¡El Yunque se levanta! Interdisciplinarity and activism at the La Mina petroglyph site 9781407356433, 9781407355276

Citation preview

¡El Yunque se levanta! Interdisciplinarity and activism at the La Mina petroglyph site Rhianna C. Rogers, James W. Schuetz and Rex Cauldwell B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 3 0 1 9

2021

¡El Yunque se levanta! Interdisciplinarity and activism at the La Mina petroglyph site Rhianna C. Rogers, James W. Schuetz and Rex Cauldwell B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 3 0 1 9

x 297mm_BAR Rogers TITLE ARTWORK.indd 1

2021

2/2/21 1:35 PM

Published in 2021 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 3019 ¡El Yunque se levanta! ISBN  978 1 4073 5643 3 paperback ISBN  978 1 4073 5527 6 e-format doi  https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407356433 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library © Rhianna C. Rogers, James W. Schuetz and Rex Cauldwell 2021 Cover image  Northeast La Mina Boulder Face with petroglyphs The Authors’ moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. Links to third party websites are provided by BAR Publishing in good faith and for information only. BAR Publishing disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third-party website referenced in this work.

BAR titles are available from: Email Phone Fax

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, ox2 7bp, uk [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Of Related Interest

Shepherds Who Write Pastoral graffiti in the uplands of Europe from prehistory to the modern age Edited by Marta Bazzanella and Giovanni Kezich BAR International Series 2999

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2020

Tibetan Silver, Gold and Bronze Objects and the Aesthetics of Animals in the Era before Empire Cross-cultural reverberations on the Tibetan Plateau and soundings from other parts of Eurasia John Vincent Bellezza BAR International Series 2984

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2020

Rock Art, Water, and Ancestors The semiotic construction of a sacred landscape in the central Andes (1800 BCE - CE 1820) Gordon Ambrosino BAR International Series 2969

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2020 Design and Connectivity The Case of Atlantic Rock Art Joana Valdez-Tullett

BAR International Series 2932

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2019 Incisioni rupestri nell’Alto Lario Roberto Basilico and Giovanni Beltramelli

BAR International Series 2924

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2019

Recorded Places, Experienced Places The Holocene rock art of the Iberian Atlantic north-west Edited by Ana M. S. Bettencourt, Manuel Santos Estevez, Hugo A. Sampaio and Daniela Cardoso BAR International Series 2878

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2017 Miscellania Theory, Rock Art and Heritage Edited by Luiz Oosterbeek and Cláudia Fidalgo

BAR International Series 2659

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2014

Rock Art in the Americas: Mythology, Cosmogony and Rituals Proceedings of the 2nd REEA Conference Ritual Americas Edited by Françoise Fauconnier and Serge Lemaitre BAR International Series 2448

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2012

For more information, or to purchase these titles, please visit www.barpublishing.com iii

¡El Yunque se levanta!

The Rock Art of Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Motif classification, quantification, and regional comparisons Suzanne M. Baker BAR International Series 2084

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2010

De antiguos pueblos y culturas botánicas en el Puerto Rico indígena El archipiélago borincano y la llegada de los primeros pobladores agroceramistas Jaime R. Pagán Jiménez BAR International Series 1687

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2007 Late Ceramic Age Societies in the Eastern Caribbean Edited by André Delpuech and Corinne L. Hofman

BAR International Series 1273

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 2004

El centro ceremonial de Caguana, Puerto Rico Simbolismo iconográfico, cosmovisión y el poderío caciquil Taíno de Boriquén José R. Oliver BAR International Series 727

Oxford, BAR Publishing, 1998

iv

Acknowledgments We would like to thank a number of people who have helped us complete this project over the past five years. If not for their continued support, personal and professional guidance, and reassurance, we know we would not have been able to do it. We would first like to thank Sr. Alex Lopez Rodríguez for allowing us to work on his land and complete this study of the La Mina site. We would also like to thank assistant director of the Cueva del Indio archaeological site, Sr. Victor Torres, who graciously stored all geological and archaeological findings from the 2015 research project. We would like say thanks to Dennise Rodríguez Ávila for her many contributions to this project, including ethnographic data collection and graphic and visual imagery. We would also like to thank Susan Caldwell for her assistance during fieldwork and her inspirational curiosities. We would also like to acknowledge the many other scholars, colleagues, and friends who offered their advice and support over the course of this project, both academically and professionally. Specifically, Michelle Hayward, senior archaeologist for PanAmerican Consultants, Inc., and Roberto G. Muñoz, anthropology graduate student at the University of Florida, whose work and insights influenced the initial phase of research for this project. We would also like to thank State University of New York (SUNY) Empire State College for offering a small grant to support the initial work on this project. Finally, we would like to say thank you to all our close friends and family for their continued support during this process. Rogers would like to acknowledge her parents, Tony and Cindy Rogers, and Dennise Rodríguez-Ávila for her emotional support, editing, proofreading, artistic contributions, and willingness to travel (and sometimes translate) in Puerto Rico. Schuetz would like to thank his family and friends for their inspiration and encouragement, especially his wife Kari for her support and dedication throughout this project. Cauldwell would like to thank family and friends. Thank you all very much.

