Whilst rereading Joanna Ostapkowicz's "Taíno Wooden Sculpture: Duhos, Rulership and the Visual Arts in the 12th-16th Century" this week, we have been struck how interesting the different types of duhos truly can be. Her photographs of the various pieces are also stunning, although the thesis should be published with color photographs and updates for the stools that have been dated. Nonetheless, thanks to this dissertation, one can see different types of duhos less frequently discussed. The above case, found in a cave near Trujillo Alto in Puerto Rico, is one of the few wooden (the only?) duhos we have seen from Puerto Rico with a human figure at the top or tip of the back. What is surprising about it, however, is the piece's legs are clearly modeled on or similar to zoomorphic duhos with the head in between the front legs. The position of the legs and pose are suggestive of that, too. Does that mean the artist was initially intending to produce a zoomorphic duho but changed their mind? Or is there something here about the animal-human features? The human head's features seem to be a little distinct from similar duhos from Hispaniola, too.
We were recently revisiting Ostapkowicz's dissertation on the duho and looking at images of the stools again. Somehow it escaped us how unusual and interesting the Hispaniola duho purchased in 1925 for the National Museum of the American Indian truly is. Despite bearing so many stylistic features common to duhos from the island of Hispaniola, including some rather famous pieces surviving in museums in Europe and the Dominican Republic, this particular one lacks a head between the front legs. The high-backed stool has the panel with the 3 circles and dots as well as a similar panel at the front, whoever carved this piece apparently did not include a head (anthropomorphic or zoomorphic). Nor can one find a head at the top of the duho, with a human or anthropomorphic head as a few examples found in eastern Hispaniola and Dominica show (although the Dominica find was likely from Hispaniola).
While duhos without heads exist, one with the specific set of features like this, seems rather unusual. It would be intriguing to learn more about the piece's history, but all we can say with certainty is that it was purchased in Paris in the 1920s and supposedly came from the Dominican Republic. It would be interesting to know if it had any connection with the famous duho given to the Musée de l'Homme by a wealthy French collector. In the case of this more famous example of Taino masterpieces, the stool was allegedly from Haiti.
While appreciating some of the brilliant pieces of polychrome ceramics produced in ancient Puerto Rico, included in Mela Pons Alegria's book on Saladoid ceramics, we could not help but notice certain patterns and designs that recur in later Taino art. While some of these similarities may be explained by recurring patterns and geometric designs influenced by hallucinations, others suggest deeply rooted practices and aesthetics that were likely inherited by the later "Taino" civilization. The above piece, a rather remarkable decorative plate with 3 circles, each one with a distinctive central circle within. The circles are organized along a line and each one appears to have what may be legs, perhaps something akin to a frog?
The similar arrangement of 3 circles along a line was a frequent motif in Taino duhos, or stools. While the stools were produced centuries later, the fact that the back often had the similar design of 3 circles is likely significant. Perhaps the 3 circles, representing the Sun, Moon, and horizon, signified the cosmos that was supporting a Taino cacique? The above example, from Hispaniola and reproduced in Arrom's careful study of Taino art and mythology, is one of the best examples of the pinnacle reached by duho sculptures. Other pieces with even more elaborate backs included intricate panel designs with faces. Indeed, the pattern of 3 circles on high-backed duhos can even be seen in stone stools found in Puerto Rico and some of the stools from the Bahamas.
Undoubtedly, the similar designs on duhos from Hispaniola, Puerto Rico and the Bahamas points to some degree of common culture and cultural exchange. In addition, if women were the potters among the Saladoid culture in ancient Puerto Rico as well as the producers of some of these elaborate duhos, as suggested by Pieter Martyr d'Anghiera for the case of Xaragua in Haiti, perhaps female artisans inherited some of the same designs and applied it to a different medium, wood and stone. For instance, one can see stylistic similarities in the faces of anthropomorphic and animal figures in stone trigonolith cemis from Puerto Rico and wooden duhos from Hispaniola. This suggests that the artists of these works were competent with stone, wood and possibly ceramics or pottery. Granted our evidence for women producers of duhos is only available for the inhabitants of La Gonave, but it is suggestive of a possible deeply rooted tradition of circular patterns from pottery adjusted to duhos.
