Latest / Sleepy Facts About History / Why Did Portugal Build a Fortress on the Gold Coast? - The Negotiated Construction of Elmina Castle | Sleepy Facts About History

Transcript

Why Did Portugal Build a Fortress on the Gold Coast? - The Negotiated Construction of Elmina Castle | Sleepy Facts About History · Sleepy Facts About History

0:04
Welcome to Sleepy Facts About History. When looking
0:13
at photographs of Elmina Castle today, it is
0:16
easy to assume the massive whitewashed walls
0:19
were built by European conquerors who simply
0:23
took what they wanted. It is just as easy to
0:26
assume the fortress was always intended for the
0:28
transatlantic trafficking of enslaved people.
0:31
The actual history of how the castle came to
0:34
stand on the Ghanaian coast is more complicated
0:37
and unsettling. In 1482, a Portuguese expedition
0:42
arrived on the Gold Coast carrying pre -cut stone
0:46
and a formal request to build a permanent trading
0:49
post. The resulting fortress, São Jorge da Mina,
0:54
was constructed not by force but through a negotiated
0:57
agreement with a local African ruler known in
1:00
Portuguese records as Caramansa. This episode
1:04
examines the diplomatic encounter between the
1:06
Portuguese nobleman Diogo de Azambuja and Caramança,
1:11
exploring why a permanent stone structure was
1:14
built and how the early Portuguese garrison survived.
1:17
Far from being an assertion of absolute European
1:20
domination, the original fortress was a fragile
1:24
commercial outpost built to access Akan gold.
1:28
The Portuguese depended entirely on local African
1:32
authorities for food, water and trade access,
1:35
operating more like tenants in someone else's
1:38
house than an invading empire. The later transformation
1:42
of Elmina into a site of enslaved human trafficking
1:46
would fundamentally change its historical meaning,
1:49
but that later purpose must be understood as
1:52
a shift from its original function. I wanted
1:56
to understand why a European power had to ask
1:59
for permission to build in Africa in 1482, and
2:03
how that early dependence reshapes our view of
2:06
global expansion. Exploring the limits of Portuguese
2:10
power reveals a history of continuous negotiation
2:13
rather than immediate conquest. The walls of
2:19
Elmina Castle have stood for more than five centuries
2:22
as a monument to European power. But they were
2:27
raised in 1482 not by conquest, but by permission.
2:31
They were built with African stone and African
2:35
labor on African soil, at the word of a ruler
2:39
whose true name we have never recovered. Picture
2:42
Elmina Castle as most people have seen it in
2:45
photographs. Thick whitewashed walls rise from
2:49
the Atlantic surf on the Ghanaian coast. Cannon
2:53
embrasures face the sea. A heavy stone presence
2:57
seems to declare European power planted firmly
3:01
in African soil. It is easy to assume that such
3:04
a fortress must have been built by conquerors
3:07
who simply took what they wanted. It is also
3:10
easy to assume that its purpose was always what
3:13
it became most infamous for. That purpose was
3:16
the transatlantic trafficking of enslaved people.
3:19
But the photograph conceals as much as it reveals.
3:24
The question this episode pursues is simpler
3:26
and more unsettling. How did those walls come
3:30
to stand there in the first place, and on whose
3:33
permission did they rest? The answer begins not
3:37
with conquest but with negotiation. It begins
3:40
not with domination but with dependence. In 1482,
3:45
a Portuguese expedition arrived on the Gold Coast
3:48
carrying pre -cut stone, lime, bricks and tools.
3:53
These were materials for a permanent fortress,
3:56
not a temporary camp. Their leader, Diogo de
4:00
Azambuja, was a nobleman of proven administrative
4:04
ability. His fleet of roughly ten carabels and
4:08
two transport ships carried perhaps five or six
4:11
hundred men. But the most important thing they
4:15
carried was a request. They needed permission
4:18
to build. and the person they needed it from
4:21
was an African ruler whose name survives only
4:24
in Portuguese rendering. That name was Caramansa.