v

Contents List of Figures..................................................................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables..................................................................................................................................................................... xiii Abstract ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� xv 1. Defining Interdisciplinarity in Archaeology................................................................................................................ 1 Preface.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives of Study.......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Research Justification.................................................................................................................................................. 3 Organization of Study...................................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina................................................................................................... 5 Limitations on Puerto Rican Rock Art Research............................................................................................................. 5 Contextualizing La Mina ................................................................................................................................................ 5 The Archaeological Marginalization of La Mina........................................................................................................ 6 The Archaeological Setting.............................................................................................................................................. 6 The Saladoids and Huecoids (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 600).............................................................................................. 6 The Ostionoids/PreTaíno Peoples (C.E. 600 – C.E. 1200).......................................................................................... 7 The Historical Setting...................................................................................................................................................... 8 Impacts of Spanish Mentalities of Conquest on Puerto Rican Natives....................................................................... 8 The Ethnographic Setting............................................................................................................................................... 11 The Taíno: An Ethnohistorical Interpretation............................................................................................................ 11 Contextualizing Caudwell’s La Mina Photographic Project (2006 – 2018)............................................................. 14 3. The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting................................................................................ 21 The Ethnogeological Setting.......................................................................................................................................... 21 Environmental Setting.................................................................................................................................................... 21 Physiography............................................................................................................................................................. 21 Climate...................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Topography................................................................................................................................................................ 24 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................................................. 24 Geological Setting.......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Mass Wasting – Earthquakes, Land Slides, Mudslides............................................................................................. 27 Regional Petrology.................................................................................................................................................... 28 Soil Types.................................................................................................................................................................. 28 4. La Mina Project Methodology.................................................................................................................................... 33 Contextualizing Puerto Rican Rock Art Research: A Short Literature Review............................................................. 33 Field Methods................................................................................................................................................................ 34 Cauldwell Photographic Methods (2006–2018)............................................................................................................ 34 Field Methods (2015 Season)........................................................................................................................................ 36 Laboratory Methods (2015 Season)............................................................................................................................... 37 Analytical Methods........................................................................................................................................................ 40 Classification Methods................................................................................................................................................... 40 Petroglyph Classification Methods ........................................................................................................................... 40 Non-Ceramic Classification Methods....................................................................................................................... 41 Geological Methods.................................................................................................................................................. 41 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................................... 44 5. Interpretation and Analysis........................................................................................................................................ 45 Cauldwell’s Project Interpretations................................................................................................................................ 45 2015 Project Interpretations........................................................................................................................................... 49 Field Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 49

vii

¡El Yunque se levanta! La Mina Material Culture Interpretation........................................................................................................................ 54 Analysing La Mina’s Rock Art...................................................................................................................................... 54 Addressing Differences between Regional Typologies............................................................................................. 54 La Mina Petroglyph Interpretation ................................................................................................................................ 61 Geological Interpretation............................................................................................................................................... 62 Terrain and Hydrology.............................................................................................................................................. 62 Site Petrology and Geological Classification............................................................................................................ 62 Soil Classification ..................................................................................................................................................... 66 Geomorphological Relevance .................................................................................................................................. 66 Dissolution Weathering and Hydrolysis.................................................................................................................... 66 Biogeochemical Processes........................................................................................................................................ 66 Geomorphological Summary.................................................................................................................................... 68 6. Puerto Rico Se Levanata: Resilience and Perseverance in Times of Crisis............................................................. 71 La Mina in the Post Hurricane Maria Era: An Activist Anthropological Approach...................................................... 71 Contextualizing La Mina Recovery Efforts Using Activist Anthropology.................................................................... 72 Example #1: A Deliberative Conversation – Puerto Rico and Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts .......................... 73 Example #2: Community Outreach – Donating to Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts ........................................... 73 Example #3: Community Outreach – Continuing the Conversations....................................................................... 74 Example #4: Community Outreach – Donating Post-2019, Government Unrest, and Earthquakes........................ 78 Final Thoughts............................................................................................................................................................... 78 Appendix A: Project Photographs (2006–2019)............................................................................................................. 79 Appendix B: Representative 2015 Field Photos............................................................................................................. 83 Appendix C: Geological and Archaeological Lab Photos............................................................................................. 85 Appendix D: Petroglyph Photos...................................................................................................................................... 91 Appendix E: Petroglyph Photos in Chapter 5 Renderings........................................................................................... 95 Appendix F: Lithic Artifact.............................................................................................................................................. 99 Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................................... 101

viii

List of Figures Figure 1.1. La Mina regional site map.................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 1.2. NW face of the La Mina boulder by Frassetto, circa 1957................................................................................ 3 Figure 1.3. NW face of the La Mina boulder........................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2.1. Locations of the cultures in the Caribbean when Columbus arrived.................................................................. 9 Figure 2.2. La Mina site – Chief’s Head boulder chief/cacique......................................................................................... 13 Figure 2.3. Possible La Mina plaza..................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2.4. Chief’s Head boulder – Bonayel glyph............................................................................................................ 14 Figure 2.5. La Mina boulder............................................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 2.6. Hippie Hole glyphs, Rio Blanco River............................................................................................................. 17 Figure 2.7. Chief’s Head boulder........................................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 2.8. Chief’s Head boulder; wrapped ancestor glyph with remains of a possible headdress.................................... 18 Figure 2.9. Owl glyphs....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 2.10. Monkey glyph................................................................................................................................................. 19 Figure 2.11. Hippie Hole glyphs, Rio Blanco River........................................................................................................... 19 Figure 3.1. Climatic subdivision of Puerto Rico and outlying islands............................................................................... 23 Figure 3.2. Regional locations and USDA major land resource boundaries...................................................................... 25 Figure 3.3. Topographical map of eastern Puerto Rico demonstrating the location of La Mina site at the base of steep topography........................................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 3.4. Stream network and relevant watershed, northeastern Puerto Rico................................................................. 27 Figure 3.5. Map of Puerto Rico showing principal faults................................................................................................... 29 Figure 3.6. Photograph of rock fall leaning on glyph, demonstrating a large mass wasting event has occurred since the glyph was drawn...............................................................................................................................................30 Figure 3.7. Photograph of presumably volcaniclastics sandstone similar to La Mina, with mottled discolouration due to variable oxidation of the matrix material......................................................................................... 30 Figure 3.8. Regional geological map based on USGS National Map GIS Database, survey site locations....................... 31 Figure 4.1. Upper and lower La Mina site map.................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 4.2. Field investigation of La Mina boulder......................................................................................................................36 Figure 4.3. GPS and compass mapping..........................................................................................................................................37 Figure 4.4. La Mina site map with terraces and transect 1................................................................................................. 38 Figure 4.5. Transect 1, test pit #1........................................................................................................................................ 39 ix

