FEWKES] AKCHEOLOGICAL OBJECTS 129

torians to havebeen fondofaromatic substances. Againstthis itmaybe urged thatthey are toocostly formortars;that somearehollowed underneath,someare flat, and some are convex; andthat thoughvery roughon the underside the roughnessseemstobe thatofanoriginal pecking,exceptingatthechinandknees oftheTyphoeanfigure,wherethe stoneiswornsmooth. Thefurrowsatthebase ofthemamm;e^seemto indicatethecustomoflashingthemtoastaffasensigns,or todash out the brainsofa victimoran enemy. Thereisnomention, however,so farasI

am

acquainted,ofthe nativesperforming humansacrifices. This lashing theoryisstrengthenedbythefactthatonsomeofthemasks whichcloselyresemble the mammiformstones there arecleat-likeprojections,evidentlytobe lashedtoa handle. Thereare nogroovesworn inthefurrows bya lashing thatIcoulddis- cover. Thebulgingtooneside ofthemamiii;e,sometotheright,otherstotheleft, hints at theiruseinjjairs.

The

theorythatthe thl^^e-pointed stones are idols has

many

advo- cates,although

some

of the interpretations of thegodsthey represent are entirely speculative. DoctorStahl,"inhischapteron religion,

by

limitingtheterm to abelief in a supreme beneficent being, orgod, andamalignant being opposedto thisdeity, findsthatthe Borinc^ueiios were absohitel}'destituteofreligiousideas("carecianen absoluto de ideas religiosas").

He may

be right in his criticism ofOviedo and other historians, that they read their-own ethicalideas into their accounts of the

West

Indian religion,but heis certainly inerror in concluding that there are no proofs, archeological or otherwise,to justify belief inthe existence ofanyreligious cult

among

theBorinquen Indians.

"The

Antilles."writes Professor^Slason,"are^allofvolcanicorigin, asthe material ofourstoneimplementsplainlyshows. I

am

indebted toProf.S.F.Bairdfor the suggestionthat,

from

thesea,theislandof Porto Ricorises inan abrupt and symmetrical manner,highl}-sugges- tiveofthe

mound

inthe

mammiform

stones,sothat withthe aid of a littleimagination

we may

seeintheseobjec^tsthegenius ofPorto Rico inthe figureof a man,a parrot, an alligator,an albatross,or

some

otheranimal precious tothese regionswhere larger animals are not abundant,supportingtheislandonitsback."

Earlierinthis articletheauthorhas referredtoafew paragraphsby Professor]\IasonregardingthelegendofTyphoeus,killedbyJupiter andburiedunder

Mount

Etna.

As

thelatter points oitt,

"A

similar

myth may

have beendevisedinvarious placestoaccount for volcanic ormountainousphenomena."

According to Agustin Navarette,

Dr

^C'alixto

Romero

C'antero in hisrefutation of Doctor^Stahl recognizedin thisthree-pointedfigure the genius of evil weighed

down

^b}'Borinquen, representedbythe mountain Lucuo,or Luquillo,and symbolized bythe conoidpromi-

nLosIndiosBorinquenos,p.157-172. InUiis chiipterDoctorStahlmakesnoreference toRamon Paneandotherwriterswhohave given the mostanthoritativeaccountsofthereligiousconceptsof the Haitians. Thereis littledoubtthat theBorinquenos resembled the IndiansofHispaniolain their religious a^ wellas in their secularcustoms.

25ETH—07 9

130 THE

ABORIGINES OF

POKTO

EICO [eth.Axx. 25 nence.

He

finds this theoryof Cantei'o as objectionable as thatof DoctorStahl that the Borinqiiefiosliadnoreligion,becausethereisno reason to laelieve that the Kiche god Cabraken was thought to be buriedunder Borinquen. Navarette"finds in thisimagea" cosmotheo- gonic"(cosmotcogonico)symbol, conforming perfectly with a tradi- tiongiven by Buretde

Longchamps. "The

cone,"hesays,"is chaos, from which inthe

form

of suni<en rocks (escoUos)ai'ose Taraxtaihe- tomos, the 'principio creador' perfectlydefined,represented T)y the head, and Tepapa. the inert

unformed

matter, represented by the posterior part^'crossed]>yrays' (posteriorappendagesandfeet)."