4:29
To understand why this encounter unfolded as
4:32
it did, we need to step back to the world the
4:35
Portuguese entered. The West African coast in
4:39
the late 15th century was not a blank space awaiting
4:42
European arrival. Portuguese ships had been probing
4:46
southward since the 1430s. They were sponsored
4:50
first by Prince Henry and later by the crown
4:53
itself. But they were not explorers in the modern
4:56
sense of penetrating unknown wilderness. They
5:00
were merchants seeking entry into established
5:02
commercial systems. Those systems already moved
5:06
gold, ivory, salt and other goods across long
5:09
distances. The Gold Coast, roughly the coastal
5:13
region of what is now Ghana, was integrated into
5:17
Trans -Saharan trade networks. These networks
5:20
carried Akan gold northward toward the Sahara
5:23
and ultimately to North African and Mediterranean
5:25
markets. Local rulers and merchants along the
5:30
coast controlled access to these trade routes.
5:32
They set the terms of exchange. They determined
5:37
who could trade where and under what conditions.
5:41
By the 1470s, Portuguese ships were anchoring
5:45
off the Gold Coast to trade directly for gold.
5:48
but they did so from their vessels or during
5:51
brief shore visits. This ship -based trade had
5:54
clear limitations. It was expensive to maintain
5:58
fleets offshore. It was vulnerable to competing
6:02
European traders. And it was dependent on the
6:06
goodwill of local intermediaries who controlled
6:08
landing sites and access to interior markets.
6:12
The Portuguese crown wanted something more secure.
6:16
It wanted a permanent shore base where goods
6:19
could be stored, where ships could be repaired
6:21
and resupplied, and where Portuguese access could
6:24
be defended against Castilian and other European
6:27
rivals. The diplomatic context had shifted in
6:31
Portugal's favor. The Treaty of Alcaçovas in
6:35
1479 ended a period of open conflict between
6:39
Portugal and Castile. It recognized Portuguese
6:43
primacy along the Guinea coast. King Joao II,
6:47
who came to the throne in 1481, made a fortified
6:51
trading post on the Gold Coast a priority. The
6:55
goal was not territorial conquest in any modern
6:58
colonial sense. The Portuguese wanted gold, and
7:03
they wanted to exclude competitors from getting
7:05
it. A permanent stone fortress, properly placed
7:09
and properly supplied, could serve both purposes.
7:12
But it could only be built if someone on shore
7:15
agreed. Diogo d 'Ausambouge's expedition sailed
7:20
in late 1481 or very early 1482, depending on
7:25
how we read the chronology. The cargo was revealing,
7:29
pre -cut stone, lime for mortar, bricks, ironwork,
7:34
and the full tool kit of stonemasons and carpenters.
7:38
These were not the supplies of a raid or a brief
7:42
trading voyage. They were the materials for a
7:45
permanent European structure on African soil.
7:48
Their presence on the ships tells us that the
7:51
Portuguese crown intended to build something
7:53
lasting. The fleet also carried soldiers, craftsmen
7:57
and labourers in substantial numbers. It carried
8:01
the provisions needed to sustain them until local
8:04
supply arrangements could be established. They
8:07
arrived at the coastal settlement near what would
8:10
become Almina in January 1482. The caravels rode
8:14
at anchor in the protected harbour. Their masts
8:18
rose above the rocky promontory. Over days and
8:22
weeks, small boats ferried the pre -cut stone
8:25
blocks from ship to shore. Each piece was lifted
8:29
by hand and lowered onto the beach where the
8:31
surf met the sand. Portuguese masons began laying
8:35
out the foundations on the rocky ground. They
8:39
measured and fitted the stones they had carried
8:41
from Europe. Local inhabitants looked on at this
8:45
strange labour. It was the construction of a
8:48
European building on African soil, stone by stone,
8:52
with no intention of dismantling it when the
8:54
ships departed. The site was strategically chosen.
8:58
It was a rocky promontory with a protected harbour,
9:02
closed to established trade routes, but not itself
9:05
the centre of a major polity. Even this choice
9:09
required local knowledge and presumably local
9:12
guidance, whether obtained in advance or on arrival.
9:16
The Portuguese could not simply select a spot
9:19
and begin construction. They needed to negotiate.
9:23
The encounter between Azambuja and Karamansa
9:27
is known to us through Portuguese chronicles.
