Southeast Ceramic Dominican Republic

Again, it should be taken with a grain of salt, but our possible descent from an indigenous population of the Caribbean appeared. Using G25 coordinates and the G25 list G25 295728 SNP on this site, we saw our ancestry in this model being reported as about 7.6 DOM_southeast-Ceramic. Well, since the eastern DR was historically linked to Puerto Rico, this is plausible. Perhaps it is based on the sample from the Atajadizo site, an early ceramic site in Hispaniola's southeast that could easily have been at least in part genetically linked to the indigenous peoples of Puerto Rico. Playing around with G25 coordinates on dnagenics also connected us to a ceramic sample from the southeast. 

Target: X_scaled Distance: 1.9033% / 0.01903307
32.0	COG_Kindoki_230BP
16.2	COG_NgongoMbata_220BP
15.0	England_MBA
10.6	HUN_Tisza_LN
7.6	DOM_southeast_Ceramic
5.4	HUN_MA_Szolad_o1
3.8	Baltic_EST_BA
3.0	MAR_Taforalt
2.0	Levant_Beirut_IAIII_Egyptian
2.0	POL_Globular_Amphora
2.0	RUS_Afanasievo
0.4	ITA_Boville_Ernica_IA

More Accounts of Xaragua's Fall

Section of an early map of the island of Haiti

Although they are limited, it is always interesting to read additional sources that mention the end of Anacaona and the Xaragua cacicazgo. In this case, coming across an account from a 1536 will by Diego Mendez, who was present during the massacres orchestrated by Ovando, is useful. While his brief account of this egregious episode in the annals of history did not go into the grisly details, Mendez stated that 84 caciques and Anacaona were killed by the Spaniards. Diego Mendez's testimony may be somewhat limited since he returned to Hispaniola from Jamaica while the Xaragua "campaign" had already started. Moreover, he wrote it several years after the events described therein, so perhaps his numbers are a little off or inaccurate. However, it was interesting to note that he remembered Anacaona as "sovereign mistress" of the island.

Another early mention of Xaragua can be found in a letter by Dominican friars to Fray Pedro Simon de Cordoba, written in 1516 or so. According to this letter, Xaragua was considered by the Indians of the island to be the principal chiefdom due to its great and many caciques, ample food, and beautiful women. In addition, they wrote a version of Ovando's actions which suggest some interesting parts not mentioned in other sources. For instance, they wrote that the Indians of Xaragua were indeed speaking of killing Ovando. Furthermore, when he trapped several caciques inside a caney or large bohio before having them burned to death (supposedly 60, according to the letter), Ovando supposedly wore guanin that he said was meant as a gift to Anacaona. Was this sign of gift-giving or exchange with Anacaona, an example of Spaniards participating in a system of reciprocity and exchange based on indigenous value systems? Either way, it was part of Ovando's plan, which eventually succeeded and led to a slaughter of several caciques. Those who survived or fled were enslaved, including on Guarocuya, a nephew of Anacaona who was later killed in the Bahoruco area. Perhaps Don Enrique or Enriquillo, the later indigenous rebel, was named after or related to this earlier Guarocuya? 

While the letter by the friars is sympathetic to the people of Xaragua, it is also somewhat condescending, alluding to them as easily deceived. What seems more likely is that there may have indeed been some sort of plot or conspiracy to free Xaragua from the Spanish threat, but it was still in its initial stages. Perhaps Anacaona was waiting for a better time or opportune moment to start it, but Ovando decided that quick, decisive and treacherous actions could neutralize the threat right away, although Oviedo wrote that it took 6 months to pacify the western part of the island, finally ending in February of 1504. It even brought in captives or slaves, like the later campaign against Higuey. Indeed, it ensured direct Spanish control over most of what is now Haiti and the establishment of the encomienda system and Spanish towns. Presumably, the captives taken in these campaigns were more easily transferred to the mining areas or Santo Domingo while others fled to Cuba. 