¡El Yunque se levanta! Figure 4.6. Transect 1, test pit #1........................................................................................................................................ 39 Figure 4.7. Transect 1, test pit screening............................................................................................................................ 39 Figure 4.8. Transect 1 (T1), bagging remains..................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 4.9. Location survey data flow chart....................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 5.1. La Mina NW side............................................................................................................................................. 45 Figure 5.2. La Mina carved water channel, close-up view..........................................................................................................46 Figure 5.3. La Mina NE side – spiral (petroglyph C)......................................................................................................... 47 Figure 5.4. La Mina NE side – parrot (petroglyph A.1 – A.2)............................................................................................ 47 Figure 5.5. Chief’s Head boulder, SW side........................................................................................................................ 48 Figure 5.6. Chief’s Head boulder, SW side (glyph O)........................................................................................................ 48 Figure 5.7. La Mina site map with terraces and transect 1................................................................................................. 49 Figure 5.8. Artistic interpretation of La Mina site profile................................................................................................... 50 Figure 5.9. Representative shell collections, test pit #2...................................................................................................... 53 Figure 5.10. Dorsal (right) side of utilized flake fragment from shovel test 8................................................................... 54 Figure 5.11. Surface collections from unnamed stream, NW of La Mina cave.................................................................. 54 Figure 5.12. All NE La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods)................................................... 56 Figure 5.13. All NW La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods).................................................. 58 Figure 5.14. All La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods)......................................................... 59 Figure 5.15. Monkey glyph found 1 km downstream from La Mina site........................................................................... 60 Figure 5.16. Wrapped ancestor glyphs found 1 km downstream from La Mina site.......................................................... 61 Figure 5.17. Volcanic breccia at La Mina cave (10 cm scale)............................................................................................ 63 Figure 5.18. Volcanic sandstone with interlocking quart grains. . ........................................................................... 63 Figure 5.19. Fine grained layered volcanic......................................................................................................................... 64 Figure 5.20. Geochemical or biogeochemical accretions developed over petroglyphs...................................................... 67 Figure 5.21. Rock fall that overlaps La Mina boulder carvings......................................................................................... 67 Figure 5.22. Drawing and photograph of La Mina cave..................................................................................................... 68 Figure 6.1. Rogers leads participants engaging in a deliberative conversation.................................................................. 73 Figure 6.2. Donations collected by authors reaching Puerto Rico...................................................................................... 74 Figure 6.3. Iglesia Metodista La Roca Pastor Luis A. Estrella with donations collected by authors................................. 74

x

List of Figures Figure 6.4. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation site, Camuy, PR...................................................................................... 75 Figure 6.5. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation truck going to Utuado, PR...................................................................... 75 Figure 6.6. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation site, Camuy, PR...................................................................................... 75 Figure 6.7. Flooding days after Hurricane Marie in Maunabo, PR.................................................................................... 77 Figure 6.8. Building destruction after Hurricane Marie in Maunabo, PR.......................................................................... 78 Figure 6.9. “Stronger than Maria” sign, Island of Vieques................................................................................................. 78 Figure A.1. Turtle glyph without chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream........................................................................................................................................................... 79 Figure A.2. Turtle glyph with chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream........................................................................................................................................................... 79 Figure A.3. Spread-eagle stick figure without chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream....................................................................................................................................... 80 Figure A.4. Spread-eagle stick figure with chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream........................................................................................................................................................... 80 Figure A.5. Channel along La Mina boulder....................................................................................................................... 81 Figure A.6. Chief’s Head boulder –Micro view evidence of chisel/hammer stone hits used to construct a glyph................................................................................................................................................................. 81 Figure A.7. Phallic symbol ................................................................................................................................................ 81 Figure B.1. Upper cacique cave.......................................................................................................................................... 83 Figure B.2. Drawing La Mina using Roe 1:1 methodology............................................................................................... 83 Figure B.3. Drawing La Mina using Roe 1:1 methodology............................................................................................... 84 Figure C.1. Basalt rock....................................................................................................................................................... 85 Figure C.2. Basalt rock....................................................................................................................................................... 86 Figure C.3. Volcanic sandstone........................................................................................................................................... 87 Figure C.4. Volcanic sandstone with quartzite-like texture................................................................................................ 88 Figure C.5. Sea shells, T1, TP-1......................................................................................................................................... 89 Figure C.6. Sea shells, T1, TP-2......................................................................................................................................... 89 Figure C.7. Historic artifacts .............................................................................................................................................. 90 Figure D.1. NE Side of La Mina – A.1-A.2 glyphs ........................................................................................................... 91 Figure D.2. NE Side of La Mina – B glyph........................................................................................................................ 91 Figure D.3. NE Side of La Mina – B and I glyph groups................................................................................................... 92

xi

¡El Yunque se levanta! Figure D.4. NE Side of La Mina – C glyph group.............................................................................................................. 92 Figure D.5. NE Side of La Mina – D glyph ....................................................................................................................... 93 Figure D.6. NE Side of La Mina – E glyph........................................................................................................................ 93 Figure D.7. NW Side of La Mina – H.1-H.2 glyphs........................................................................................................... 94 Figure E.1. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03770)......................................................................................... 95 Figure E.2. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03771)......................................................................................... 95 Figure E.3. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03769)......................................................................................... 96 Figure E.4. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03789) ................................................................... 96 Figure E.5. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03790) ................................................................... 96 Figure E.6. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03896) ................................................................... 97 Figure F.1. Lithic artifact. Type: lithic/ bi-facial flake........................................................................................................ 99

xii

List of Tables Table 2.1. Antellean Formative Period (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1492) ..................................................................................... 7 Table 2.2. Roe and Hayward Chronology (4000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1524)................................................................................. 7 Table 4.1. Data Fields......................................................................................................................................................... 40 Table 4.2. Data Fields......................................................................................................................................................... 40 Table 4.3. Data Fields......................................................................................................................................................... 40 Table 5.1. La Mina Photographic Log, Archaeological Remains....................................................................................... 51 Table 5.2. Chanlatte-Baik (2013) and Roe and Hayward (2009): Chronologies Combined (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1542).................................................................................................................................................. 55 Table 5.3. La Mina Photographic Log, Geological Samples.............................................................................................. 65