9:30
The most important of these is the work of Rurida
9:33
Pina. the royal chronicler who wrote in the early
9:37
16th century with access to official records
9:39
and presumably to participants' accounts. João
9:43
de Benos, writing his Decadas da Ásia in the
9:47
1550s, added further detail drawn from earlier
9:51
documentation. These are not transparent windows
9:54
onto African thought and decision -making. They're
9:58
Portuguese texts, written by Portuguese authors,
10:01
shaped by Portuguese assumptions about rank,
10:05
ceremony, and the proper ordering of political
10:07
encounter. We cannot recover Karamansa's actual
10:11
words. We cannot recover his precise title or
10:15
political position. We cannot recover his private
10:19
calculations. What we have is a filtered record,
10:23
and we must read it as such. According to these
10:28
accounts, Azambuja requested a formal meeting
10:32
with the local ruler. The Portuguese chroniclers
10:35
describe ceremonial display. They describe the
10:39
Portuguese in their formal dress, the presentation
10:42
of gifts, and the demonstration of Portuguese
10:44
wealth and the implied power behind it. As Ambujo
10:48
asked permission to build a fortified trading
10:51
post, Caramansa, in the Portuguese telling, expressed
10:55
hesitation. He and his predecessors, he reportedly
10:59
said, had traded peacefully with the Portuguese
11:01
from their ships. A permanent stone structure
11:04
with armed men resident year -round might bring
11:08
conflict where there had been commerce. It might
11:11
attract the attention of rivals. Or it might
11:15
become a source of tension with neighboring polities.
11:19
This reported hesitation is historically plausible
11:22
even if we cannot verify the exact words. A permanent
11:26
European fortress represented something different
11:29
from episodic ship -based trade. It would alter
11:33
the local political landscape. It would create
11:37
new obligations and potential conflicts. And
11:40
it would establish a foreign military presence
11:43
that would not simply depart with the changing
11:45
winds. Any ruler considering such a request would
11:50
have weighed these implications carefully. He
11:53
would have understood that the decision could
11:55
not easily be reversed once the walls began to
11:58
rise. The eventual agreement, as described in
12:02
Portuguese sources, involved mutual obligations.
12:05
The Portuguese would be permitted to build and
12:08
to maintain a garrison, but in exchange they
12:11
would continue trading, provide gifts and respect
12:15
the authority of the local ruler. The precise
12:18
terms are not recoverable in detail. We do not
12:22
know whether they involved rents, duties, specific
12:25
trade privileges or other conditions. What the
12:29
sources make clear is that the Portuguese understood
12:31
themselves to be operating under permission granted,
12:34
not territory seized. They paid for their presence,
12:38
literally and politically, and they remained
12:41
dependent on the continuing goodwill of the same
12:44
local authorities who had granted them entry.
12:48
Construction began rapidly, at least in its initial
12:51
phase. Portuguese accounts claim that the first
12:55
tower and basic defensive works rose within about
12:58
20 days. This was an impressive pace. It may
13:03
reflect both the preparedness of the expedition
13:05
and the urgency of establishing a defensible
13:08
position before local conditions or politics
13:11
shifted. The full stone fortress, what would
13:15
become Sao Jorge da Mina, took longer to complete.
13:19
Subsequent months and years brought additional
13:21
walls, storage facilities, living quarters, and
13:25
the gradual elaboration of the structure that
13:27
still stands today. Archaeological and architectural
13:31
study of the castle confirms the scale and permanence
13:35
of this Portuguese building project. It also
13:38
reveals later modifications that complicate any
13:41
simple reading of the original 1482 construction.
13:45
The name itself tells us something about Portuguese
13:48
intentions. São Jorge da Mina. Saint George of
13:53
the Mine. It invoked the patron saint of Portuguese
13:57
chivalry and identified the place with its commercial
14:00
purpose. Amina, the mine, meant gold. It was
14:06
the metal that gave the Gold Coast its European
14:09
name. The fortress was built to protect and facilitate
14:13
the gold trade. It was not built to conquer territory.
14:17
It was not built to round up and imprison human
14:20
beings for Atlantic transport. Those later functions
14:24
developed. They would become central to Elmina's
14:28
historical significance and its modern status
14:31
as a site of memory for the transatlantic slave
14:34
trade. But to project that later function backward
14:37
onto 1482 is to misunderstand the historical
14:41
moment. The Portuguese of Azambuja's expedition
14:45
wanted gold, and they built a fortress to get
14:49
it more reliably and more exclusively. The early
14:52
operation of São Jorge da Mina reveals the constraints
14:56
that shaped Portuguese life on the coast. The
15:00
garrison, however well -armed behind its stone
15:03
walls, could not feed itself. The surrounding
15:06
land remained under African political control.