Thus, in our minds, the consistent pattern of 3 circles on high-backed duhos from 3 different island cultures that shared the "mosaic" of Tainoness points to trade and common origins. The pattern of the 3 circles must have held some deep meaning, which the ancient Hacienda Grande decorative plate may have shared. As mentioned previously, it likely had religious relevance and could have been tied to a common cosmovision. We know the Sun was important in the Taino cosmovision, and perhaps the 3 circles symbolized the stars? Alternatively, the Hacienda Grande pot features what may be legs, perhaps an allusion to frogs or another animal associated with life. In addition, the designs might symbolize life if the squatting position are associated with frogs, water, and birth.
The remarkable continuity of motifs and styles across different mediums like pottery, stone and wooden sculpture strongly suggest cultural continuity and exchange in Hispaniola, Puerto Rico and the Bahamas. The deeply rooted Saladoid tradition must have influenced subsequent cultural development, particularly in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Unfortunately, we have not seen more examples of ceramics and sculpture from the Hacienda Grande and other cultures of Puerto Rico, but we suspect like later Taino art, some of the patterns of their ceramics were reproduced in their sculptures.
Our theory, of course, is pure speculation. But it does suggest some possible antiquity to aesthetic styles found on the ornate duhos of Puerto Rico, Hispaniola and the Bahamas. That the symbol was found on the more elaborate of stools, associated with caciques and cohoba ceremonies, one must assume its frequency was related to the Taino cosmovision and spirituality. Despite the several centuries separating the elegant Hacienda Grande pottery and the later duhos, one might see elements of later "Taino" beliefs reflected in their art.
Here is a fascinating example of cave art from Hoyo de Sanabe. The picture was found in the 14th volume of the Boletin of the Museo del Hombre Dominicano It appears to depict two seated figures sitting on duhos while partaking in cohoba. If duhos were often associated with caciques in the cohoba ritual, then these figures are like caciques. Perhaps the bird figure depicted above one of the seated figures is a reference to the pelican or owl, two birds which have appeared in Taino sculpture. The strange, larger figure above could be an allusion to a specific cemi or spirit seen or communicated with through the cohoba ritual?
Taino duhos are some of the best-known and most elaborate works of pre-Columbian Caribbean craftsmanship and art. Associated with cacical authority and the elites of Taino society, the best known duhos are often sculpted of wood. Many possess two-dimensional geometric patterns and designs and feature anthropomorphic or zoomorphic faces and features. Although stools are widely used in South and Central American indigenous cultures, among the Taino, duhos, particularly the ornate wooden ones, have stood the test of time and still serve as a testament to the artistic talent and technical brilliance of indigenous woodcarvers. As powerful artifacts associated with caciques and the elites, they can also be a powerful source or analysis for reconstructing something of Taino ruling ideology. Their restricted use, elaborateness, and the addition of symbols that may be based on cotton textiles, belts, navels, cemis (and/or ancestors) and entoptic phenomena suggest art and religion were closely entwined in an overall ideology of rulership.
Joanna Ostapkowicz, author of the thesis Taíno Wooden Sculpture: Duhos, Rulership and the Visual Arts in the 12th-16th Century, appears to be one of the world's leading experts on the subject. Her thesis, including an extended catalog of extant duhos and their provenience and museum acquisition histories, establishes that at least 147 duhos have survived. Unfortunately, several have been damaged and the original contextual location of the find is not always clear. More than a few pieces probably ended up in private hands and several more likely await discovery in the Caribbean. Haiti, for example, with La Gonave identified as one center of production during the time of Anacaona, might yield more duhos of wood that could shed light on their production and distribution. Ostapkowicz's study also includes those built of stone as well as wood, but the wooden ones are often the most remarkable. In addition to examining the known origins of over 100 duhos, she includes examples of other wooden sculpture in Taino art traditions. A sophisticated review and discussion of known scholarship on Taino chiefdoms, the role of women in production, animal symbolism, and the relationship between rituals and ideology in cacical authority and duho use cover the rest of the dissertation.
