Board of Auxiliary Vessels which, utilizing material in the department's war plans, prepared a list of suitable private craft that would meet the Navy's expanded needs. On 9 March Congress passed a $50 million emergency defense appropriation bill, and the Navy Department began to acquire vessels. By the end of the war, the navy had purchased or leased 103 warships and auxiliaries. Another twenty-eight vessels were added from existing government organizations including revenue cutters, lighthouse tenders, and the vessels of the Fish Commission. After the war auxiliary vessels such as colliers, refrigerator ships, and distilling ships became a permanent part of the fleet.12The availability of coal was the single most important factor in determining naval operations in 1898. A lack of coal severely limited Admiral Cervera's options upon arriving in the Caribbean with his Spanish squadron in the middle of May, and American concerns over coaling nearly allowed him to escape from Santiago de Cuba near the end of the month. There were essentially three sources of fuel available for naval squadrons: coaling stations at friendly bases, neutral ports, and other ships (usually colliers). Key West served as the base for U.S. naval operations in the Caribbean. International law permitted, but did not require, neutrals to provide visiting ships of belligerents just enough coal to allow them to make it to the nearest friendly port, but this was an option of last resort. Colliers were the most common source of fuel for vessels of the fleet blockading Cuba. Six were available to the U.S. fleet early in the war, and an additional eleven were purchased by the end.The endurance of a ship depended on a number of circumstances, such as bunker capacity, the amount of coal stored on deck, the quality of coal, how many boilers were lit, and the ship's speed while under way. Most major warships of the U.S. fleet had an operational range in the neighborhood of 4000 nautical miles, or just over two weeks of continuous steaming at ten knots.13 Naturally, ships' commanding officers were reluctant to allow their bunkers to get anywhere near empty, and they availed themselves of nearly every opportunity to add to their supply of coal.Coaling from open lighters in port was the quickest and most efficient means of refueling a ship. Winches set up on the warships hauled the coal on board in bags, where small carts carried them to the coal chutes leading from the upper deck directly to the bunkers. When coaling from colliers it was best to find a sheltered anchorage safe from the effects of rough seas. Coaling in the open sea with a ship alongside was always considered a dangerous evolution. Colliers were equipped with cotton-bale fenders to protect the ships when the motion was slight. However, any situation where the swell was sufficient to cause either ship to roll more than three or four degrees or rise more than one or two feet was considered too dangerous to attempt. There were many occasions when coaling at sea was simply not possible, and perhaps many more where it was considered problematic. The speed with which coal could be taken on board varied widely, most often dependent on the weather. On 31 May USS Brooklyn took on coal at a rate of eighteen tons per hour, while eight days later she achieved a rate of nearly fifty-seven tons per hour. The weather rarely cooperated long enough for more than a few hundred tons to be loaded on board before rising seas called a halt to the operation.14 It is important to have an appreciation of the problems inherent in refueling warships of the day for a proper perspective on strategic and operational decisions made during the war.Secretary Long formally organized the Naval War Board in March 1898 to advise him on strategy and operations. Initial members were Assistant Secretary Theodore Roosevelt, Rear Admiral Montgomery Sicard (who had just arrived from command of the North Atlantic Station), Captain Arent S. Crowninshield, and Captain Albert S. Barker. By May, Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan joined the organization. Roosevelt left to become a lieutenant colonel in the First Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, and the Navy Department reassigned Captain Barker to command USS Newark. Although it had no executive authority, the Board exerted considerable influence on operations through its advisory capacity. In particular, Mahan's views often dominated. Following earlier war plans, the Board recommended concentrating on Spain's outlying possessions with a close blockade of Cuba, giving