15:09
The Portuguese had no agricultural base of their
15:13
own. They depended on local suppliers for food,
15:17
water, firewood and building materials. African
15:20
canoes arrived at the fort's landing place with
15:23
yams, fish, and fresh water. Portuguese officials
15:28
waited for supply ships from Portugal that might
15:31
be months overdue. Their storehouses depended
15:35
on what local markets would provide. The relationship
15:38
was something like that of a tenant to a landlord.
15:41
The Portuguese paid for their foothold. They
15:45
expected certain protections and access. but
15:49
they remained subject to the authority of the
15:52
one who controlled the ground they stood on.
15:54
This was not equality, and it was not mutual
15:58
understanding. It was a practical arrangement
16:02
between parties with different goals, different
16:05
expectations, and different understandings of
16:07
what the agreement meant. The coastal trade in
16:11
gold was not a Portuguese creation. It was an
16:14
African -controlled system into which the Portuguese
16:17
sought entry. Their fortress gave them no automatic
16:21
control over the interior networks that brought
16:24
gold to the coast. Local African merchants and
16:28
political authorities retained substantial leverage.
16:31
They could redirect trade to other landing sites.
16:35
They could withhold supplies. Or they could cultivate
16:39
relationships with competing European traders.
16:42
The Portuguese paid rents and duties to maintain
16:46
their position. They gave gifts to secure continued
16:49
access. They operated within a commercial world
16:53
whose rules they did not set and could not enforce
16:56
beyond the range of their cannon. The stone walls
17:00
that look so imposing from the sea enclosed a
17:03
garrison that was, in practical terms, a tenant
17:07
in someone else's house. This vulnerability was
17:11
not merely theoretical. European competitors
17:13
continued to appear on the Gold Coast. seeking
17:17
the same gold the Portuguese wanted. Castilian
17:20
ships came initially. Later, French and English
17:24
vessels arrived. Rival African states could and
17:28
did shift their alliances and trade relationships.
17:32
Disease took a heavy toll on the Portuguese garrison
17:35
in the unfamiliar disease environment of the
17:38
West African coast. Supplier ships from Portugal
17:41
were slow, unpredictable, and expensive. The
17:45
fortress that appears in retrospect as a bold
17:48
assertion of European power was, in its daily
17:51
operation, a fragile commercial outpost surviving
17:54
through continuous negotiation. The way we understand
17:59
this fortress has shifted over time. Earlier
18:02
European accounts and later imperial histories
18:05
treated Elmina as a bold assertion of Portuguese
18:08
power. They saw it as a first step in the expansion
18:12
of European control across the globe. Modern
18:16
scholars reading the same Portuguese chronicles
18:18
against the material evidence and the African
18:20
political context have come to see something
18:23
different. The walls that impressed European
18:26
visitors were something like a stage set. They
18:29
were imposing to the eye. But they were not a
18:33
sign of actual military or political control
18:36
over the surrounding region. The fort was an
18:39
enclave, not an empire. Its walls marked the
18:43
boundary of Portuguese control. and that control
18:46
ended where the walls ended. Beyond them, African
18:50
rulers, merchants, farmers, and fishermen continued
18:54
to govern their own affairs. They set the terms
18:58
of trade. They determined whether the European
19:01
presence would be tolerated, ignored, or expelled.
19:05
The identity of Caramansa remains uncertain,
19:09
and this uncertainty matters. Portuguese sources
19:14
render the name variously. Scholars have debated
19:17
whether it represents a personal name, a title,
19:21
or a Portuguese corruption of some local term.
19:24
It may be related to the title of the ruler of
19:27
the coastal settlement near the fort site, PEH.
19:32
Hare's careful analysis of the Portuguese sources
19:35
has shown how little we can recover with confidence
19:38
about this figure's actual position and perspective.
19:41
The Portuguese chroniclers needed to present
19:43
the encounter as a legitimate diplomatic negotiation,
19:47
not a crude seizure. Their accounts are shaped
19:51
by that need. We cannot independently verify
19:54
what Caramanza wanted, feared or calculated.