xiii

Abstract Between August 1, 2015 and August 8, 2015, Dr. Rhianna C. Rogers, James Schuetz, P.G., and Rex Caudwell conducted a Phase I geological and archaeological survey of La Mina, a previously unrecorded preTaíno/Taíno site located on private property near the El Yunque National Forest in Municipio de Naguabo, Puerto Rico. Our 2015 fieldwork consisted of a Phase I geological and archaeological survey as well as the cataloging of co-author Rex Caudwell’s longitudinal photographic study of the site (2006-2018), both of which included the documentation of dozens of previously unrecorded preTaíno/Taíno glyphs. In 2017-2018, we supplemented our initial fieldwork with additional ethnographic data, focusing on the aftermath of recent natural disasters and cultural unrest in the region. Combining this work with the use of ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and activist anthropology, we were able to take an interdisciplinary approach to archaeological analysis. The ultimate goal of this interdisciplinary study was to highlight the importance of La Mina petroglyphs as well as give voice to the people who created and continue to protect them. It is worth noting that the petroglyphs of this site have never been studied, cataloged, or analysed by professional/academic archaeologists or geologists. Prior to this study, co-author and photographer Rex Caudwell’s research was the only research conducted at the site. Beyond the documentation of previously unrecorded petroglyphs at this site is the fact that La Mina is slowly disappearing due to dissolution weathering associated with precipitation from its proximity to the El Yunque rainforest. Speaking with members of the community and local informants and reviewing Caudwell’s prior work illustrating the loss of glyphs over the past 5-10 years further substantiated the need for detailed site analysis. This weathering process has created a significant degree of uncertainly pertaining to some details of the petroglyphs within an imprint of localized erosion. As an 8.14 meter-long and between 1-3 meter-height surface heavily petroglyph-covered northern face, the La Mina rock offers glimpse into the lives of the people of this region. Our research about this site provides documentation before further information is lost from the erosional process. As part of this study, we used a field method created by Roe (2005) for drawing petroglyphs on heavy-gauge clear plastic affixed to the La Mina rock. As part of this study, we used high resolution imagery, Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Geographical Information Systems (with ESRI ArcMap), and field sketches to provide a detailed analysis of the site. Tentative analysis of the petroglyphs at this site indicates it was primarily used during the early Elenan/late Chican Ostionoid occupation (~600-1200 A.D.), but later Taino use may have occurred. This survey is only part of the story though, as this paper demonstrates the value of engaging the local community in the process and how using cutting edge methods to collect field data can improve site interpretation.

xv

1 Defining Interdisciplinarity in Archaeology Preface

focused on ethnoarchaeology,2 ethnogeology,3 and activist anthropology.4 Our hope is that the title of this book, ¡El Yunque se levanta!: Interdisciplinarity and Activism at the La Mina Petroglyph Site, gives voice to these people and their pride as well as to the petroglyphs they produced.

Over the past 20 years, Puerto Rico has experienced many situations that have highlighted both the resilience of its peoples as well as the socio-economic issues affecting its ability to thrive. When this project began in 2015, archaeologists had already situated Puerto Rico as a key geographical location for categorizing native occupations in the Caribbean (Ramos 2010; Curet 2006; Siegel 2005; Rouse 1982; Alegría 1965). However, lack of archaeological funding on the island reduced Puerto Rico’s contributions to this important discussion (Curet 2006; Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018).1 When we published our initial findings for the La Mina petroglyph site in 2017 (Rogers et al. 2017), Puerto Rico was hit with devastating category 4 and 5 hurricanes, causing unprecedented destruction across the island, including the collapse of the private homestead at the La Mina site and co-author Rex Cauldwell’s forced relocation off the island. At the same time, the moniker Puerto Rico se Levanta emerged, highlighting people’s desire to rebuild and advocate for positive change. Island pride from inhabitants of the island and members of the Puerto Rican diaspora combined with the global community to collect and redistribute resources. However, corruption scandals in 2019, subsequent protests, and the ousting of Puerto Rican officials once again plunged the island into socio-economic uncertainty and hampered the rebuilding efforts. That same year, a series of devastating earthquakes rocked the already fatigued island, affecting communities still reeling from the natural disasters and corruption scandals from prior years. If that were not enough, the island currently finds itself in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic and further revenue losses resulting from a decrease in its staple economic venture, tourism. Despite these issues, while working on this book we have seen time and time again the resilience of Puerto Ricans, from communities coming together to share resources to the emergence of grassroots organizations and individually led relief efforts. As highlighted in chapter six, we were so moved by their efforts that we collaborated with our own organizations and Puerto Rican contacts to donate money and other resources to distribute across the island and within our archaeological project area. The resilience of Puerto Rican culture and its peoples, both now and evidenced in our research, compelled us to change the focus of this book from strictly archaeological to an interdisciplinary work

Introduction Archaeologists consider Puerto Rico a vital location for mapping the spread of native peoples across the Caribbean (Ramos 2010; Curet 2006; Siegel 2005; Rouse 1982; Alegría 1965). However, lack of funding, limited focus on petroglyph research, and limited historical records have reduced Puerto Rico’s contributions to the broader archaeological conversation (Curet 2006; Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018.) This project hopes to alleviate this issue through its discussion of the La Mina site, a previous unrecorded petroglyph site near the El Yunque National Forest in Municipio de Naguabo, Puerto Rico. Our 2015 fieldwork consisted of a Phase I geological and archaeological survey as well as the cataloguing of co-author Rex Caudwell’s longitudinal photographic study of the site (2006–2018), both of which included the documentation of dozens of previously unrecorded preTaíno/Taíno glyphs. In 2017–2018, we supplemented our initial fieldwork with additional ethnographic data, focusing on the aftermath of recent natural disasters and cultural unrest in the region. Combining this work with the use of ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and activist anthropology, we were able to take an interdisciplinary approach to archaeological analysis (Gumerman and Phillips 1978; Sinopoli 1991; Kelso 1993; Guttman-Bond and Kluiving 2015; Ralph 2013). The ultimate goal of this interdisciplinary study was to highlight the importance of La Mina petroglyphs as well as give voice to the people who created and continue to protect them. The La Mina petroglyphic site is located just northwest of the Rio de Cubuy in the foothills of the La Mina mountain (see Figure 1.1). It lies at the edge of the Luquilllo Mountain Ethnoarchaeology is the ethnographic study of peoples for archaeological reasons, usually through the study of the material remains of a society (see David and Kramer 2001). 3  Ethnogeology is the scientific study of human relationships with and including systems of knowledge related to the earth system, typically conducted in the context of a specific community or culture. Ethnogeological research synthesizes field- and laboratory-based and bibliographic methods from both geoscience (e.g., mapping, stratigraphy, materials analyses, environmental chemistry) and ethnography (e.g., participant observations, interviews, participatory mapping) (see Semken et al. 2016). 4  Activist anthropology is a disciplinary approach that believes activism can enhance anthropological research by reframing the conversation. More specifically, it foregrounds participants as holders of knowledge (see Borda 2006), deconstructs boundaries between the academic world and the real world (see Chambers 1998), and challenges us vs. them and proper vs. improper cultural practices and their interpretations. 2 