Indigenous Caribbean Ancestry

Again, playing with G25 coordinates (non-simulated ones, this time) and different calculators or Illustrative DNA revealed some degree of genetic continuity from the pre-Columbian Caribbean and modern populations in the region. For example, using my G25 coordinates and Tomenable's calculators for the world in the 6th century BC and 1st century BC, I received the following results: 

Target: Yo Distance: 1.7369% / 0.01736942
46.0	Africa(West)_Niger_Congo_Peoples
22.0	Europe_Northwest
15.2	Europe_Southwest
6.6	America_Cuba_Guanahatabey
5.0	Europe_South_Central
3.2	Africa(Central)_Foragers
0.6	Africa_Garamantians
0.6	America_Ancestral_Puebloans
0.4	America_Amazon_Foragers
0.4	MENA_Judah_Kingdom

Of course, this is only slightly accurate, in that it's using our G25 coordinates to match with select ancient population samples. The sub-Saharan African category is about right, but probably based on mostly modern samples. Europe is probably generically accurate, although most of our European ancestry was probably from southwestern Europe (overwhelmingly the Iberian peninsula, which, over 2000 years ago, had populations genetically related to northwestern European groups). The Garamantian connection is probably a reference to other admixture calculators assigning us some minor degree of North African ancestry (and the Garamantian sample had sub-Saharan ancestry). Intriguingly, the indigenous Americas ancestry, a total of about 7.6 percent, is overwhelmingly linked to this calculator's archaic Cuba sample. Of course, reducing the number of populations to 5 and following other recommendations erases the Guanahatabey. It also reclassifies European ancestry as just Roman Empire-Europe.

Interestingly, Illustrative DNA's Three Way modeling does come slightly close to our ancestry with a best fit of Medieval ancestry as 43.6% Medieval Iberian (Girona), Lucayan Taino (7.2%) and Bantu (49.2%). Obviously, this is only roughly useful, but comes closest to approximating our ancestry as a split of 3 major populations: indigenous Americas, sub-Saharan Africa, and Europe (mainly Iberian peninsula). It's a shame sub-Saharan Africa isn't properly broken down and analyzed, but the difficulty of finding ancient DNA samples makes it somewhat understandable. Regardless, it does seem like our Indigenous ancestry, usually always linked to South American groups, was at least partly based on indigenous populations in the Caribbean. 

Mound-Builders

Enjoying a dated but interesting documentary on Cahokia and related mound-building sites in North America. Featuring Leonard Nimoy as narrator, it serves as a nice overview or introduction to a complex of indigenous civilizations in the continent.

Pictograms at Potoo Hole

Just a brief video on pictograms at Potoo Hole in Jamaica made by indigenous peoples.

Simulated G25 Coordinates and Ancestry

Although using G25 coordinates from different admixture calculators and then using Vahaduo to run that information against G25 coordinates for various populations, past and present, is fun, it's probably not very reliable. However, using simulated coordinates from MDLP with a 1st Century BC calculator by Tomenable did match our data with a sample from Hispaniola, from Macorix Ciguayo. Using other simulated scaled G25 coordinates did not detect this, only calling it Amazon Farming Tribes. And, if we are being honest, about 2000 years ago was around the time when agriculturalists who likely spoke Arawakan languages were migrating in the Greater Antilles. Needless to say, none of this should be taken too seriously, but interesting to see nonetheless. The other set of G25 coordinates, which only listed Amazon Farming Tribes, was more accurate in other ways.

On the Huecoid

 

Watching this old but interesting documentary on the Huecoid on the Youtube channel of Gerardo M. Piñero Cádiz was quite interesting. Luis Chanlatte Baik himself appears in this, explaining his work on the first Huecoid site identified back in the 1970s. While his theory of an Andean origin for the Huecoid needs more evidence, it is interesting to noe the amulets or pendants with a condor-like bird holding a human head does have a long pedigree in Andean cultures. Perhaps the Huecoid really were of Andean origin or were influenced by Andean cultures to some extent, before migrating to Puerto Rico and Vieques over 2000 years ago? And if evidence from the lithics can be relied upon, the Huecoid truly were a distinct tradition from the Saladoid who appear to have Arawakan speakers from Venezuela. Were the Huecoid representatives of another language family besides Arawakan? 