19:58
We know only that permission was granted. We
20:02
know that conditions were attached. And we know
20:06
that the Portuguese understood themselves to
20:08
be operating under African authority. Some scholars
20:12
have emphasized the coercive dimensions of the
20:15
encounter. They point to the armed men on Azambuja's
20:19
ships, the display of Portuguese wealth and implied
20:22
power, and the implicit threat that refusal might
20:25
bring consequences. Others have emphasized the
20:29
commercial and diplomatic agency of African rulers.
20:32
These rulers saw the Portuguese as useful trading
20:36
partners and granted permission on terms that
20:39
served their own interests. These perspectives
20:42
are not mutually exclusive. The encounter involved
20:46
mutual interest and unequal power. It was negotiation
20:50
conducted under conditions of asymmetry. The
20:54
Portuguese could not simply take what they wanted,
20:57
but they were not powerless supplicants either.
21:00
They brought ships, weapons, and the backing
21:03
of a European crown. The local ruler brought
21:07
control of the landing site, access to trade
21:10
networks, and the ability to deny or permit their
21:13
presence. The resulting agreement reflected this
21:16
balance however temporary, and however differently
21:19
understood by each side. The transformation of
21:23
Elmina over the following centuries is essential
21:26
to understanding the site's full historical weight,
21:29
but it must be understood as transformation,
21:32
not as original purpose. Over the 16th century,
21:36
and increasingly after the Dutch seized the fort
21:39
in 1637, Elmina became more deeply involved in
21:44
the trafficking of enslaved people across the
21:46
Atlantic. The dungeons that visitors see today,
21:50
the door of no return, the whole apparatus of
21:53
human commodification, these belong to a later
21:56
period of the fort's history. They are real.
22:00
They are central to what Elmina means in modern
22:03
memory. and they must not be sanitized or minimized.
22:07
But they were not what Diogo de Azambuja built
22:11
in 1482. The original São Jorge da Mina was a
22:16
gold trading fortress. It was built with permission.
22:21
It was dependent on African cooperation, and
22:25
it was embedded in African -controlled commercial
22:27
worlds. This distinction is not a matter of excusing
22:32
what came later. It is a matter of understanding
22:35
historical chain. The fort that began as a negotiated
22:39
enclave in the gold trade became, over time,
22:43
something else. It became first a more established
22:47
Portuguese presence. Then it became a Dutch prize.
22:52
Then it became a node in the expanding Atlantic
22:55
system of enslaved labor. Each phase built on
22:59
what came before. But each phase also transformed
23:03
the meaning and function of the walls. To collapse
23:07
these phases into a single story of original
23:09
sin is to lose the specific historical dynamics
23:13
that made each transformation possible. The material
23:17
remains of the castle offer their own testimony.
23:20
The original Portuguese construction, visible
23:24
in the lower walls in the central tower, was
23:26
substantial and permanent. It was evidence of
23:30
serious investment. and serious intent but the
23:33
subsequent modifications additions and reconstructions
23:37
over centuries of portuguese dutch and later
23:39
british control show how the fort's function
23:42
and significance changed the architecture that
23:46
impresses modern visitors is a palimpsest it
23:49
is layers of different purposes and different
23:52
powers superimposed on the original 1482 foundation
23:55
the daily life of the early garrison as best
24:00
we can reconstruct it underscores the gap between
24:03
the fort's military appearance and its commercial
24:05
reality. Portuguese soldiers and officials lived
24:09
in cramped quarters behind thick stone walls
24:12
that stayed cool against the heat. Beyond those
24:15
walls, the surrounding African town and countryside
24:18
carried on with their own rhythms of politics
24:22
and trade. The garrison suffered from unfamiliar
24:25
diseases. They waited for ships that might be
24:29
months overdue. They traded for gold with African
24:33
merchants who set the prices and determined the
24:36
quality. They ate food grown by African farmers.
24:40
They drew water carried by African laborers.
24:44
And they slept behind walls that protected them
24:47
from European competitors, but not from the political
24:50
and commercial leverage of their African hosts.
24:53
The stone fortress was a tool, not a triumph.