1  Since 2002, the island has operated on a deficit budget each year and between 2005–2013 it saw its overall population decrease by 11% (Chirinko, Chiu, and Henderson 2019). These trends led Congress to announce and pass the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act in 2016, which created a U.S. supervising fiscal board, a series of lawsuits, and further destabilization of the local economy.

1

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Loíza

Reference Map

Santa Bárbara Carolina

Río Grande

Canóvanas

Bartolo

Luquillo

Palmer

Las Croabas

Ramos

Campo Rico

Fajardo Luis M. Cintrón

Celada

Lomas

Gurabo

La Mina Juncos

Aguas Claras

Duque

El Mangó Peña Pobre

Cueva del Indio

Ceiba

Hippie Hole

Daguao

Río Blanco

Naguabo

San Lorenzo Las Piedras

La Fermina Humacao

Bajandas

Buena Vista

Comunas

Scale 0

20

40

Martorell

Playita 60

Palmas del Mar

Regional Site Locations

Yabucoa

80

Major Roads

El Negro

Kilometers Palo Seco

Legend

Municipalities

Maunabo

Figure 1.1. La Mina regional site map.

range near the El Yunque National Forest, which causes the site to experience both tropical and humid climates. Coined La Mina by locals, this region (including both the mountain and site) was originally named after a historic mine, now abandoned, in the mountain just north of the site. Local informants suggested that the La Mina site had been continuously occupied by a variety of peoples, including preTaíno permanent settlements and temporary Taíno settlements; Spanish coffee and tobacco plantations;5 and later organized into a privatized homestead in the Barrio Cubuy of the Naguabo municipality.

studied.6 Pané’s (1999) colonial chronicles made brief mention of fleeing Taíno peoples entering this region during Spanish conquest and colonization periods; however, other than this reference, no specific known historical documentation exists for the La Mina site. Though other archaeologists have toured the La Mina site (Frassetto 1960; Rodríguez Álvarez 1991), including a few academics from the University of Puerto Rico (Mayagüez in 2014), none of them decided to study or publish about it (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018). Besides this project and Caudwell’s longitudinal photographic study,

Though the La Mina petroglyph boulder is well known by locals, the overall site has never been systematically

It is worth noting that in Rodríguez Álvarez’s (1991) Actas del XIV Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Arqueología del Caribe presentation titled “A classification scheme for the Puerto Rico petroglyphs,” there was a previously unpublished 1960s photo of the La Mina boulder, which he attributed to Frassetto (1960). 6 

5  Further evidence of this occupation was supported by the abundance of breadfruit and coffee trees located at the site.

2

Defining Interdisciplinarity in Archaeology

Figure 1.2. NW face of the La Mina boulder by Frassetto, circa 1957.

no other research (amateur or professional) has occurred at site. Given the lack information about La Mina and the limited amount of rock art studies in the Naguabo region, this project has the potential to significantly contribute to the cultural understanding of natives occupying this area.

That said, in order to meet the goals of this project, we developed the following research question:

Objectives of Study

Based on this question, we developed the following research objectives:

1. What is the cultural context and significance of the La Mina petroglyph site?

Research Justification

1. Understand and/or construct an ethnoarchaeological, ethnogeological, and activist anthropological context for the La Mina site and its surroundings; 2. Identify the cultural and temporal phases of the represented rock art and classify their symbolic and stylistic elements; and 3. Determine how La Mina fits into the greater boulder art sequence for ancient Puerto Rico.

The enormous amount of scholarly literature currently dedicated to interdisciplinarity in archaeology attests to its increased influence in the field and its importance as a theoretical framework for interpreting archaeological sites (Sinopoli 1991). Combining our 2015 fieldwork with the interdisciplinary fields of ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and anthropological activism offers a more holistic approach to analysing La Mina’s people and material culture. In addition to these socio-cultural factors, the significance of this work lies in the fact that the La Mina petroglyphs are disappearing due to dissolution weathering associated with precipitation (see Figures 1.2 and 1.3). Speaking with members of the community and local informants and reviewing Caudwell’s prior work have illustrated a significant loss of glyphs over the past 50 years, which further substantiated the need for an immediate detailed analysis of the site.

To address the research question and objectives, we adopted a variety of methods, including petroglyphic classification methods created by Rodríguez Alvarez’s (1988) and Roe (2005) as well as Roe’s methodology for drawing petroglyphs to scale on heavy gauge clear plastic. We also combined Chanlatte-Baik’s (2013) and Roe and Hayward’s (2009) cultural chronologies to create a cultural sequence for the site. weathering features such as dissolution weathering, localized mass wasting, and biogeochemical accretions have affected or can potentially affect the site. Dissolution weathering has created dissolution channels in the face of La Mina, which appear to be part of the carving itself. However, this tendency for erosion is degrading the depth of the carvings over time and placing the future of La Mina at risk. Existence of significant organic decomposition on top of La Mina, in the form of decaying breadfruit, likely increases the dissolution weathering via decrease in pH. La Mina is proximal to mapped and documented geological faults that may have caused localized mass wasting (local cave collapse, movement of overburden boulders, etc.), thereby altering the site since the time of the carvings. Lastly, small clastics growths were documented on the carved portion of the glyph, indicating an active biogeochemical process that has occurred since the glyphs were carved. These post-carving growths may serve as a potential for dating.