The technical aspects of production are likewise included, as she estimates that wooden duhos constructed out of dense, tropical hardwoods like guayacan, would have likely required a specialist artisan (part-time or perhaps master artisan) 4 to 6 hours per day and at least a year to finish. This does not include the amount of time required to fell a tree or the seasoning time, either. Undoubtedly, crafting elaborate duhos required a woodcarver who know how to select the appropriate tree and the mastery of techniques with adzes, heat, and cutting to produce a finished stool. At the time this was written, the specific type of wood used for the duho or more precise dating was lacking. Today, however, some duhos have been dated as far back as the 13th century. Ostapkowicz's analysis and dating of other wooden artifacts, such as cohoba stands, suggest elaborate woodcarving in guayacan probably developed centuries earlier. Indeed, some masterpieces of Taino Hispaniola wooden sculpture date back to the 11th or 12th centuries. Perhaps elaborate duhos carved from guayacan or mahogany were already in circulation by the 11th century, possibly of restricted, elite use and distribution? This would suggest an efflorescence of Taino arts and cacical authority a few centuries before the dates proposed by Rouse.
Where Ostapkowicz's analysis is most interesting is on the subject of women in production, exchange, and use of duhos. If, as indicated by Martyr d'Anghiera, women in La Gonave actually produced duhos and wooden sculptures, this would suggest women were not restricted only to ceramics, domestic duties and cotton cloth production. Moreover, if the duhos depict the anthropomorphic or zoomorphic figure wearing cotton bands, belts, and caps, produced by Taino women, then the role of goods produced by women were essential to elite accoutrement. Women were also involved in the transfer of duhos, as Anacaona herself gave duhos to the Spanish. Moreover, according to Ostapkowicz, duhos may have been inherited matrilineally and exchanged at weddings. Indeed, women were also participants in at least some of the ritual activities involving cohoba, and probably sat on duhos if in positions of authority as cacicas. The past assumptions of scholars for a strict gender segregation during cohoba rituals or the actual act of sitting on a duho, lack sufficient evidence. Even among various South American populations from whom ethnographic analogies are often sought, women occasionally use stools and participate in various hallucinogen-induced trances or rituals.
Similarly important for understanding Taino society is the prominence of anthropomorphic features of several duhos. For Ostapkowicz, this emphasis is likely linked to ancestors and or cemis, as past cacique ancestors could also become cemis. By incorporating them into the duho, they literally and symbolically act as the foundation or support for the sitter. The sexual genitalia, linked to procreation, may have further supported this view. Moreover, the symbolism of trees with roots, trunks and branches associated with stages of life and connections to the subterranean world was likely linked to spirits, or seen as embodying or housing a spirit or being. Ostapkowicz, though skeptical of drawing too heavily on Pané, cites numerous episodes involving trees, wood, or, in one case, fruit. A tree moving on it own, and speaking with a behique through cohoba, can direct the shaman/carver into cutting it. Moreover, cemis carved of wood were also believed to be able to move on their own and escape from caciques or communities they were not interested in staying with. If ancestors were similarly venerated and could become cemis, their representation in a duho would become a powerful numinous quality that justified the sitter's right to office. Through sitting on the duho that was explicitly linked to powerful ancestors, and using the same duho in cohoba rituals or placing it in caves, the owner asserted their power to intercede between the human and other worlds in the Taino cosmos. In other words, elaborate duhos can be "read" as powerful texts of rulership.