The

universewas born

from

this"principioereador"and matter,as

was

likewise the firmament ("boveda (pie cubria la tierra"); hence he assertsthebase(ofthethree-pointed stone)^isscoopedoutintheform ofan arch. "_{In a}word,"saysNavarette, "thisfigure(three-pointed image)isafse/ni {zeuii),theunique Indo-Borincpieiio idol, inwhich is

symbolizedthe creatorandinert matteron twosidesof chaos, which extendsovertliefirmament (bovedadeluniverso)."

The

author's chiefo})jection toDoctorCantero\s interpretation of the symbolismof the three-pointedidolsisthat he elevatesa"geniusof evil"_toaplaceitnever occupiedinthe

mind

ofthe Antilleans. There

isnosatisfactoryproofthat the Borinquefio Indians ever recognized a

god

ofevilas

we

understandthe conception.

They

no doubtbelievedin a greatbeingwhose

power

causes theterriblehurricaneswhichattimes sweep over the island,and they possibly personated or deified this

power

asa greatsnakegod.

The

early missionaries readilyimagined thatthisdeificationof amythicsei'pentwastheanalogueof their

own

personification of evil,but this interpretation was whollytheirown, not that of theIndians.''

Navarettead\-ance8no adequate support for his statement that the conoid projection represents "chaos," and givesnoauthority for the statementthattheAntilleansl)elievedthattheunionofthe "principio ereador "and matter gavebirthtothe universe.

The

author

must

take issuewith

him

also in hisstatement that thesenti{sem!)istheunique

"Indo-Borinqueilo" idol inwhichissj'mbolizedthis"principioerea- dor," believinghe has mistaken the true

meaning

of the termzemi.

Althougli the great

Sky

god

may

haveTteen calleda semi,cliemi,cemi, or;>;/(/,the

word

proliably

means

notone l)ut

many

subordinate super- naturalbeings,as

was

elsewherepointedout. Tutelary godsarecalled zeinis, inwhich case the

word

has simplythe

same meaning

as clan totem. These three-pointed Borinquefio idols have differentforms, representingreptiles,birds,and

human

beings,afactwhich

makes

^it

tiEstudiosde arqueologiartePuertoRico, resultadosdeunaexcursioncioiitifioo,nrl ioles 1to7, first printedintheperiodicalICl.\oiicio,May,1S9S;reprintedinAquila,Ponce,.iprilandJlay, 1904.

''The wordmahoum.^usedhy the Antilleansasanameo£someoftheirgods,aswell as ofimages ofthesame,isprobably derivedfromma(great),bona(snake). The sameword,hotia.fromwhich comestheUnglisli bon,likewisegavethename(w«'/(sorcerers) tosomeoftheir priestly orders.

FEWKES] ARCHEOLOGICAI. OBJECTS 131 improbablethatthey representOlio o'reatsupernaturalbeing or creator ("principio creador").

The

comparison of the head of a three-pointed stone with a

"creator" andofthe feetwith "matter,"theconical projection rep- resenting- '"chaos," hasnohistoricalevidencetosupportit,while the recognition of the arch of the universe in thecurvedbaseisequally unsupported.

The

secondandthirdtypes of three-pointedidols

show

the absurdity of the entire theory of tlic nature of the three-pointed stonesas

expounded

byNavarette. In thelasttyjiementioned "chaos"

has evidentlybeenreplaced bya huge monster whose

mouth

occupies the place of the conoid projection.

Thislikeness of thethree-pointed stonetoagodor genius ofPorto Ricoburiedunderasuperimposedmountainrepresentedbj'theconoid projectionis

marked

in the lirst type,lessevidentinthe second,and wholl}' absent

from

the third and the fourth. All theories which compare the conoid prominence toamountain,tochaos,or thelike, failtoaccountfor theheadsfoundinthefirst tyjje.

The

three-pointed stonesrepresent supernatural beings of diii'erent kinds,anthropomorphic and zoomorphic.

The

Borinqueiio Indians, likethose ofHaiti,recognizedonegreatsupremegod,buthewasnot acreator.

Ramon Pane

distinctly states tliatthis god hadaniothei', whosefive

names

he hasmentioned.

