Treasures. . .of black wood, brilliantly polished: Five examples of Taíno sculpture from the tenth-sixteenth century Caribbean

Abstract

Five wooden sculptures from the pre-contact Caribbean, long held in museum collections, are here dated and given a context for the first time. The examples studied were made from dense
Guaiacum
wood, carved, polished and inlaid with shell fastened with resin. Dating the heartwood, sapwood and resins takes key examples of ‘Classic’ Taíno art back to the tenth century AD, and suggests that some objects were treasured and refurbished over centuries. The authors discuss the symbolic properties of the wood and the long-lived biographies of some iconic sculptures.

Full text

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly
polished’: five examples of Ta´
ıno
sculpture from the tenth–sixteenth
century Caribbean
Joanna Ostapkowicz1, Alex Wiedenhoeft2, Christopher Bronk
Ramsey3, Erika Ribechini4,SamuelWilson
5,FionaBrock
3&
Tom Higham3
Five wooden sculptures from the pre-contact
Caribbean, long held in museum collections,
are here dated and given a context for the first
time. The examples studied were made from
dense Guaiacum wood, carved, polished and
inlaid with shell fastened with resin. Dating
the heartwood, sapwood and resins takes key
examples of ‘Classic’ Ta´
ıno art back to the
tenth century AD, and suggests that some
objects were treasured and refurbished over
centuries. The authors discuss the symbolic
properties of the wood and the long-lived
biographies of some iconic sculptures.
Keywords: Caribbean, Ta´
ıno, wood, sculpture, tenth–sixteenth centuries AD
Introduction: Ta´
ıno wooden sculpture
Ta´
ıno carvings were among the first visual art forms from the New World to reach the shores
of the Old after 1492: from ceremonial duhos (chairs) and sculptures to masks and belts
1World Museum Liverpool, William Brown Street, Liverpool, L3 8EN, UK (Email:
Joanna.Ostapkowicz@liverpoolmuseums.org.uk)
2Center for Wood Anatomy Research, USDA, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, 1 Gifford Pinchot Drive,
Madison, WI 53726-2398, USA
3Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building,
South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK
4Dipartimento di Chimica e Chimica Industriale, Universita di Pisa, Via Risorgimento 35, Pisa 56126, Italy
5Department of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA
Received: 29 September 2010; Accepted: 17 November 2010; Revised: 7 December 2010
ANTIQUITY 85 (2011): 942–959 http://antiquity.ac.uk/ant/085/ant0850942.htm
942

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 1. At the time of European contact, Ta´
ıno communities occupied much of the Caribbean’s Greater Antillean islands:
Hispaniola (present day Haiti and Dominican Republic) was the heartland, and the likely source of the five carvings here
discussed, two of which have specific provenances as shown.
of ‘admirable artistry... and other things never before seen or heard of in Spain’(LasCasas
in Parry & Keith 1984: 66). Wood was the main component of many of these objects,
whether hidden or featured: it could form the framework of a mask, the foundation around
which cotton was woven to create the central figure on a belt, or quite simply — and most
significantly — as the lustrous surface par excellence of indigenous ‘treasures’. For the Ta´
ıno,
wrote the contemporary historian Martyr D’Anghera (1530 [1970]: 125), ‘treasure did not
consist of gold, silver or pearls, but of utensils necessary to the different requirements of life, such as
seats, platters...and plates made of black wood, brilliantly polished; they display great art in the
manufacture of... these articles’. A study of this versatile material, used for everything from
house posts to feast platters, can offer insights into indigenous concepts of value, aesthetics
and belief (Helms 1986; Saunders & Gray 1996).
Ta´
ıno, derivative of nita´
ıno, meaning ‘good’ or ‘noble’ has become a convenient term
to refer to the people inhabiting the Hispaniola (Haiti/Dominican Republic), Puerto Rico,
Jamaica, Cuba, the Bahamas and the Turks and Caicos islands (TCI) at the time of European
contact (Figure 1). The name, however, masks the cultural complexity and diversity that
was present in the region at this time, and should be viewed more as a ‘spectrum or mosaic
of social groups with diverse expressions of Ta´
ınoness’ (Oliver 2009: 27–8). As Peterson et al.
(2004: 19) note, Ta´
ıno is a ‘supra-cultural entity at a level well above an individual culture...
943