the army time to mobilize sufficient strength for land campaigns in Cuba and Puerto Rico.15As the Navy Department worked with the president and the War Department in developing strategy, Secretary Long began repositioning naval units in preparation of the opening of hostilities. Since January, much of the North Atlantic Squadron had been concentrated for winter exercises at Key West, Florida. The first colliers did not reach the fleet until 3 May, nearly two weeks after the blockade began. On 17 March the battleships Massachusetts and Texas were ordered to join the armored cruiser Brooklyn at Hampton Roads, Virginia, to form the Flying Squadron under Commodore Winfield Scott Schley. The protected cruisers Minneapolis and Columbiajoined Schley's force prior to the outbreak of hostilities. The squadron was organized to protect the U.S. coast against a sudden descent by the Spanish armored cruisers of Pascual Cervera's squadron, known to be concentrating in the Cape Verde Islands. The Navy Department recalled the protected cruiser USS San Franciscoand Commodore John A. Howell from Europe. On 20 April Howell assumed command of the newly formed Northern Patrol Squadron, which was responsible for the protection of the coast and coastal trade from the Delaware capes to Bar Harbor, Maine. Rear Admiral Henry Erben commanded the Auxiliary Naval Force with his headquarters on shore at New York City. This command consisted primarily of eight old iron monitors stationed at several U.S. ports.16Assistant Secretary Roosevelt sent a telegraphic order to Commodore George Dewey on 25 February commanding him to concentrate the ships of the Asiatic Station at Hong Kong. In the event of war he was to take his squadron and destroy the Spanish ships in Philippine waters. Dewey's command at Hong Kong consisted of the protected cruisers Olympia, Boston, and Raleigh, and the gunboats Concord and Petrel. The Revenue Cutter McCulloch joined the force on 17 April, and the protected cruiser Baltimore arrived on 22 April. Dewey also prepared for future operations in a region without friendly bases by purchasing the British steamers Nanshanand Zafiro to carry coal and supplies for his squadron.17Anticipating a showdown with Spanish fleet in the Atlantic theater, Secretary Long ordered the battleship USS Oregon to depart from its home port at Bremerton, Washington, for San Francisco, California, on 7 March, to begin the first leg of a 14,700 nautical mile journey to Key West. The gunboat USS Marietta made the battleship's voyage quicker and easier by arranging for coal and supplies in South American ports along the way. The Oregonleft San Francisco on 19 March, under the command of Captain Charles E. Clark, and arrived at Callao, Peru, on 4 April, traveling 4800 miles in just sixteen days. The battleship departed Callao on 7 April, and arrived at Sandy Point at the southern tip of the continent ten days later. Rendezvousing with the Marietta on 21 April, the Oregonheaded north, putting into Rio de Janeiro on 30 April, where Secretary Long warned Captain Clark that Admiral Cervera's squadron was at sea. Departing Rio on 5 May, the American battleship arrived at Bahia, Brazil, three days later. Not wishing to submerge his ship's armor belt in case of an encounter with the Spanish squadron, Clark ordered on board only enough coal to reach Barbados, where he arrived on 18 May. The Oregon steamed into the American base at Key West on 26 May in efficient condition and ready for operations against the Spanish fleet.18Although President McKinley continued to press for a diplomatic settlement to the Cuban problem, he accelerated military preparations begun in January when an impasse appeared likely. McKinley asked Congress on 11 April for permission to intervene in Cuba. On 21 April, the President ordered the Navy to begin the blockade of Cuba, and Spain followed with a declaration of war on 23 April. Congress responded with a formal declaration of war on 25 April, made retroactive to the start of the blockade.International law required a blockade to be effective in order to be legal. With the absence of colliers and the Atlantic fleet divided between Key West and Hampton Roads, the American effort was initially limited to the north coast of Cuba between Cardenas and Bahia Honda, and Cienfuegos on the south coast. The U.S. fleet at Key West at the beginning of hostilities consisted of three armored ships, three monitors, one protected cruiser, two unprotected cruisers, seven gunboats, one armed yacht, six torpedo boats, and five armed tugs. In the early light of 22 April, Sampson's