24:57
It gave the Portuguese certain advantages. It
25:01
gave them storage, defense, and permanence. But
25:05
it did not give them control. This is the central
25:09
historical reality that the seed -defined episode
25:12
seeks to convey. The stone walls of Elmina concealed
25:17
a fragile reality. Portuguese power on the coast
25:21
survived only through negotiation within African
25:24
-controlled commercial worlds. The fortress that
25:28
looks like a declaration of domination. was in
25:30
its origins and for long after a declaration
25:33
of dependence the portuguese needed african permission
25:37
to build they needed african cooperation to operate
25:41
and they needed african tolerance to remain their
25:46
guns pointed seaward toward european rivals they
25:50
did not point inland toward the political and
25:53
commercial systems that actually sustained or
25:56
threatened their presence The modern visitor
25:59
to Elmina Castle stands in a place of layered
26:02
memory. The dungeons and the door of no return
26:06
speak to the later centuries of enslaved trafficking.
26:09
And they must be heard. But the lower walls and
26:13
the original tower speak to something else. They
26:17
speak to a moment in 1482 when European merchants
26:21
arrived with stone and lime and a request. They
26:25
speak to a moment when an African ruler considered
26:27
that request and granted it with conditions.
26:30
And they speak to a moment when the resulting
26:33
fortress rose not as a symbol of conquest, but
26:37
as a monument to the negotiated, unequal, and
26:41
ultimately unstable accommodation between different
26:43
worlds. Understanding both layers is essential.
26:48
Understanding how the fort began. and what it
26:51
became is essential to understanding the full
26:54
historical weight of the place. The encounter
26:57
between Azambrucha and Karamansa, however imperfectly
27:02
recorded, reveals a world in which European and
27:05
African power were not yet arranged in the patterns
27:09
of later colonial domination. The Portuguese
27:12
had ships and guns and the ambition of a rising
27:15
Atlantic power. The African rulers of the Gold
27:19
Coast had control of the land, the trade networks,
27:23
the food supplies, and the political structures
27:26
that determined who could come and who could
27:28
stay. The fortress that resulted from their encounter
27:32
was a compromise, not a conquest. Its walls have
27:37
endured for more than five centuries, but the
27:40
political reality they enclosed was far more
27:43
fragile than the stone itself. What remains uncertain
27:47
matters too. We do not know Karamanza's true
27:51
name or title. We do not know the exact terms
27:55
of the agreement, the precise gifts exchanged,
27:58
or the private calculations on either side. We
28:03
do not know how long the local ruler expected
28:05
the Portuguese to stay. We do not know whether
28:09
he understood the long -term implications of
28:12
granting permission for a permanent stone structure.
28:15
The Portuguese sources, for all their detail,
28:18
are partisan documents written to justify and
28:20
celebrate Portuguese enterprise. The African
28:24
side of this encounter must be reconstructed
28:27
from silence. It must be reconstructed from the
28:30
logic of the political and commercial systems
28:32
we know existed, and it must be reconstructed
28:36
from the material evidence of how the fort actually
28:39
functioned. This is not a satisfying completeness.
28:43
But it is an honest recognition of what the evidence
28:46
can and cannot provide. The listener who began
28:50
with the photograph of Elmina Castle should now
28:53
hold a more complicated picture. The photograph
28:57
showed something massive, whitewashed, seemingly
29:00
absolute in its assertion of European presence.
29:03
The fortress was built with permission, not seized
29:06
by force. It was built for gold, not for the
29:10
trafficking of enslaved people. though it would
29:13
later become central to that trade. It was built
29:17
by Europeans who needed African cooperation to
29:20
survive, not by conquerors who controlled the
29:23
world around them. The walls that have made Elmina
29:26
a symbol of European power were, from the beginning,
29:29
markers of European dependence. And the history
29:33
that unfolded within and around those walls was
29:36
not predetermined by their construction. It was
29:39
shaped by the continuous negotiation. mutual
29:42
need, and unequal power of the many people, African
29:47
and European, named and unnamed, who made their
29:51
lives in the shadow of the stone. The stone endures.
29:56
The political arrangements it enclosed did not.
30:00
Understanding that distinction, and understanding
30:03
how the fortress came to stand on that coast
30:06
in the first place, is the work that this episode
30:09
has sought to accomplish. Elmina Castle remains
30:12
what it has always been. It is a place where
30:16
different worlds encountered each other. It is
30:20
a place where accommodation was possible and
30:22
fragile. And it is a place where the heavy permanence
30:26
of walls belied the lighter, more contingent
30:29
reality of the human arrangements they contained.