Speculating on Xaragua Demographics

While perusing Repartimientos y encomiendas en la Isla Española: El repartimiento de Albuquerque de 1514 by Luis Arranz Márquez, we decided to speculate on what the population of areas associated with the former cacicazgo of Xaragua may have been before 1514. Obviously, there are severe problems and limitations with the data. For instance, Anderson-Cordova's totals for the 3 areas we are considering here as part of the former Xaragua was only 3554. However, the data as presented by Arranz Márquez gives a somewhat higher total for Yaquimo, La Sabana (perhaps more autonomous due to its distance) and La Vera Paz, 3625. One must also remember that some of the indigenous population in this part of Hispaniola may have been relocated to areas closer to mining operations. While the 1517 Interrogatory found forced relocation to be something severely resisted by the Indians, causing them to rebel, flee to the mountains or threaten to commit suicide, some indigenous peoples were probably forcibly relocate during the initial phases of conquest. Of course, the brutal Spanish conquest of Xaragua under Ovando must have similarly lowered the area's population through slaughter and fleeing populations. That raises another issue, too, since some of the population may have fled to other islands or other inaccessible areas and were not formally enumerated in repartimiento statistics.

That said, looking at population data for 3 areas associated with the former cacicazgo of Xaragua in 1514 might offer suggestions for its population before 1492. We know from Spanish sources that it was considered the most powerful chiefdom on the island before the Spanish conquest. Xaragua would have been able to support a relatively large population through its use of irrigation canals, too. That would have been necessary to support Xaragua's unusually large nitaino population. Indeed, the very name Xaragua, according to Granberry and Vescelius, means Lake Country. The "Taino" are known to have relied heavily on seafood as well as some of the fauna that would have also lived in the lakes and rivers. Furthermore, according to Oviedo, Xaragua still had large villages in the 1510s. When he first visited the area in 1515, Oviedo reported large villages near Lake Azuei. While Oviedo may have exaggerated the population capacity of Taino villages or aldeas in the precolonial period, there was undoubtedly a large concentration of people in the area of Xaragua. The combination of lakes, rivers, access to the sea, irrigation, large cotton production, and larger than average "elite" population make this seem likely.

So, how does one interpret that demographic past with the sad statistics of 1514? If 3554-3625 is a rough estimate of what the Indian population of that part of Hispaniola was in 1514, then what would the population in precolonial times have been? Surely, it must have been orders of magnitude greater. While the aDNA evidence of precontact remains by David Reich et al suggest a population of the island in the tens of thousands, we find it likely that Xaragua could have supported at least two or three times more (probably even more) people before the Spanish conquest. Indeed, using the number of caciques (plus 1 nitaino) reported in the 1514 Repartimiento, one finds 85 for the region of what once comprised Xaragua. According to Las Casas, writing from memory as an elderly man, Xaragua before Spanish rule had 100-200 nitainos. Supposedly the Spaniards under Ovando's leadership also massacred around 80 nitaino when they killed Anacaona. If that is accurate, assuming Las Casas remembered correctly, but 60-70 Spaniards married women from among the elite of Xaragua in Vera Paz. Yet, in 1514, Vera Paz only had 24 caciques (25 if you count the nitaino). Yaquimo had 40 caciques while Sabana had 21. If these numbers are added up, you have a total of 86 "caciques (including 1 nitaino who functioned as a cacique). Due to the unspecified breakdown of Xaragua's caciques and the caciques to their south and southwest, we can only guess that the core of Xaragua may have had 100+ caciques. The lesser caciques may have been counted as nitainos by Las Casas, though we have no evidence for that.

Moreover, in 1514, there was an average of about 43 people per cacique in the three areas considered here as part of the chiefdom. In preconquest times, when Xaragua had more caciques and a higher population, each cacique ruling over an aldea or yucayeque probably included at least 100-150 in his community. Francisco Moscoso, in his detailed study of "Taino" demographics in Puerto Rico, reached some conclusions which may be worth applying to the Haitian case, too. For example, assuming the figure of Las Casas for an average yucayeque being around 2500 (unlikely to be true in all parts of the Greater Antilles), and each cacique ruled over an aldea, Puerto Rico's population may have reached as high as 110,000 (assuming the number of 44 caciques is accurate). If we assume that each cacique ruled an aldea of around 2500 for Xaragua in precolonial times, then we can easily reach figures of 60,000 for the "core" part of the chiefdom. For the other two sections, again assuming each cacique had a community of 2500, we would quickly reach numbers that are contradicted by the genetic data for population estimates (over 200,000 people living in western Hispaniola, or Haiti's Ouest and Sud departments).