fleet deployed from Key West to steam across the Florida Straits and begin the blockade. Sampson believed he could reduce the defenses of Havana by rolling up the Spanish fortifications from the west. However, Secretary Long, following the advice of the Naval War Board, ordered him not to risk his armored ships unnecessarily against land fortifications in light of Cervera's potential deployment to the Caribbean. The Navy Department was considering occupying the port of Matanzas, garrisoning it with a large military force, and opening communications with the insurgents. Long wanted Sampson to keep his most powerful ships ready to escort the transports if McKinley should decide on an early landing in Cuba.19By the morning of 23 April the advance ships of the blockading fleet were off their assigned ports. Additional vessels reinforced them over the next several days. The U.S. Navy struggled during the first weeks of the war to assemble the logistical apparatus necessary to support the blockade. Ships had to keep steam up in their boilers to pursue unknown vessels as they came into sight. Until colliers were fitted out and sent south, most of the blockading ships were forced to return to Key West to coal. Fresh water and food were also in short supply during the early days of the war.The blockade was monotonous duty broken only by the rare capture of a Spanish vessel or an exchange of gunfire with gunboats and batteries. Although the Navy Department prohibited Sampson's vessels from engaging heavy batteries, like those around Havana, they allowed the bombardment of smaller field works. On 27 April the New York, Puritan, and Cincinnati shelled Point Gorda at Matanzas to prevent the completion of new batteries.20 Most encounters were only skirmishes resulting in few if any casualties.A few actions were intense, such as the one at Cardenas on 11 May when the U.S. Navy gunboat Wilmington, the torpedo boat Winslow, and the Revenue Cutter Hudson were drawn deep into the harbor by Spanish gunboats. Hidden Spanish batteries ambushed the Winslow, severely damaging her, killing ten and wounding twenty-one of her crew. While under heavy fire the Hudson towed the torpedo boat out of the harbor as the Wilmingtoncovered the withdrawal with rapid fire against the Spanish guns.21The U.S. blockading forces also undertook operations to isolate Cuba from telegraphic communications to Madrid via Cienfuegos, Santiago, and Guantanamo. The most celebrated action of this type occurred on 11 May off Cienfuegos. Commander Bowman McCalla of the cruiser Marblehead organized the party and planned the operation to cut the underwater cables leaving the city. Marine sharpshooters and machine guns in steam cutters poured a continuous fire into Spanish positions on shore, along with gunfire support from the Marblehead and the gunboat Nashville, while sailors in launches dragged the sea floor with grapelling hooks for the cables. The launch and cutter crews endured heavy Spanish fire for three hours and cut the two main telegraph cables (leaving a third, local line), and dragged the ends out to sea. Every member of this expedition was awarded the Medal of Honor.22The strength of the North Atlantic Fleet and the effectiveness of the blockade grew as U.S. Navy vessels concentrated in the Caribbean and yards converted and armed vessels purchased by the Congressional Bill of 9 March. From the start of the blockade until the capitulation of Santiago de Cuba in mid-July, the North Atlantic Fleet added to its strength three battleships, one armored cruiser, one monitor, five protected cruisers, one unprotected cruiser, seven auxiliary cruisers, four gunboats, two torpedo boats, five armed tugs, six revenue cutters, nine armed yachts, two supply ships, a hospital ship, a repair ship, a distilling ship, and thirteen colliers.23Secretary Long telegraphed Commodore Dewey at Hong Kong on 21 April informing him that the U.S. blockade of Cuba had begun and that war was expected at any moment. On 24 April, British authorities informed the commodore that war had been declared and he must leave the neutral port within twenty-four hours. Dewey also received a telegram from the Navy Department, instructing him to proceed immediately to the Philippine Islands and begin operations against the Spanish fleet. However, Dewey wanted to receive the latest intelligence from the American consul at Manila, Oscar Williams, who was expected daily. The American squadron moved to Mirs Bay on the Chinese coast thirty miles east of Hong Kong to await a circulating pump for the Raleigh and the arrival