As can be seen from a comparative analysis of both photos, the loss of glyphs over the last fifty years is quite evident. If left undocumented, the weathering process has the potential to further destroy diagnostic details of the petroglyphs.7 Thus, our goal is to collect and disseminate our data results before further information is lost to history. This site represents several geomorphological conditions important to understanding the local archaeological relevance as well as factors of importance to the larger archaeological community. Erosional and

7 

3

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 1.3. NW face of the La Mina boulder.

As part of this study, we documented all known petroglyphs and site features located within the site terminus (i.e., the previously unrecorded glyphs on La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders, the upper Cacique cave, and miscellaneous glyphs found on rocks along the unnamed streams bisecting the site). Additionally, we documented surrounding/known petroglyph sites (i.e., Hippie Hole and the Cueva del Indio archaeological site) as well as those documented previously by the National Register of Historical Places (NRHP) and other scholars (Rodríguez Alvarez 1988). As previously mentioned, we also collected ethnographic data to support our archaeological and geological data sets as well as used high-resolution imagery, global positioning systems (GPS), geographical information systems (GSI) with ESRI ArcMap, and field sketches to provide a detailed analysis and interpretation of the site. In sum, during this study, we accomplished the following tasks:

The archaeological and geological Phase I survey is only part of the story of this site. As this book will demonstrate, the value of engaging the local community through our use of ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and activist anthropology significantly enhanced the meaning and interpretation of this site. Organization of Study This study is divided into six chapters. Chapter two presents archaeological, ethnographic, and historical research previously conducted in and around the La Mina site. Chapter three examines the ethnogeological, geological, environmental settings and the role that they had in the development of the site. Chapter four presents the field and laboratory methods used for this study, including those employed by Cauldwell’s photographic study (2006–2018) and all other interdisciplinary methods used on the analysis of remains (e.g., details about the La Mina: Petroglyph Catalogue, Lab Photo Log: Geological Samples, and the Lab Photo Log: Archaeological Remains). Chapter five presents the analysis and interpretation of the site. We described and quantified elements of each petroglyph and grouped them into the aforementioned chronologies to identify site function, use, and cultural occupations. Tables are provided for archaeological and geological findings to explain their representation at the site. Summaries are provided for all diagnostic classifications to explain their importance and group them in their respective chronological sequences. Chapter six uses activist anthropology to contextualize our involvement in the greater La Mina/Naguabo community in the post-2017 hurricane era and beyond. Finally, appendixes A-E provide additional resources for interpreting data sets from this project, including definitions, petroglyph descriptions, tables, photographs, and drawings.

1. Analyzed Caudwell’s photographic study of the existing petroglyphs within the site terminus and compared them to 2015 photographs; 2. Mapped surface characteristics of La Mina site, including its associated terraces (T1–3) using both GPS receiver/GIS points and tape and compass measurements; 3. Assessed subsurface composition through test pitting and geological analysis along a 49 meter transect (T1) and in areas of high site probability; 4. Collected surface and sub-surface samples for various locations across the site to interpret the La Mina’s occupation periods;8 and 5. Documented and comparatively analysed La Mina temporal site function(s) with our aforementioned interdisciplinary approach.

8  Cueva del Indio site archaeologist Sr. Victor Torres now curates all artifacts from the site.

4

2 Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina Limitations on Puerto Rican Rock Art Research

cave art does as a form of landscape communication technology (Houston 2004). (24–25)

Though scholars have documented Caribbean petroglyphs since the twentieth century (Pinart 1979; Dumont 1876; Krug 1878), few projects have focused specifically on Puerto Rico. During the early 1900s, a collection of seminal rock art studies was conducted by Stahl (1889) and Fewkes (1907) and later by Frassetto (1960), Rouse (1982, 1992), Alegría (1965), Dávila (1976), and Martinez Torres (1981). Among these foundational studies, only Frassetto and Fewkes dealt with the classification of localized Puerto Rican rock art.9 In recent years, cultural resource management (CRM) firms and government professionals have been the dominant contributors to advancements of rock art research on the island (Dubelaar et al. 1999). This has been partially due to the lack of funding (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018) and a perceived bias against rock art in academic circles (Michelle Hayward, pers. comm.).10 It is worth noting that the marginalization of rock art studies in the Caribbean has been further inhibited by its continued reliance on Eurocentric colonial documents and the lack of a universal rock art typology and/or classification method. As Samson et al. (2017) stated,

Despite its issues, many scholars have argued that rock art uniquely highlights the interconnectedness and acculturation of native worldviews and cosmologies in Puerto Rico that other diagnostic artifacts and monumental architecture can only partially address (Brady and Prufer 2005; Morales and Quesenberry 2005). It is worth reiterating that no universal typology of rock art exists across North America or the Caribbean. However, using the work of Frassetto (1960), Rouse (1982, 1992), Alegría (1965), and Roe (2005) works, scholars have begun classifying rock carvings into three general types: pictograph, rock paintings, and petroglyphs (Roe 2005; Dubelaar 1986; Hayward, Atkinson, and Cinquino 2009; Pagán Perdomo 1978). Still, the lack of a universal typology has hindered the development of a reliable temporal sequence in the archaeological record. That said, most modern scholars commonly reference Roe’s (2005) rock art typology, which is based on stylistic traits; however, more work in this area is necessary if we are to truly have a united classification method. To take steps towards a solution to this issue, we have also adopted Rodríguez Álvarez’s (1988) typology from Rio Blanco to supplement Roe’s work, when needed. As scholar Alice V. M. Samson argued ‘cumulative work on Puerto Rican rock art, including [work] done by colleagues such as Reniel Rodriguez Ramos at the University of Puerto Rico [and others], will eventually mean that we will be in a better position to refine these chronologies in future’ (Alice V. M. Samson, pers. comm.). We believe that Puerto Rican rock art research is at a turning point. If we are to better contextualize the sites in this area, we must be willing to invest in more projects and agree upon a universal temporal classification method. As an attempt to create an inclusive method of analysis, our book employs a combination of current standards, including Alvarez’s (1988) and Roe’s (2005) rock art typologies; Roe and Hayward’s (2009) and ChanlatteBaik’s (2013) cultural chronologies; and ethnoarchaeological and ethnogeological work, as well as some significant studies that have contributed to the joint understanding of rock art in this region (e.g., Dubelaar et al. 1999). The rest of this chapter provides an interdisciplinary look at the archaeological, ethnographic, and historical settings of this region in order to construct a more comprehensive site history.