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
[and] refers to a widespread Antillean set of cultural practice and norms shared by several or more
localized cultures in the Greater Antilles and beyond.’
The ancestral roots of the Ta´
ıno can be traced back in the archaeological record to a
sequence of rapid migrations by horticulturalists travelling up from the South American
mainland through the Lesser Antilles to finally settle in Puerto Rico and Hispaniola by about
400 BC. Their descendants prospered, interacting with local inhabitants who had occupied
the Greater Antilles for centuries, and both ancestries contributed to the culture most
archaeologists refer to as the Ta´
ıno (Wilson 2007: 138). Populations expanded quickly and
people began to explore and settle other islands, reaching Cuba, Jamaica and the Bahamas
by about AD 600 (Wilson 2007: 102–110). The following centuries until the invasion
of European powers saw the expansion of settlements, the construction of monumental
ball courts, escalating socio-political complexity as caciques (chiefs) rose to power and,
concomitantly, an artistic florescence.
By the time of Columbus’ arrival in 1492, wooden sculpture is documented as being
central to religious and social practices, taking a wide variety of forms, including cem´
ıs
(depictions of spirits, deities or ancestors), canopied stands which held hallucinogenic
snuff during ceremonies, and duhos reserved for the use of caciques and other elites during
important ritual and social occasions. The Spanish described these pieces in their accounts,
and sent examples back to Europe — others were preserved in caves for centuries: some
300 have survived in museum and select private collections (Ostapkowicz 1998). Some of
these have become seminal examples of Ta´
ıno artistry, the highlight of museum displays and
catalogues.
But despite such prominence, little is understood about the stylistic range of Ta´
ıno wooden
sculpture, its regional and temporal variation or use within the complex chiefdom-level
societies that produced them. The reliance on the same key pieces in exhibit catalogues and
displays has in many ways rendered static our perceptions of Ta´
ıno carving, overshadowing
the wide diversity of styles known from the region and instilling an impression of greater
stylistic unity than actually exists. There is also an unexamined assumption that all complex
wooden sculpture falls within the final century prior to European contact — yet prior
to this project no major pieces were subjected to radiocarbon dating and this attribution
appears to rely on a perceived late fifteenth/early sixteenth-century style based on cronista
accounts. This, coupled with the perennial problem of poor documentation for many of
the sculptures, with uncertainties over their provenance and subsequent histories, has in
many ways limited our knowledge. The research introduced here presents the first detailed,
multidisciplinary study of the woodworking industries of the pre-contact Caribbean, with
the aim of placing this artistic heritage within a firm historical framework. It announces the
work of a wider project, supported by the Getty Foundation and British Academy, which has
brought together 66 wooden sculptures, selected on the basis of their historical significance,
wide-ranging distribution (both Greater and Lesser Antilles) and stylistic attributes. The
present paper focuses on five key carvings, illustrated in Figures 2–6, in order of their
radiocarbon chronologies. These artefacts cut across the main catagories of Ta´
ıno carving
—cem´
ıs, feast platters, duhos, reliquaries and cohoba stands. Each has undergone AMS
radiocarbon dating and wood identification, as well as resin analysis (where applicable)
while three have also been 3D laser scanned (Figure 7). The results offer the potential of
944

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 2. Cohoba stand, Guaiacum sp., shell, AD 974–1020 (modelled dates), Dominican Republic/Haiti (?). H: 665mm;
W: 220mm (max); D: 230mm. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Michael C. Rockefeller Memorial Collection, Bequest
of Nelson A. Rockefeller, 1979 (1979.206.380).
stepping beyond perceived aesthetics, to more concretely engage the aspects of their creation
— from raw material to final product. Detailed overviews, from dating to wood and resin
identification to charting the individual histories of each artefact and highlighting their
placement in local chronologies, are in preparation.
Provenance
The majority of pieces under discussion entered museum collections — or were first
inventoried — in the nineteenth century. The earliest documented is the Florence feast
platter (Figure 6) which first came to light in the 1820 inventory of the city’s Regio Museo
di Storia Naturale (Ciruzzi 1983: 161). The Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary (Figure 3) was in the
museum’s collections by 1850. For the most part, these carvings — like the cohoba stand
acquired by the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA) in 1979 (Figure 2) — were circulating
in private hands prior to their deposit in museum collections: Edna Dakeyne, who sold the
cohoba stand to Nelson Rockefeller in 1955, originally acquired it through an auction in
Ireland sometime in the mid 1930s (Metropolitan Museum of Art Collection Database,
Provenance) — its collection history is undoubtedly deeper still. The circulation of these
objects, perhaps over centuries, has resulted in the loss of associated source information;
they are tentatively attributed to Hispaniola based on their stylistic conventions.
The Kelsey duho (Figure 5) and Loma de Polo cem´
ı(Figure 4) have provenance linking
them to the north and south coasts of the Dominican Republic, respectively. The cem´
ı
945