of Williams. They spent two days drilling, distributing ammunition, and stripping the ships of all wooden articles (which could add to the damage of fires on board ship caused by enemy gunfire). Almost immediately after Williams arrived on 27 April, the American squadron departed for the Philippines, in search of the ships of the Spanish squadron. The consul correctly informed Dewey that Rear Admiral Patricio Montojo y Pasaron intended to take his ships to Subic Bay. What Williams did not know is that Montojo returned to Manila after taking his squadron to Subic Bay only to discover that the defenses he had hoped to fight under were far from complete.24Dewey sent two of his cruisers to reconnoiter Subic Bay on 30 April. Finding it empty, and in defiance of the reports of mines in the channel, the Americans pressed on into Manila Bay and discovered the Spanish squadron near Cavite. Leaving his two auxiliaries in the bay guarded by the McCulloch, Dewey formed his remaining ships into a line and steamed in a oval pattern along the five-fathom curve, pouring a heavy fire into the outgunned Spanish force. Montojo's gunners replied from their ships and two 5.9 inch guns on Sangley Point, but with little effect. The Americans scored critical hits on the larger Spanish warships, setting them ablaze. After nearly two hours of fire, Dewey ordered his captains to withdraw, acting on reports that his ships were running low on ammunition.25Dewey took his squadron five miles off Sangley Point and signaled his captains to come on board and report their condition. The commodore discovered that his squadron had sustained very little damage and that he had plenty of ammunition to continue the battle. After allowing the crewmen of his ships to enjoy a light meal, Dewey ordered his ships to reengage the remnants of Montojo's shattered squadron. The Spanish admiral had pulled his surviving vessels behind Cavite into the shallow waters of Bacoor Bay to make a final stand. Hitting the Spanish ships in their new anchorage proved difficult, and Dewey ordered the gunboats Concord and Petrel, with their shallow draft, to destroy them at close range. The garrison at Cavite raised a white flag at about 12:15, and the firing ended shortly thereafter.Montojo's fleet was destroyed, suffering 371 casualties compared to only nine Americans wounded. When official word on the magnitude of the Navy's victory reached the United States, nearly a week later, the American public heaped enthusiastic praises on Dewey as wild celebrations erupted throughout the country. Meanwhile, the U.S. squadron took control of the arsenal and navy yard at Cavite. However, 26,000 Spanish regulars and 14,000 militia garrisoned various points in the Philippine Islands including 9000 at Manila. Dewey cabled Washington stating that, although he controlled Manila Bay and could probably induce the city to surrender, he requested 5000 men to seize Manila.26Admiral Cervera had repeatedly warned the Spanish Ministry of Marine that his squadron would face certain destruction if sent to the Caribbean. Even so, he departed the Cape Verde Islands under orders on 29 April with his squadron of four armored cruisers, towing three torpedo-boat destroyers, intending to steam for Puerto Rico. To look for the Spanish squadron, the U.S. Navy Department had three fast former mail steamers, Harvard, Yale, and St. Louis, establish a patrol line stretching from Puerto Rico and along the Leeward and Windward Islands. As long as Cervera's location remained uncertain, the strength of the U.S. fleet would be divided between Rear Admiral Sampson's North Atlantic Fleet based in Key West and Commodore Schley's Flying Squadron based in Hampton Roads; the former to maintain the blockade of Cuba and the latter to guard the east coast of the United States from a sudden descent by the Spanish cruisers.27Sampson correctly deduced that Cervera intended to make for San Juan, Puerto Rico, and he determined to deprive the Spanish fleet of the benefits of that port. Leaving his smaller ships to maintain the blockade of Cuba's northern ports, the American admiral embarked on an eight-day journey, plagued by the slow speed and mechanical unreliability of his two monitors. The American force arrived off San Juan early on 12 May. After a nearly four-hour bombardment of the Spanish works, Sampson broke off the engagement and returned to Key West, satisfied that Cervera's ships were not in San Juan.28The Spanish squadron's crossing of the Atlantic had been slowed by the need to tow the fragile destroyers. As he approached the West Indies, the