Across the islands, Caribbean cave art is characterized by a diverse yet widely-shared corpus of iconographic themes (Dubelaar 1986) … Iconography is rarely representational … and depicts schematized humananimal-plant figures, prominent facial imagery, often sprouting appendages, and a range of iterated forms with internal patterning. Scholarly interpretation either relies on Pané’s account as a crib sheet to translate motifs (Abreu et al. 2011) or dismisses the same as a Eurocentric perspective at best relevant to northern Hispaniola at the end of the fifteenth century. Despite a long history of Caribbean rock art research (Dubelaar 1986; Hayward, Atkinson, and Cinquino 2009; Pagán Perdomo 1978), interpretive progress is challenged by a lack of secure chronological data, and scientific analysis of production techniques, processes, and materials. Cave art and its attendant activities float disconnectedly alongside other aspects of daily life, as is the case in many world regions (Bahn 2010; Chippindale and Taçon 1998). This is a first stage in building better interpretive hypotheses about what

Contextualizing La Mina

As was mentioned in chapter one, Rodríguez Alvarez’s (1991) rock art typology is the only known source to contain a 1960s photo of the La Mina boulder. 10  Some scholars, like Hayward, believe that academics consider rock art to be too subjective and/or unnecessary for cultural reconstruction (Michele Hayward, pers. comm.). 9 

The El Yunque region is characterized by its limited archaeological research, conflicting cultural classifications, complex geology, steep topography, 5

¡El Yunque se levanta! The Archaeological Setting

boulder-laden rivers, and mountainous terrain. This complicated matrix offered its earliest pre-Columbian peoples (i.e., Huecan Saladoid, Cedrosan Saladoid, and Elenan/Ostionan Ostionoid) as well as the later Taíno populations the ability to develop complex societies and artistry, including detailed rock art. However, the lack of written records has led archaeologists, ethnographers, and historians to assume the principle role of interpreting those cultures. As one would suspect, differing schools of thought and different disciplinary approaches have created competing models for interpreting sites, which have impacted (both positively and negatively) the interpretations of rock art and cultural sequencing at La Mina.

The Saladoids and Huecoids (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 600) Indigenous peoples, identified by archaeologists as MesoIndian archaic/preagroceramic peoples, began to arrive in Puerto Rico during the third and fourth centuries B.C.E. (García Goyco n.d.-a). Archaeologist Froleich Rainey (1936) introduced the first cultural schema for the Antilles, based on the classification of dietary eating habits (i.e., shell vs. crab cultures). This classification system was quickly replaced by Rouse’s 1950s ceramic typology, which grouped native occupations by ceramic diagnostic elements and Saladoid cultural developments (Rouse 1992). Rouse’s typological model remained the principle foundation for most temporal classifications in Puerto Rico until 1977 when the Centro de Investigaciones Arqueológicas discovered the La Hueca site on the island of Vieques and introduced a new Saladoid sub-classification, the Huecoids. Archaeologist Luis A. Chanlatte-Baik (2013) challenged Rouse’s classification with his creation of a chronological sequence that separated the Huecoids and Saladoids as two distinct cultural groups. ChanlatteBaik’s argument was that the Huecoids, who had been previously classified as Huecan Saladoid, were, in fact, a separate cultural group from a different region of South America. Chanlatte-Baik suggested that the first farmerpotters to settle Puerto Rico were the Huecoids, originally from the middle and lower Orinoco basin of Venezuela, who brought with them artistic representations of the Andean condor and simplified cross-incised pottery styles from the Andes. Chanlatte-Baik argued that the Saladoids (known locally as Ingerí) then colonized Puerto Rico after, or possibly during, the Huecoid occupation. A simplified version of Chanlatte-Baik’s chronological sequence is outlined in Table 2.1.

The Archaeological Marginalization of La Mina Given that La Mina is located on private land, this site has been relatively unknown to archaeologists. The initial desktop analysis for the La Mina project was conducted between August 2014 and September 2015. Resources utilized for this analysis included a review of the following information: • A collection of ethnographic data from locals living in the area (Summer 2014); • A review of scholarship about Caribbean and Puerto Rican boulder art, such as Pinart (1979), Frassetto (1960), and Roe (1980); • A review of NRHP; • A review of online Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office and Instituto Cultura Puertoriquena records; • A review of the 1988 United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps of Puerto Rico; and • A review of available Puerto Rico GIS layers.

It must be said that not all archaeologists agree with Chanlatte-Baik’s new classification. Scholars such as Roe and Hayward (2009) continue to ascribe to Rouse’s typology and associated argument for a single Saladoid occupation, devoid of a separate Huecoid cultural group. To illustrate this point, we have also included Roe and Hayward’s temporal classifications for comparision here in Table 2.2.

The search indicated that four sites were listed on NRHP in the Municipio of Naguabo where the La Mina site is located. Of the sites on the NRHP list, only one was archaeological, the Icacos Petroglyph Group (#15000855). During this search and in our subsequent ethnographic interviews with locals and town officials, no known historical records were located for the La Mina site; however, the co-authors did observe an historical milling road along the southern terminus of the site, supporting the oral histories that La Mina was once the site of a historic plantation.11 Besides the Rodríguez Alvarez (1991) photo of La Mina and the unpublished photographic study of the site conducted by co-author Rex Caudwell, this site has stayed relatively undocumented and minimally researched.