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Figure 3. Reliquary, Guaiacum sp., AD 1052–1176 (modelled dates), Dominican Republic/Haiti (?). H: 460mm; W:
249mm (max); D: 250mm. Courtesy of Mus´
ee Barrois, Bar-le-Duc, France, 850.20.38.
was recovered from ‘Loma de Polo’ (possibly Loma Pie de Palo), near Barahona, southern
Dominican Republic in 1916 by Theodoor de Booy, who was working on behalf of the newly
established Museum of the American Indian. The Kelsey duho’s provenance is somewhat
more tenuous: it was acquired from a merchant in San Felipe de Puerto Plata, which suggests
it may have been found locally. Named after the collector Albert Warren Kelsey, whose name
is boldly inscribed on the duho’s upper surface, it entered the Missouri Historical Society
collection in 1878. A stylistically similar duho, now in the British Museum collections,
was found in the neighbouring area of La Isabella, 48km from Puerto Plata, and may lend
tentative support to the northern provenance of this unusual duho/platter style.
Woods employed
All 66 pieces in the study were identified to genus, revealing a range of wood choices:
Cordia sp., Carapa sp., Swietenia sp., Clusia sp.,Andira,sp.,and Petitia cf. dominguensis.
But it is Guaiacum sp. that clearly dominated the results, with nearly three-quarters of the
sculptures identified to this genus, including all the pieces discussed in this paper. Guaiacum
is among the world’s hardest woods, heavy and very difficult to carve, even with today’s metal
tools (Ostapkowicz 1998). Its distinctive, interlocked grain can be worked to a smooth and
uniform texture, taking on a high polish. The high concentration of extractive chemicals
in the dark green to black heartwood makes the wood highly resistant to decay (Brush
1938: 9). It is this combination of features, among others, that make the wood one of such
exceptional quality, creating a high demand for it since its first introduction to European
markets c. 1508 (Record & Mell 1924: 315) and resulting in its near extinction in recent
years (Convention for the International Trade in Endangered Species: Appendix II).
Guaiacum sanctum and G. officinale, of particular interest here, have a natural distribution
within the islands of the Greater Antilles and Bahamas/TCI, and thrive in hot, dry
environments, preferring to take root in shallow, limestone-rich soils and low-lying but
946

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 4. Cem´
ı,Guaiacum sp., AD 1031–1299 (wood and resin dates), Loma de Polo (possibly Loma Pie de Palo) near
Barahona, Dominican Republic. H: 192mm; W: 65mm (max); D: 56mm. Courtesy of the National Museum of the American
Indian, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 058307.
well-drained areas (dry coastal or limestone forests) (Brush 1938: 3; Pic´
o 1974: 184). Other
than in horticultural contexts, the trees now mostly appear in small, scattered natural groves
and, due to over logging, are restricted to fairly inaccessible regions — but it is likely that
their distribution was more extensive during pre-contact times. They are considered slow
growers, achieving a maximum height of around 10m, but beyond this comparatively little
is known about their growth rate. For example, a plot of G. officinale growing in shallow soil
over limestone in Puerto Rico, with an average annual precipitation of 750mm, measured
90mm in diameter after 49 years of growth, while another plot, in the same area, grew to
a 130mm diameter after 41 years (Francis 1993: 2): undoubtedly, microclimatic variables
influenced these growth rates. Two of the five artefacts — the cohoba stand and reliquary —
were carved from boles or branches roughly 310–330mm in diameter (inclusive of 80mm
sapwood estimates), suggesting that artisans had access to substantial trees, presumably near
to their villages. There is also the possibility that the timber or final products were traded,
as may have been the case with Anacaona’s storehouses in the Xaragu´
a cacicazgo (Las Casas
1951: 1.447), which overflowed with wooden artefacts likely acquired from various sources.
947

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Figure 5. Kelsey duho, Guaiacum sp., AD 1298–1433 (wood and resin dates), Puerto Plata region (?), Dominincan
Republic. L: 605mm; W: 205mm (max); H: 168mm. Courtesy of the Saint Louis Art Museum, Friends Fund and Primitive
Art Society Fund in honor of Morton D. May, 168:1981.
Carving techniques
The choice of raw material had direct impact not only on the quality and final appearance of
the sculptures but, critically, on the labour involved in creating them. Each carving stage was
likely based on the series of decisions focused on the most efficient means of manipulating
the material in order to achieve the desired end. Given the difficulty of working Guaiacum,
it is probable that the bole selected was only marginally larger than the final size of the
carving to minimise labour investment. Indeed, several sculptures incorporate sapwood,
948

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 6. Florence platter, Guaiacum sp., AD 1445–1523 (69.5% probability), Dominican Republic/Haiti (?). L: 506mm;
W: 222mm (max); D: 63mm. Courtesy of the Museum of Natural History, Section of Anthropology and Ethnology, Florence,
Italy, 308.
suggesting either the carvers felt that it was unnecessary to remove this from the carving, or
they wanted to include it specifically as a contrast to the dark heartwood. The latter may be
a factor for some of the pieces discussed here: for example, sapwood features prominently
in the Florence platter (Figure 6) — its location at the base perhaps evoking a bowl half
filled with amber liquid. The strategic location of the sapwood in the genital region of the
Kelsey duho (Figure 5) may have been intended to visually highlight this area of the reclining
transformative figure.
Working such a dense wood required a versatile toolkit that demanded constant upkeep to
maintain sharpness. Given the challenges of working Guaiacum, and to ensure the efficiency
of the stone and shell tools, it is probable that the wood was carved green (fresh), when it
was comparatively softer and easier to work, rather than when it dried to iron-like hardness.
949