Spanish admiral dispatched two of these vessels to the French island of Martinique to gain information on American movements and the availability of coal. On 12 May Cervera learned that Sampson was at San Juan. The Spanish admiral also discovered that the French had refused to sell him any coal. Driven by the need to refuel his ships and the desire to avoid combat with a superior American squadron, Cervera steamed for the Dutch harbor of Curaçao. He arrived there on 14 May only to be further disappointed when the expected Spanish collier failed to arrive, and the Dutch governor authorized the purchase of only 600 tons of coal. After considering his options, Cervera chose to take his fleet to Santiago de Cuba where he arrived on the morning of 19 May.29With Sampson out of touch for long periods during his return from Puerto Rico, the Navy Department on 13 May ordered Commodore Schley's Flying Squadron to Charleston, South Carolina, in preparation to intercept the Spanish fleet. Further orders directed Schley to Key West and a meeting with Rear Admiral Sampson. The Navy Department believed that Cervera's most likely objective was Cienfuegos because of its rail connection to Havana. Therefore, after arriving in Key West on 18 May, Schley received orders to take his squadron, reinforced by the battleship Iowa and several small vessels, and proceed to Cienfuegos. On 19 May, after Schley left on his mission, the White House received a report that the Spanish ships had run into Santiago de Cuba. The source of this information was Domingo Villaverde, an agent working as a telegraph operator in the governor-general's palace in Havana. This connection was a closely guarded secret, so when the information reached the Navy Department as an unconfirmed report, Long's telegram to Sampson sounded less than certain.30Sampson forwarded Long's notice to Schley along with his own decision to maintain the Flying Squadron off Cienfuegos, believing that even if Cervera had put into Santiago, he would have to bring his squadron west to deliver the munitions thought to be an essential part of his mission. USS Minneapolis and the St. Paul were sent to Santiago to confirm the presence of the Spanish squadron, and Sampson instructed Schley to keep in communication with them. On 20 May Sampson received a report from the assistant chief of staff at Key West confirming the previous report from Washington that the Spanish squadron had put into Santiago. He then sent orders instructing Schley to proceed to Santiago if he was satisfied that Cervera was not in Cienfuegos. On 21 May Sampson sent the collier Merrimac with 4500 tons of coal to Schley's support. Two days later the rear admiral departed Key West and cruised in the Bahama Channel with a force of thirteen ships to block any attempt by Cervera to enter Havana from the north side of the island. As additional information arrived at the Navy Department confirming Cervera's presence at Santiago, Long and Sampson dispatched several messages encouraging Schley to proceed to that port and prevent the Spanish squadron from escaping.31The Flying Squadron arrived off Cienfuegos early on the morning of 22 May when Schley received the first notice that the Spanish squadron might be at Santiago. The following day he received the second. However, the initial uncertainty of the Spanish squadron's whereabouts and the difficulty of observing ships in Cienfuegos led Schley to remain where he was. Finally, on 24 May, the commodore learned through Cuban insurgents that Cervera's ships were not in port. That evening the American squadron headed east, two days later than Sampson expected.32In his message informing Sampson of his departure Schley stated that he was concerned about having a sufficient supply of coal in his warships. The Iowa had arrived off Cienfuegos with half her capacity, and on 23 May she took on just 255 tons more. The Texas was also short of coal, and her projecting sponsons made coaling at sea almost impossible. The one collier then with the squadron was insufficient to coal enough ships when the weather afforded an opportunity. Schley informed Sampson that these concerns and his desire to coal his ships at a protected anchorage led him to choose Môle St. Nicolas, Haiti, as his next destination.33The Flying Squadron arrived at the longitude of Santiago on 26 May, and Schley communicated with the American cruisers watching the port. Engine problems on the collier Merrimac caused the squadron to average only seven knots in its journey from Cienfuegos. The weather had been too rough to allow coaling at sea and