The

authorregards the three-pointed stonesas clan idolsorimagesof tutelarytotems

—

^{truezeiiiU inthe senseinwhichthetermis}

^employed

by

mostofthe earlywriters.

The

difference intheir formsdenotes differentconceptions of thesemi indifferent clans.

Each

cacique,no doubt,had oneor

more

of theseimages, representinghisclanzemi and such others as he hadinheritedor otherwise obtained.

The

writer regards

them

astheidols ofwhich

Pane

wrote: ''Each one(Indian) worshipstheidolsofspecialformscalled zrmis,which he keepsin his

own

house."

He

referstothree-pointedidols

when

he speaks of stone

£('////.?with "'three points,which the natives believe cause the^ga-ica

(yucca?)tothrive."

In a discussion of the

many

interpretations of the three-pointed stoneswhich are suggested,

we must

not lose sightof the factthat severalbearwell-markedsigns thattheywerelashed to

some

foreign bod}',andthatinone ortwo specimens this evidence of lashingisso plainthatitcan not be disregarded. There are specimenswherethe cord usedintying the objecttoanotherhas

worn

groovesinthe stone itself; a feature that has been noticed

by

several writersandis too prominenttobeoverlooked.

It will be seeninthe discussion of the useandmeaningoftheother greatenigmainPortoRican archeologythatoneof the theories of these objectsisthat thethree-pointed stoneswere onceattachedtooneof the panels of the stone collars, but a comparative study of the various

132 THE

ABORIGINES OF

POKTO

KIOO [eth.^an.n.2D

forms or types of both groups has faileil thus far to support this the.oi'y.

Itdoes notseem probable that the three-pointed stoneswere

worn

onthe head.

The

littleidolswhichtheolder writers saywereattached tothe forehead

when

the Carib

went

into battle are supposed tobe theamuletsthatare treated in subsequent pages.

The

curvature of the bases of the three-pointed stones does notfitthe

human

forehead orcranium,although theymight have been attached to crowns and

worn

inthatway.

The worn

grooves seen in

some

specimenssuggest that they were used perhaps as implements,butitcan notbe asserted that theveiy smallspecimenswould have beeneffectivefor thepurpose.

Itisclearthat

however

they functioned the figurestheyrepresent

—

human

beings,lizards, birds,andotheranimals

—

^{theyweresomething-}

more

than ornamental, especially

when we

take into consideration that the islandersworshiped idolsof these variedforms.

From

whatever side

we

approachthesubject,-

we come

backtotheconclusion thatthey areidols,or zemis. Ifthey werenot actuallyworshiped,theyassumed forms whichare duplications ofidolsthatwereworshiped.

It willbe noted,in acomparisonof the carvingsonthe anteriorpro- jectionofthree-pointed stones of thefirsttype,that,

when

any attempt

is

made

at carving theseobjects,thehead isalways representedand that thisregionisthe best

made

ofallregions of thestone. Thisisa universalfeatureinallaboriginaltechnology

—

^{thattheheadoftheidol}

receives themostcare, notonlyin sculpture,butalso inpainting-and

all other delineations of

men

or ofanimal idols. Legs,arms, wings, or

body

are regarded asof secondaryimportance andare,as a rule,

more

highly conventionalized. Possiblythis is duetothe idealistic nature of primitiveart.

The

aboriginalartistrepresents thatwhichhe regards the

most

importantcharacterinthe

god

depicted,sometimes resortingtosymbolismfor that purpose, neglecting those partswhich tohis

mind

are not so important. His figuresare atfirst idealistic, ratherthan realistic, representations.

Skjiicikculai: Stones

The form

of these objects, especially the cleats on each corner, suggests very strongh- heads of striking implements attached to handles. It

may

be mentioned as corroborative evidence ofthisuse that the

marks

of the lashing are clearly evident in the specimens figured in plate l,g and ^</'. These specimens are quite distinct in

form from

the three-pointed types already described, and, so faras is known,are represented in our collection byonly two specimens, both

from

PortoRico. Theseare typical of adistinct class,unrelated tothepreceding three-pointedstones,butwith certain resemblances

FEWKES]

ARCHEOLOGTCAL

OBJECTS

13B