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Figure 7. Screenshots of the Kelsey duho 3D computer model (3D laser scanning by Joseph Parsons, National Museums
Liverpool). Artefact in the collections of the Saint Louis Museum of Art, Saint Louis, US, 168:1981.
Some of the carvings in the wider corpus suggest that the wood changed dimension after it
was carved, possibly indicating the use of fresh material. Tool marks imprint more readily
on the moisture-rich surface of green wood (Sands 1997: 54), and there is a wide range
of tool marks evident on the surfaces of many carvings to suggest that they were carved
fresh. Perhaps the greatest challenge involved the hollowing of a drum or reliquary — such
as the Mus´
ee Barrois example (Figure 3): here, dark discolouration on the inner surface,
coupled with rough adzing, suggest the use of fire to excavate the interior. Considerable
effort would be involved; quite apart from the difficulties of working such a hard wood
within so confined a space — which likely required a specific set of smaller tools — the task
demanded an intimate understanding of the wood’s strengths and weaknesses.
Resins
In some carvings, resins were used to inlay shell or guanin (a gold-copper alloy) into the
eyes, mouth and earspools of a figure. A small quantity of resin from the Florence platter
(7.6mg in size) was extracted for 14C and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
(Figure 8), the latter to better understand (1) what material was used; and (2) what was
being dated (see below). The results revealed the presence of a diterpenoid material from the
Pinaceae family: although it was not possible to establish the genus, it was probably Pinus
caribaea. In contrast, triterpenoid resins from the Protium or Bursera genus were used for
the inlays in the Mus´
ee Barrois and the Loma de Polo sculptures (Figures 3 & 4).
Pinus caribaea and certain species of Protium and Bursera have a long history of use in
the Caribbean as adhesives: for example Bursera has been used as a ‘glue, canoe varnish and
as a gum smeared on branches to trap small birds’ (Gibney & White in Nicholls 2006: 17;
see also Little & Wadsworth 1964: 236; Timyan 1996: 210) and Pinus resins continue to
be extracted commercially in Cuba. In neighbouring Mesoamerica, Bursera wasusedbythe
Maya to adhere pigments such as cinnabar and ‘Mayan Blue’ to jade and ceramic surfaces
(Stross 1997; Arnold et al. 2008), while among the Aztecs and Mixtecs, Pinaceae,Bursera
950

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 8. Florence platter, before (left) and after (right) sampling the top fragment of earflare resin. Courtesy of the Museum
of Natural History, Section of Anthropology and Ethnology, Florence, Italy, 308.
and Protium resins were used as adhesives for fifteenth–sixteenth-century turquoise mosaics
(Stacey et al. 2006).
AMS radiocarbon dating
Although there are no firm guidelines for the growth rates of Guaiacum, their evergreen
nature and the deposition of extractives in the wood suggest that they would be slow to
mature: this provides potential challenges to AMS dating. Slow growing woods can be
several centuries old at the pith, as opposed to the much younger sapwood, and sampling
indiscriminately within the artefact without knowing exactly what is being dated could
dramatically skew results and their interpretation. This factor informed our methodology:
the small radiocarbon samples, ranging between 10 and 90mg each, were critically targeted.
Sapwood, where present, was sampled to provide the date closest to the felling time of the
tree, otherwise the carving was oriented relative to its position within the original bole,
and the sample extracted from the extreme outer edge to achieve the same goal. Several
artefacts were sampled from multiple locations to gain insight into growth rates: from the
pith to determine seedling establishment (i.e. the age of the tree), and at selected points to
determine the sequence of growth. This approach was further fine-tuned by sampling resin
inlays, where present: this provided an indication of the object’s final stages of manufacture
or its reuse. Together with each piece’s terminus wood date, this sequence of dates provided
insight into the timescale of artefact production — from harvesting the tree to final inlays.
The five artefacts here discussed were selected to highlight some of these methodological
issues.
The results (Table 1) indicate that the wooden carvings predominantly cluster around
AD 900–1500 (all dates are calibrated, and reported at 95.4% probability, unless otherwise
noted). It is clear that large-scale, iconographically complex sculptures were not, as often
assumed, produced only in the last centuries before European contact, but have a longer
951

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Table 1. AMS radiocarbon results for the MMA cohoba stand, Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary, Loma de Polo cem´
ı,Kelseyduho and Florence platter. The
Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit lab numbers (OxA) are provided alongside the sample site, the dates BP, and calibrations at 95.4% (the most
likely dates are highlighted in bold). All dates were calibrated using the IntCal09 dataset (Reimer et al. 2009) and OxCal v4.1.6 (Bronk Ramsey
2009).
Museum, accession Date cal AD (95.4%
Title/Provenance no. Sample site Lab no. BP Error probability)
MMA cohoba stand
Hispaniola (?)
(Figure 2)
Metropolitan Museum of
Art, New York, US;
1979.206.380
L side: 89.9mm from pith OxA-20626 1165 28 AD 777–900 (75.9%)
AD 917–965 (19.5%)
L side: 89.9mm from pith OxA-21855 1093 24 AD 891–996 (93.7%)
AD 1006–1012 (1.7%)
R side: 115.4mm from
pith
OxA-20627 1031 27 AD 902–916 (2.9%)
AD 968–1035 (92.5%)
Pith OxA-20675 1107 26 AD 886–993 (95.4%)
Pith OxA-20676 1144 27 AD 781–790 (2.4%)
AD 808–977 (93%)
Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary
Hispaniola (?)
(Figure 3)
Mus´
ee Barrois,
Bar-le-Duc, France;
850.20.38
Outer wood OxA-19399 927 28 AD 1026–1170 (95.4%)
Inner wood, 25mm from
edge
OxA-19398 904 28 AD 1039–1208 (95.4%)
952