several of his smaller vessels in addition to the Texas were running low on fuel. Rather than remaining on station with his larger ships and trusting Sampson to supply him what he needed, Schley ordered his squadron to head west for Key West to refuel. Sampson, who had since returned to Key West, and Secretary Long were shocked when they learned of Schley's intentions on 28 May. Making it clear that he and the Navy Department expected the Flying Squadron to remain on station, Sampson assembled his squadron and departed for Santiago. On 27 May the weather off the south coast of Cuba improved, and Schley reversed course once again, finally establishing a blockade at Santiago de Cuba on 29 May.34Schley's coaling problems impressed on Sampson and the Navy Department the need to seize a sheltered anchorage on the south coast of Cuba, and Guantánamo Bay had already been considered. Shortly after Schley established the blockade of Santiago Sampson ordered the First Marine Battalion at Key West to embark on their transports and prepare to land in Cuba. At the same time he sent Commander Bowman McCalla and USS Marblehead to reconnoiter Guantánamo Bay as a possible anchorage. McCalla's report was favorable, and on 10 June the Marine battalion under Lieutenant Colonel Robert Huntington landed, establishing a position on the east side of the outer harbor that served to protect the fleet during its coaling operations throughout the campaign.35 Having a reliable location to refuel so close to Santiago proved invaluable to the blockading fleet. It allowed American captains to keep steam up in their ships' boilers ready to pursue Cervera's squadron when it attempted to break out. On the morning of 3 July, the battleship Oregon had all four boilers lit, giving her the speed necessary to catch the Cristobal Colon in the running fight during the final stage of the Battle of Santiago de Cuba. This high rate of coal consumption could be maintained because the Oregon was able to refuel four times from 1 June to 3 July, once at sea and three times at Guantánamo Bay.36Although McKinley and his advisors had intended to wait until the end of the rainy season to send a major land expedition to Cuba, they believed that the bottling up of the Spanish squadron at Santiago afforded the U.S. an opportunity to strike a damaging blow to the enemy's military capability in the Caribbean. On 1 June Sampson received a report from Secretary Long that 25,000 men under Major General William Shafter were preparing to embark for Cuba from Tampa, Florida, and that the North Atlantic Fleet should convoy the troops and assist the landing near Santiago. As the navy prepared to carry the troops, Sampson took steps to tighten the blockade of Cervera's squadron.At the onset of the campaign Sampson seized on the idea to sink a vessel in the narrow channel leading to the harbor of Santiago. His intention was to keep the Spanish ships from escaping until the army could capture the city or assist the navy in passing the forts and mines at the harbor entrance. The Naval War Board in Washington approved, and Sampson selected the collier Merrimac under naval constructor Richard Pearson Hobson for the operation. Hobson and seven volunteers took the ship into the channel during the early morning hours of 3 June. Spanish gunfire from shore batteries shot away the vessel's steering gear and anchor chains making it impossible for the Americans to sink the vessel in the proper location. Only two of the ten prepared scuttling charges went off, and the Merrimac came to rest too far up the channel to pose a serious obstacle. Hobson and his men were captured by the Spanish.37Major General Shafter's troop transports departed Tampa on 14 June, rendezvousing with their navy escorts the following day. The expedition arrived off Santiago on 20 June and began to disembark east of the city at Daiquiri two days later. In addition to providing escort for the convoy, Sampson's ships furnished fifty-two steam launches, sailing launches, whaleboats, lifeboats, and cutters to help the army and its equipment ashore. Shafter expressed deep appreciation for the navy's assistance in this matter, as the boats on the army's transports were too few in number to disembark the expedition in any reasonable length of time.38Sampson's armored ships maintained a tight blockade of Santiago de Cuba, coaling from colliers in open water when the seas were calm and from colliers at Guantánamo Bay when the weather required it. On the morning of 3 July, Admiral Cervera attempted to break out of the American blockade thus precipitating