However, applying the lower range of estimates used by Moscoso might bring us closer to the demographic realities of Xaragua. If the paramount chiefs ruled aldeas of 2500 or more but the regional caciques headed communities of 500-1000, Puerto Rico's "Taino" population may have been around 44,000. Applying those same figures to Xaragua's "core" area with 24 "caciques" (23 times 500, plus 2500 for the paramount cacique's community) gives a figure of 14,000. Of course, one must remember that the Spaniards had killed Anacaona and a large segment of Xaragua's nitaino. Perhaps the center of the chiefdom had a population greater than this. Nonetheless, a figure of 14,000 for the "core" province of Xaragua with about 24 caciques would mean each cacique ruled an average of 583 people. That is probably still too high. Including Yaquimo's 40 caciques, associating each with a community of about 500 people, leads to an estimate of 20,000, which is also likely far too high. Instead, we must apply different formulas to arrive at a possible estimate. If our 43 people per cacique in 1514 is any reliable estimate, we may be safer tripling that number in precolonial times to reach more accurate estimates. If, say, there were around 129 people per cacique before the Spanish conquest, then perhaps the total population of Xaragua would have been around 18, 207, including about 7500 people living in larger settlements associated with the most powerful caciques in Xaragua  (Behechio's settlement), Yaquimo, and the area of La Sabana. 

Overall, we are still not sure what the population of Xaragua may have been before its fall. We believe the "core" could have possibly supported a large, extensive population. That area, which presumably lost quite a few of its caciques during the violent conquest, may have had several thousands of people living there. The whole chiefdom, extending it to the southeast and southwest (Haiti's Sud) may have had over 18,000 people although that is a very rough estimate. We are assuming that the average population in an area per cacique in 1514 can be tripled to reach very tentative figures. If we went with a less conservative approach that assumed a population of 5 times as many people per cacique in the precolonial era, Xaragua may have had over 20,000 people, which is not unlikely given its influence and wealth. Unfortunately, the lack of a more detailed breakdown or reliable accounts of Xaragua make all this guesswork. It is also possible that the system of repartimientos elevated the number of caciques in some areas (Yaquimo) or lowered it in others, or perhaps some nitainos became caciques in the Spanish system. 

Indigenous Ancestry

Like everyone else, we succumbed to genetic testing. Using AncestryDNA, which is said to sometimes inflate the indigenous ancestry of people with roots in the Spanish Caribbean, we found we do indeed possess "Amerindian" ancestry from the Caribbean. Playing around with GEDMatch has led me to think the "hacked" score of around 7% for Indigenous Puerto Rico may be more accurate than the 9% assigned in the official AncestryDNA results. Overall, this is not surprising. If the average Puerto Rican, according to studies by researchers, possesses around 14 or 15% indigenous ancestry, then someone who is half Puerto Rican will probably inherit some of that. 

We suspect the Bolivia & Peru ancestry detected at 1% might just be from the indigenous Caribbean ancestry. After reading studies on the "Taino" genome and their relations to South America, including the around 14% Ceramic-related ancestry found in Puerto Ricans, we found allusions to some degree of overlap with populations in Andean South America. While the genetic, linguistic, and archaeological evidence points to an origin among Arawakan-speaking groups of the Amazon region, the "Taino" also overlaps with other South American populations. Indeed, one study found links between pre-contact ceramic Puerto Rico and Amazonia and the Andes, although the strongest similarities in terms of mtDNA variation and haplotype frequency was with Eastern Tukanoan groups. What surprised us is that Ancestry reported the Bolivia & Peru was inherited from both parents. Perhaps our Haitian mother does indeed have very distant indigenous ancestry? 

Playing with GEDmatch also pointed to some "Amerindian" ancestry. Various admixture calculations suggest about 6-7% indigenous Americas ancestry, and the "archaic" matches did point to indigenous people in Brazil. Autosomal DNA comparison with the kit for an indigenous woman of the Bahamas who lived around 1000 years ago showed very minor connections, with the longest segment at 6.7 cm for a match. G25 simulated coordinates also included a prehistoric Brazil sample. This all seems about right, although I am sure I do not have mtDNA or Y-DNA haplogroups of indigenous ancestry. Indeed, playing around with raw data suggested J for Y-DNA, which also seems about right. Alas, sub-Saharan African ancestry is never easy to analyze here...