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Table 1. Continued
Museum, accession Date cal AD (95.4%
Title/Provenance no. Sample site Lab no. BP Error probability)
Loma de Polo cem´
ı
Possibly ‘Loma de
Polo’, Barahona,
Dominican Republic
(Figure 4)
National Museum of the
American Indian,
Washington, US;
058307
Outer wood OxA-19060 936 24 AD 1031–1157 (95.4%)
Resin OxA-19181 722 24 AD 1255–1299 (94.0%)
AD 1370–1380 (1.4%)
Kelsey duho
Puerto Plata (?),
Dominican Republic
(Figure 5)
Saint Louis Museum of
Art, Saint Louis, US;
168:1981
Sapwood OxA-20840 596 26 AD 1298–1370 (70.9%)
AD 1380–1410 (24.5%)
Resin OxA-20841 543 25 AD 1319–1351 (28.0%)
AD 1390–1433 (67.4%)
Florence platter
Hispaniola (?)
(Figure 6)
Museum of Natural
History, Section of
Anthropology and
Ethnology, Florence,
Italy; 308
Resin OxA-18331 383 25 AD 1445–1523 (69.5%)
AD 1573–1628 (25.9%)
953

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
history. Pieces such as the MMA cohoba stand (Figure 2), long considered the apogee of
Ta´
ıno art and attributed to the fifteenth–sixteenth centuries (Newton 1978: 159), reveal
that this scale and artistry was present as early as AD 902–1035 (latest of four dates at
95.4% probability). A series of samples was taken from the base of the sculpture to assess
the growth rate of the selected tree and to estimate its felling date, and hence time of carving
(assuming the wood was carved fresh). Collectively, these AMS dates appear to push the
threshold for this accomplished sculpture back by several centuries, from c. AD 1400–1500
to AD 1000.
The dates for the equally remarkable Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary (Figure 3) indicate that
it was likely carved between AD 1026 and AD 1208 (95.4% probability, 2 dates). Two
radiocarbon samples were taken from the inner and outer edges of this hollow carving,
roughly 25mm apart, to gauge whether it would be possible to fine-tune the tree’s growth
rate. The two dates overlapped, indicating that within the margin of error (+
−28) there is
nothing to distinguish between samples taken so close together, at least in this instance —
and implying that the selected tree was not as slow growing as originally assumed.
To further investigate the growth rate of Guaiacum boles, 16 measurements were obtained
from a variety of pieces with multiple dates. A consistent model, in the form of a probability
density estimate for the period elapsed for 10mm of growth, was constructed to estimate
this growth rate (Figure 9). The results indicate that the growth rate was between 4 and 14
years for 10mm of wood. This information also allows us to tighten up the age estimates
for all of the pieces for which there are multiple measurements, including the MMA and
Mus´
ee Barrois carvings (Figure 10). Modelling the dates for the two sculptures reveals that
the MMA cohoba stand is likely to be slightly earlier (AD 974–1020) than the Mus´
ee Barrois
reliquary (AD 1052–1176). The cohoba stand’s minimum diameter of 220mm represents
between 59 and 165 years of growth.
The 14C result on the resin from the Florence platter revealed a date ranging from AD
1445–1628, with the greatest probability of AD 1445–1523 (c. 70%). This falls within
the last, ‘Classic’ phase of Ta´
ıno carving. Comparative information on radiocarbon dating
of resins is not available, but nonetheless we would expect dates obtained from any resin
to be within a decade of the use of the fresh resin since they are generated as part of the
metabolically active elements of the tree (Tans et al. 1978).
The dating of these pieces offers insight into their curation and re-use by subsequent
generations. On the one hand, some carvings are consistent with a single phase of
manufacture, with overlapping dates for the outer wood (providing a date as close to
the felling time as possible) and for the resin used to affix inlay (providing an indication
of the last stages of manufacture): such is the case with the Kelsey duho,withthe
determinations suggesting that it was carved and finished with inlay at some point between
AD 1298 and AD 1433. On the other hand, there are other carvings that indicate a
gap of decades if not centuries between the felling of the tree and the finishing — or
perhaps ‘refreshing’ of the piece through inlay: the Loma de Polo cem´
ı, for example,
has an outer wood date of AD 1031–1157, and a resin date of AD 1255–1299 (94%
probability). Even taking into account a couple of decades of missing sapwood, the two
dates suggests that a span of at least 100 years elapsed between the wood being harvested —
and likely carved — and the resins added to secure the now missing shell or guan´
ın inlay. This
954