the Battle of Santiago de Cuba. Off the entrance to the bay that morning were the battleships Texas, Oregon, Iowa, and Indiana, the armored cruiser Brooklyn, and the armed yachts Vixen and Gloucester. Most of the battle was a running fight as the blockading vessels attempted to get enough steam up to keep up with their quarry. Foul bottoms and poor quality coal reduced the speeds of the usually swift Spanish cruisers. Ranges were often in excess of 4000 yards: greater than the crews trained for and longer than the new rangefinders could handle. In addition, radical turns in the early stages of the battle further complicated the gunnery problem for the Americans. Smoke from the weapons' brown powder and frequent mechanical failures further reduced the effectiveness of the U.S. Navy's gunfire. The battleships and the Brooklyn generally registered hits when they achieved a parallel or near parallel course with the Spanish cruisers and maintained it for several minutes. Although only 1.29 percent of American shots hit their targets, the volume of fire was sufficient to destroy or run aground each one of Cervera's vessels.39 The defeat of this squadron freed President McKinley and the Navy Department to pursue other plans.In the years prior to the war, U.S. planning boards had never reached a consensus on the issue of deploying a squadron of warships to European waters. Although the Naval War Board had not ordinally planned such a deployment, the formation of the Spanish Navy's Reserve Squadron resurrected the debate. Following the departure of Cervera's squadron to the Caribbean, the Ministry of Marine began to organize a second squadron under Rear Admiral Manuel de la Cámara y Libermoore centered around the battleship Pelayo and the armored cruiser Emperator Carlos V. Although it was believed by the Navy Department that this force would reinforce Cervera, it held out the possibility that the Spanish ships would head for the Philippines. Consequently, the monitors Monterey and Monadnock were prepared to undertake a slow and hazardous voyage across the Pacific to reinforce Dewey's command at Manila. On 16 June the Reserve Squadron departed Cadiz and steamed into the Mediterranean bound for the Philippine Islands.40The Navy Department responded to the news of Cámara's deployment by ordering Rear Admiral Sampson to detail two battleships, an armored cruiser, and three auxiliary cruisers to be ready to depart for Europe if the strong Spanish force passed into the Red Sea. When the Reserve Squadron arrived at Port Said on 26 June, Washington decided to organize formally a force entitled the Eastern Squadron. The command was activated on 7 July under the leadership of Commodore John C. Watson, and consisted of the battleship Oregon, the protected cruiser Newark, and the auxiliary cruisers Yosemite and Dixie. The battleship Massachusetts was added on 9 July, the auxiliary cruiser Badger on 12 July, and the protected cruiser New Orleans on 17 July. The navy also assembled six colliers and a refrigerator ship at Hampton Roads, Virginia, to support the Eastern Squadron's deployment. The Navy Department allowed news of the squadron's formation and its intended target to be widely circulated. It was hoped that such news would force Spain to recall the Reserve Squadron to Spanish waters.41Cámara ran into difficulty attempting to refuel his ships at Port Said. The Egyptian government refused to sell him coal, nor would it allow the Spanish squadron to take on coal from its own colliers while in port. Cámara was forced to take his ships out to sea where bad weather prevented any attempt at coaling. The Spanish admiral took his squadron through the Suez Canal, into the Red Sea and began to refuel on 7 July. The delay gave the Spanish government an opportunity to reconsider Cámara's mission in light of the near certainty that American ships would enter Spanish waters. The Sagasta government made the decision to recall the Reserve Squadron to Cadiz, and Watson's deployment was held in abeyance for the time being.42Even though Spain no longer threatened Dewey's control of the situation at Manila, the Navy Department was still concerned about German intentions, especially in the Philippines where it was thought Germany might try to take advantage of the situation to increase her colonial possessions in the Pacific. Rear Admiral Sicard and Captain Crowninshield of the Naval War Board still wanted to send Watson to reinforce Dewey. Captain Mahan dissented from this view. In the mean time, Watson's ships were needed to support the expedition to Puerto Rico. By