Estate Shoys

The area of estate Shoys was occupied during the French period. By 1750, the estate hosted a cotton plantation owned by Bertram Samuel Schuster.

The Beck printed maps, annotated prints, and manuscript copies do not depict any sugar machinery. These maps consistently attribute ownership to Michael Schaÿ. By the 1790s, ownership transitioned to John Heyliger.

Both Oxholm maps in 1778 and 1799 depict several structures with no clear indication of sugar or cotton cultivation at Shoys. The 1856 map indicates a windmill with structures to the east and west of it at Shoys.

The US Topographic maps note windmill ruins with multiple structures around it. These ruins are consistent with field reconnaissance on the property of the Buccaneer Hotel.

The McGuire geographic dictionary of the Virgin Islands (p. 176) notes that Shoys was owned by F. DuBois for a sugar plantation in 1851.

Photos of Shoys, 2020s

View highlighting the main entrance of Shoys windmill.
Main entrance of Shoys windmill. This mill may have had steps to access the working floor when in operation. The keystone treatment, with the circular and rectangular stones above it, are identical to the mill at Solitude East End B.
View from Shoys windmill looking west through the main entrance.
Shoys windmill looking west through the main entrance. The main entrance always faces west to allow access while the windmill blades were turning.
View of Shoys windmill looking northeast at the main entrance and juice trough openings.
Shoys windmill looking northeast at the main entrance and juice trough openings. Evidence of plaster on the exterior is evident in the upper left visible portion of the mill. Note the accentuated keystone over the juice trough opening.
View of Shoys windmill looking west at the window.
Shoys windmill looking west at the window. Notice the iron rollers in the foreground. These would have been inside the mill and vertical, with the gears to the top, to crush the sugar cane. The holes near the foundation were used to hold timbers that would have secured the windmill sails when not in operation.
View from Shoys windmill looking east through the window.
Shoys windmill looking east through the window. Windows were added to mills starting around the turn of the 18th century for light and ventilation.
View of Shoys windmill looking west at the window.
Shoys windmill looking west at the window. Notice the iron rollers in the foreground. These would have been inside the mill and vertical, with the gears to the top, to crush the sugar cane. The holes near the foundation were used to hold timbers that would have secured the windmill sails when not in operation.
View from Shoys windmill looking south through the juice trough opening.
Shoys windmill looking south through the juice trough opening. The boiling house would have been on this side of the mill.
View of Shoys windmill looking southeast at the bagasse opening.
Shoys windmill looking southeast at the bagasse opening. Notice the fill material at the lower portion, under the floor. While operating, the bagasse opening would have had a sloped floor to allow the crushed cane to fall out of the mill more easily.
View from Shoys windmill looking northwest through the bagasse opening.
Shoys windmill looking northwest through the bagasse opening. The bagasse opening helps understand the direction in which the sails rotated, since this opening allowed removal of the crushed cane during processing.
View of the Shoys mill interior highlighting the machine slot looking north.
Shoys windmill interior highlighting the machine slot looking north. Notice the brick interior of the arch. This material, softer than the fieldstone, helped protect the long beams when replacing working machinery inside the mill.
View of the Shoys mill interior highlighting the upper portion of the mill that has not collapsed.
Shoys windmill interior highlighting the upper portion of the mill that has not collapsed. The long slots would have held timbers that supported a ring around the top. This ring held the mechanism where the cap could be turned.

Historic Maps of Shoys

Snippets of the U.S. Geological Service topographic maps of 1958 & 1982 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The 1958 USGS map 1982 photorevision show the ruins of a windmill at Shoys.
Snippet of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey topographic map of 1920 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The 1919 USCGS topographic map shows the Shoys Mill as a stone fanmill with no fan. Other structures lie in all directions around the mill.
Snippet of the Danish Atlantic Islands Association map of 1907 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The 1907 map indicates a circle at Shoys.
Snippet of the Parsons map of 1856 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
Parsons’ 1856 map depicts a windmill with structures to the east and west of it at Shoys.
Snippets of the Oxholm map of 1799 and the1820 update featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
Oxholm’s 1799 map and 1820 update show a couple of structures but no indication of sugar or cotton production at Shoys.
Snippet of the Oxholm map of 1799 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
Oxholm’s 1799 map shows a couple of structures but no indication of sugar or cotton production at Shoys.
Snippets of the Mühlenfels map of 1790 & the Janssen map of 1791 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The 1790 & 1791 manuscript maps after Beck by Mühlenfels & Janssen both attribute ownership to John Heyliger.
Snippet of the Oxholm 1778 map of Christiansted featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
Oxholm’s 1778 map of Christiansted shows several structures at estate No.44 with no clear sugar-related structures. No ownership attributed.
Snippet of the Küffner map of 1767 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
Küffner’s 1767 manuscript copy of Beck’s map depicts a settlement in the area of Shoys. Ownership of Shoys not indicated, with Baron von Prok, whose plantation is indicated with Bar v. Prok Pl. owned estates 9 and 49 further east, subsequently incorporated into Mount Roepstorff and Southgate Farm.
Snippets of all 5 annotated Beck maps made from 1766 to 1770 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The five annotated Beck maps dated 1766, 1767, c.1767, and 1770 along with the two 1766 manuscript copies of Beck indicate no structures at Shoys. All of these maps attribute ownership to Michael Schaÿ. This ownership indicates the place name of Shoys for this estate originated in the 1760s. For the 1770 annotation, the name not underlined in red indicates this estate was not planted in sugar.
Snippets of both Beck maps printed in 1754 & circa 1757 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The Beck printings with data from 1752 and c.1755 show no structures in any of the estates associated with Shoys.
Snippet of the Cronenberg and von Jaegersberg map of 1750 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
The Cronenberg and von Jægersberg map of 1750 indicates cotton cultivation and attributes property ownership to Bertram Samuel Schuster.
Snippet of the Lapointe map of 1671 featuring East End A Quarter estate # 44, currently named Shoys.
During the French period, settlement by three individuals, la Taille, Martel, and Boucher is indicated near Shoys. For the specific site of the windmill, Martel appears the closest.