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
Figure 9. Estimate of the period required for the radial growth of 10mm of wood in the bole of a Guaiacum sp. tree.
would imply that the piece may have been refurbished after some four generations of use, the
resins refreshed during its long history. This curation element should not be surprising given
that these objects were not only labour-intensive to make, but were spiritually significant
‘beings’, with biographies and reputations accrued over the course of their long ‘lives’ with
their various human trustees (Oliver 2009). Although it is important to acknowledge the
possibility of carvers recycling older wood, which may impact on our understanding of these
manufacturing sequences, there is evidence to suggest that carvers used unseasoned, freshly
harvested wood. If so, the above dates would certainly stand as reasonable indicators for the
carving/inlay sequences and, hence, curation over long periods of time.
Discussion
Ongoing research is revealing intriguing insights into the materiality, chronologies and
curation of Ta´
ıno wooden objects, indicating a longer and more complex history than
previously thought. The preliminary results outlined in this paper suggest that wooden
sculptures were important aspects of Caribbean chiefdoms as early as AD 1000, undoubtedly
reflecting a deeper prehistoric use. The MMA cohoba stand and the Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary
emerged decades, if not centuries, prior to AD 1200, the date long accepted as the start of
the ‘mature’ or ‘Classic’ period of Ta´
ıno art (Rouse 1992: 123). Chiefly accoutrements, in
the form of duhos, and other complex carvings have long been considered part of this mature
phase (Rouse 1992: 123; Curet 1996: 126). Yet these two large-scale sculptures appear to
push the date for this period back by some two centuries, to AD 1000: both feature complex
iconography painstakingly cut into the dense, interlocked grain of Guaiacum, revealing a
remarkable level of artistry and skill. Although their provenance is not clear, together with
955

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Figure 10. The effect of modelling the growth rate of the wood on the MMA stand, where we have estimated the date of the
outer edge of the wood, and the Mus´
ee Barrois reliquary, where we have estimated the date of the outer sample. The simple
calibrated radiocarbon date distributions are shown in outline and the modelled distributions in black with the corresponding
95.4% probability ranges as brackets below the distributions.
the Florence platter they display stylistic features that would link them to Hispaniola, the
source of the other artefacts discussed (Figure 1). From about AD 600, dramatic changes
were occurring on Hispaniola: the population expanded and pushed out into areas that
had been sparsely inhabited or unpopulated, material culture diversified (e.g. pottery styles
changed — Rouse 1992: 109–112), large ceremonial centres emerged and, critically, social
ranking began to be distinguished (Wilson 2007; Rouse 1992). It is not surprising, therefore,
that as increasingly competitive Ta´
ıno chiefdoms were emerging, the calibre of sculpture
production was beginning to escalate as well, including pieces that in their scale and drama
had impact on the entire community (small sculptures, such as the Loma de Polo cem´
ı, which
easily fits in the palm of the hand, may have been more personal — but no less potent —
items). The presence of these larger-scale carvings, at a time when there is archaeological
evidence for the emergence of social hierarchy, would suggest the development of ‘art’ in the
service of leaders vying for power (Curet 1996).
There is evidence that Guaiacum was a wood that had value and meaning on many levels.
It was a dominant fuel and construction wood in several Caribbean sites stretching from the
Saladoid to Ostionoid periods (c. 500 BC–AD 1500) (Berman 1992; Newsom 1993: 148;
Pearsall 2002: 114, 118, 134; Righter 2002: 301) but was also a source of various cures —
as befitting its common title, lignum vitae, the ‘wood of life’. It is identified in sixteenth-
century European treaties as ‘the Indian Cure’ for syphilis, ‘after the people of that lande
956