the time the Eastern Squadron was free to depart the Caribbean peace negotiations were under way and Watson's deployment was held back for good.43One overlooked role in the story of the Eastern Squadron is that played by the repair ship Vulcan. She was fully equipped with lathes, jacks, and small foundries for brass and iron castings. The Vulcan reported for duty off Santiago on 1 July and was stationed at Guantánamo Bay for the remainder of the war. During that time she filled 528 orders for repairs and 256 requisitions for supplies. This work included making extensive repairs of boilers, engines, and pumps, much of it fitting out the ships of the Eastern Squadron as it prepared for its trans-Atlantic voyage.44 It is thought that the pressure put on the Spanish government by the possible deployment of the Eastern Squadron was an important factor in starting peace negotiations in August 1898. If so, the repair ship Vulcan played a significant role in bringing about an end to the war.The U.S. Navy provided escort and support for the army's final two campaigns of the war. On the afternoon of 21 July the lead forces for the invasion of Puerto Rico got under way from Guantanamo Bay. Thirty-five hundred men embarked in nine transports were escorted by the battleship Massachusetts as well as the Dixie, Gloucester, Columbia, and Yale, all under the command of Capt. F. J. Higginson. Originally planning to land east of San Juan at Playa de Fajardo, the expedition's commander Major General Nelson A. Miles directed the Navy to land his force on the island's south coast. The expedition arrived off Port Guanica on the morning of 25 July. Lieutenant Commander Richard Wainwright of the Gloucester requested and received permission to send a landing party ashore. They soon came under fire from the small Spanish garrison, but held their position until the first army troops arrived and secured the landing place. Wainwright also assisted the amphibious landing at Port Ponce three days later by sneaking into the inner harbor the night before, gathering up a number of barges for the army to use.45 In Manila Bay, Dewey's squadron maintained a foothold at Cavite, opened communications with the insurgents, and provided naval gunfire support during the army's assault on Manila on 13 August.Pre-war plans and preparations by the U.S. Navy contributed substantially to the American victory. Most major strategic decisions were anticipated by the Naval War College studies and the secretary's war planning boards. Information appended to the boards' reports on merchant ships available for purchase or charter provided a strong background for Roosevelt's Board of Auxiliary Vessels as it sought to provide the U.S. fleet with ships such as colliers, auxiliary cruisers, and repair ships, indispensable for conducting war. In particular, the early procurement of colliers gave the U.S. Navy the strategic mobility to extend the blockade to Cuba's southern ports, keep Cervera's squadron bottled up in Santiago de Cuba, and threaten to send a major force to European waters. In addition Dewey's purchase of Nanshan and its cargo of coal permitted him to hold Manila Bay until an American expedition arrived from across the Pacific Ocean. Secretary Long's pre-war orders preparing and concentrating U.S. warships in the Atlantic theater ensured material superiority over any expedition Spain might send to the Caribbean.There are several areas where more extensive preparations would have enhanced the navy's effectiveness even further. If the U.S. had constructed specialized colliers with their own winches, like those in the British Navy, these vessels could have refueled Schley's ships at sea more rapidly during the brief times that the weather allowed. If the navy had had plans to seize Guantanamo Bay, the Isle of Pines, or some other sheltered anchorage on the south coast of Cuba at the beginning of the war, the U.S. Navy would have been in a much better position to prevent Cervera from entering any port in Cuba. Stronger coastal defenses might have prevented the public cry for warships to defend the major harbors of the United States, thus negating the need to divide the fleet between the North Atlantic and Flying Squadrons.The overall success of U.S. naval operations during the Spanish-American War demonstrated the value of extensive peace-time preparations. In the technological warfare of the last one hundred years, the most important preparations have not always been the construction of major warships, but also planning for adequate logistical support and vigorous intellectual debate.