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
[Hispaniola] hadde taught...that medycine...’ (von Hutton 1536: 11; see also de Oviedo
1526 [1959]: 2.9–11). The choice of wood may also have been based on more intangible,
esoteric perceptions of the material — from symbolic parallels between potentially auspicious
tree qualities to the spiritual embodiment of the material itself. Ram´
on Pan´
e, the Jeronomite
friar who was hosted by both Macorix and Ta´
ıno/Arawak speakers in northern Hispaniola
between 1494 and 1498, noted that certain trees were specifically selected because they were
animated by cem´
ıs (Arrom 1999: xiv; xxi, 25). These beings — ‘nocturnal shadows among
the trees’ (Martyr D’Anghera in Arrom 1999: 51) — were far from pliant forces, but rather
dictated the way they should be carved, revealing their names only after a behique (shaman)
had performed the cohoba ceremony (involving the ingestion of hallucinogenic drugs). Such
nuances of meaning and belief are difficult to access from the material that now remains,
although they hint at the overall picture of Ta´
ıno understanding of their animated and
interactive world — quite literarily, a living forest.
As discussed here, there is growing evidence to suggest that some wooden objects were
carefully curated and passed down through the generations. This could have been done for
any number of reasons, from the piece being seen as imbued with powerful numinous forces
to having important histories and names associated with it (Oliver 2009). Resin dates, which
complement the wood samples taken from some sculptures, reveal that several objects may
have been curated over a significant period of time, having their inlay ‘refreshed’ periodically.
This is the first direct evidence of cross-generational use of Ta´
ıno wooden artefacts — which,
given their labour-intensive manufacture, alongside the possible belief in their continued
spiritual relevance, is only unexpected because of our assumptions about the ephemeral
nature of wooden artefacts. It is the care and attention that went into safeguarding these
pieces that speak of their long life and high value for Ta´
ıno lineages, which themselves
spanned many generations.
Conclusion
Rather than remaining isolated artefacts in specialist exhibits and catalogues, bearing only
a vague connection to the rest of the archaeological record, these five carvings — and
the others that comprise the wider study — can now be used to enrich and expand
discussions on the development of Ta´
ıno culture and aesthetics. Other aspects of the study are
ongoing — such as stable isotope analysis, which aims to help clarify provenance issues by
measuring various light isotope ‘signatures’ in the wood, indicative of the specific island
region from which the tree originated. This aims to investigate stylistic variations within
and between islands. Further analysis of resins and pigments is also underway. Through
these various techniques, and through the detailed radiocarbon study, the histories of these
pieces are at long last beginning to emerge.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following: the Getty Foundation; the British Academy; National Museums
Liverpool; Julie Jones, Heidi King, Ellen Howe and Marjin Manuels, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York, US; Mathew Robb, Laura Gorman, Saint Louis Art Museum; Etienne Guibert and staff, Mus´
ee Barrois,
957

‘Treasures...of black wood, brilliantly polished ’
Bar-le-Duc, France; Monica Zavattaro, Museum of Natural History, Anthropology and Ethnology section,
Florence and Andrea Santacesaria, Opificio delle Pietre Dure di Firenze, Italy; Patricia Nietfeld, Jessica Johnson,
Ramiro Matos, Jos´
e Barreiro, Jorge Estevez, Roberto Borrero and the Ta´
ıno Nations who gave their permissions
for destructive sampling at the National Museum of the American Indian, Washington, US; Martin Cooper,
Joseph Parsons and Annemarie LaPens´
ee of the Conservation Technologies department at National Museums
Liverpool, for 3D laser scanning; Rick Schulting and the two anonymous reviewers for their comments on an
earlier version of this article.
Unless otherwise noted, all photographs are by Joanna Ostapkowicz.
References
ARNOLD,D.,J.R.BRANDEN,P.R.WILLIAMS,G.M.
FEINMAN &J.P.BROWN . 2008. The first direct
evidence for the production of Maya Blue:
rediscovery of a technology. Antiquity 82: 151–64.
ARROM, J.J. 1999. An account of the antiquities of the
Indians. Durham (NC): Duke University Press.
BERMAN, M.J. 1992. Fuel wood selection and the
Lucayan-Ta´
ıno landscape: a preliminary view, in
W. Ha r d y E sh ba ug h ( ed .) Proceedings of the fourth
symposium on the natural history of the Bahamas:
1–12. San Salvador: Bahamian Field Station, Ltd.
BRONK RAMSEY, C. 2009. Bayesian analysis of
radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51(1): 337–60.
BRUSH, W.D. 1938. Lignum vitae (Guaiacum species).
Washington (DC): Foreign Woods, Forest Service,
United States Department of Agriculture.
CIRUZZI, S. 1983. Gli antichi oggetti americani nelle
collezioni del Museo Nazionale e Etnologia di
Firenze. Archivo per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia
113: 151–65.
CURET, A. 1996. Ideology, chiefly power and material
culture: an example from the Greater Antilles. Latin
American Antiquity 7(2): 114–31.
FRANCIS, J.K. 1993. Guaiacum officinale L.
Lignumvitae. Guayacan. Zygophyllacea. Caltrop
family. Washington (DC): USDA Forest Service,
International Institute of Tropical Forestry,
(SO-ITF-SM; 67).
HELMS, M.W. 1986. Art styles and interaction spheres
in Central America and the Caribbean: polished
black wood in the Greater Antilles. Journal of Latin
American Lore 12(1): 25–43.
VON HUTTON, U. 1536. Of the wood called guaiacum,
that healeth the Frenche pockes, and also healeth the
goute in the feete, the stoone, the palsey, lepree, dropsy,
fallynge euyll, and other diseases in Aedibus. London:
Tho. Bertheleti.
LAS CASAS, B. 1951. Historia de las Indias (Biblioteca
Americana 1–3). Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura
Economica.
LITTLE,E.L.&F.H.WADSWORTH. 1964. Common trees
of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands (Agricultural
Handbook 249). Washington (DC): US
Department of Agriculture.
MARTYR D’ANGHERA, P. 1530 [1970]. De orbe novo: the
eight decades of Peter Martyr D’Anghera. Translated
by Francis August MacNutt. New York: Burt
Franklin.
NEWSOM, L.A. 1993. Native West Indian plant use. PhD
dissertation, University of Florida. Ann Arbor (MI):
University Microfilms.
NEWTON, D. 1978. Masterpieces of primitive art: the
Nelson A. Rockefeller collection. New York: Alfred
Knopf.
NICHOLLS, R.W. 2006. Remarkable big trees in the US
Virgin Islands. St Thomas: University of the Virgin
Islands and the Urban and Community Forestry
Assistance Program, VI Department of Agriculture.
OLIVER, J.R. 2009. Caciques and cem´
ı idols: the web spun
by Ta´
ıno rulers between Hispaniola and Puerto Rico.
Tuscaloosa (AL): University of Alabama Press.
OSTAPKOWICZ, J. 1998. Ta´
ıno wooden sculpture:
rulership and the visual arts in the 12–16th century
Caribbean. Unpublished PhD dissertation,
University of East Anglia.
DE OVIEDO, G.F., edited by J. PEREZ DE TUDELA
BUESO. 1959. Historia general y natural de las Indias.
Volumes 1–5 (Biblioteca de autores espa˜
noles 119).
Madrid: Ediciones Atlas.
PARRY,J.H.&R.G.KEITH (ed.). 1984. New Iberian
world: a documentary history of the discovery and
settlement of Latin America to the early 17th century.
New York: Times Books.
PEARSALL, D.M. 2002. Analysis of charred botanical
remains from the Tutu site, in E. Righter (ed.) The
Tutu archaeological village site: a multidisciplinary
case study in human adaptation: 109–134. London:
Routledge.
PETERSEN, J.B., C.L. HOFMAN & L.A. CURET. 2004.
Time and culture: chronology and taxonomy in the
eastern Caribbean and the Guianas, in A. Delpuech
& C.L. Hofman (ed.) Late Ceramic Age societies in
the eastern Caribbean (British Archaeological
Reports international series 1273): 17–32. Oxford:
Archaeopress.
PIC ´
O, F. 1974. The geography of Puerto Rico.Chicago
(IL): Aldine Publishing Company.
RECORD,S.J.&C.D.MELL. 1924. Timbers of tropical
America. New Haven (CT): Yale University Press.
958

Research
Joanna Ostapkowicz et al.
REIMER, P.J., M.G.L. BAILLIE,E.BARD,A.BAY LI SS ,J.W.
BECK,P.G.BLACKWELL,C.BRON K RAMSEY,C.E.
BUCK,G.S.BURR,R.L.EDWARDS,M.FRIEDRICH,
P. M . G ROOT ES,T.P.GUILDERSON,I.HAJDAS,T.J.
HEATON, A.G. HOGG, K.A. HUGHEN,K.F.KAISER,
B. KROMER ,F.G.MCCORMAC,S.W.MANNING,
R.W. REIMER, D.A. RICHARDS,J.R.SOUTHON,S.
TALAMO, C.S.M. TURNEY,J.VAN D ER PLICHT &
C.E. WEYHENMEYER. 2009. IntCal09 and
Marine09 radiocarbon age calibration curves,
0–50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51(4):
1111–50.
RIGHTER, E. (ed.) 2002.The Tutu archaeological village
site: a multidisciplinary case study in human
adaptation. London: Routledge.
ROUSE, I. 1992. The Ta´
ınos: rise and decline of the people
who greeted Columbus.NewHaven(CT):Yale
University Press.
SANDS, R. 1997. Prehistoric woodworking: the analysis
and interpretation of Bronze and Iron Age toolmarks.
London: Institute of Archaeology.
SAUNDERS,N.J.&D.GRAY. 1996. Zem´
ıs,trees,and
symbolic landscapes: three Ta´
ıno carvings from
Jamaica. Antiquity 70: 801–812.
STACEY, R.J., C.R. CARTWRIGHT &C.MCEWAN. 2006.
Chemical characterization of ancient Mesoamerican
‘Copal’ resins: preliminary results. Archaeometry 48:
323–40.
STROSS, B. 1997. Mesoamerican Copal resins, in C. &
T. Jon e s ( ed .) U-Mut Maya 6: reports and readings
inspired by the advanced seminars led by Linda Schele
and the University of Texas at Austin, 1994–1996:
177–86. Austin (TX): University of Texas.
TANS, P.P., A.F.M. DEJONG &W.G.MOOK. 1978.
Chemical pretreatment and radial flow of 14Cin
tree rings. Nature 271: 234–5.
TIMYAN, J. 1996. Bwa yo: important trees of Haiti.
Washington (DEC): South-Eastern Consortium for
International Development.
WILSON, S. 2007. The archaeology of the Caribbean.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
959