Adding to this debate, another theory proposed by scholar Osvald García Goyco (n.d.-a, n.d.-b) argued that a proto-Maya group, traveling from what is now Belize, arrived on the island circa 4000 B.C.E. He also suggested that a second wave of settlers, an Arawak-speaking people from the Amazon, presumably a combination of Huecoids and Saladoids, migrated from what is presentday Venezuela and spread throughout Puerto Rico, circa 2150 B.C.E. 12 As can be seen, disagreements persist between archaeologists about the post-Archaic settlers of

The current landowner, Senior Alex Lopez Rodriguez, indicated that the road was over one hundred years old and was once used during the plantation phase of La Mina.

12  It is possible that a proto-Maya group settled the region and were the MesoIndian archaic/preagroceramic people to whom García Goyco referred earlier, but that is still debatable.

11 

6

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina Table 2.1. Antellean Formative Period (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1492) Cultural Period

Corresponding Material Culture Periods

Archaic Period (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 460)

Preceramic (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 500) Aceramic (C.E. 500 – 1400)

Agroalfarero Periods (500 B.C.E. – C.E. 1492)

Agroalfarero I – La Huenca/Huecoids (~C.E. 170 – 700) and Saladoid (~C.E. 700) occupations Agroalfarero II – Ostionoid/PreTaíno occupation

Table 2.2. Roe and Hayward Chronology (4000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1524) Culture / People Chronological Period

Calendric Dates

Sequence 1

Sequence 2

Lithic Age

4000 – 2000 B.C.E.

Lithic Age Complexes

Lithic Age Complexes

Archaic Period

2000 – 300 B.C.C.

Archaic Cultures

Archaic Cultures

First Phase

300 B.C.E. – 350/400 C.E.

Early Saladoid

Early Saladoid

Second Phase

350/400 – 600 C.E.

Late Saladoid

Epi-Saladoid

First Phase

600 – 900 C.E.

Early Ostionoid

Epi-Saladoid

Second Phase

900 – 1200 C.E.

Late Ostionoid

Pre-Taíno

Contact Period

1200 – 1500 C.E.

Later/Latest Ostionoid

Taíno

Contact Period

1500 – 1524 C.E.

Classic Taíno

Historic Taíno

Early Ceramic

Late Ceramic

Source. Adapted from Peter G. Roe and Michele H. Hayward (2009), courtesy of Dennise Rodríguez-Ávila.

Puerto Rico. In order to simplify these inconsistencies, we have elected to combine these theories into one universal chronology presented later in this volume (see chapter five).

population, site complexity, and the spread from coastal communities to additional inland settlements across the island (Cancel-Sepúlveda 2008; Roe 2005). As the population boomed, increased social stratifications resulted in the first monumental architecture documented on the island, ball courts. Roe (2005) suggested that it was during this time that rock art emerged as a predominant form of cultural expression. As Roe elaborated: ‘[during the Ostionoid occupation] artisans and patrons attention shifted from the “lateral view” (shape-shifting were-animal spirits) evocative of the earlier egalitarian society, toward a “vertical view” of more powerful humans above one’s state and in control of one’s life’ (289). It is worth noting that elements of Roe’s hypothesis can clearly be seen in glyphs at the La Mina site. When comparing petroglyphs on the La Mina boulder with those on the Chief’s Head boulder, you can see a clear transition between the lateral and vertical focus of glyphs (see chapter five). On the La Mina boulder, the lateral focus is clearly seen through the depiction of spiritual elements of life, including the birthing of the world and animal spirits; whereas on the Chief’s Head boulder, carved by Ostionoid/ PreTaíno and Taíno peoples, glyphs represent more of the vertical focus, including carvings of chiefs, burials, and the sun (see chapter five). As such, we believe the most likely settlement sequence for the La Mina site was a combination of Huecoids/Saladoids peoples, then a reoccupation period by a smaller group of the Ostionoid/PreTaíno peoples, and then, finally, a colonial resettlement of the site by the Taíno, of which the latter group is discussed next.

Despite the differing schools of thought, scholars agree that the Saladoids and Huecoids brought with them South American and Amazonian traditions, including agricultural practices, rock art, ceramic types/styles, ceremonial practices, and animalistic cosmological beliefs (Curet 2006; Chanlatte-Baik 2013; Roe, Hayward, and Cinquino 2018). By approximately 300 B.C.E., Puerto Rico and the rest of the Antilles were comprised of thriving communities and complex, interconnected settlements. According to Rouse and Alegría (1990) the Saladoids, who included both the Saladoids and Huecoids described by Chanlatte-Baik (2013), colonized the West Indies, often conquering, absorbing, or killing the archaic, preagroceramic peoples. Recent evidence suggests that Rouse and Alegría’s Saladoids may have also coexisted with, acculturated elements of, and probably intermarried with archaic groups during the Andean colonization process (García Goyco n.d.-b). As will be seen later in this book, we believe that the La Mina site contains both Saladoid/Huecoid occupation(s). The Ostionoids/PreTaíno Peoples (C.E. 600 – C.E. 1200) The Ostionoid/PreTaíno occupation, viewed in sites like Punta Ostiones, Cabo Rojo, Santa Elena, Toa Baja, and Esperanza, was marked by a drastic increase in 7

¡El Yunque se levanta! The Historical Setting

in 1492, the Spaniards, in their attempts to achieve social, political, and economic domination, proceeded with the conquest and acquisition of the Caribbean and later mainland (see Figure 2.1).

Due to the lack of historical records for La Mina, we believe a broader context for Spanish conquest and colonization is needed to create a more holistic interpretation for the site. According to the Florida Museum of Natural History (FLMNH):

Beginning in the early sixteenth century, the Spanish royal family requested hundreds of men to travel to, document, and conquer the lands across the Atlantic. These men, known as the conquistadors, a group that included military men, theologians, chroniclers, and intellectuals, were both fascinated and appalled by the complexities of New World social and religious practices. As information reached Europe about New World wealth and riches, subjects of the Spanish crown traveled west for the opportunity to attain aspects of New World social, political, and economic success. As a result of the underlying ideological notions of European superiority in social, religious, and cultural affairs, along with the newly transplanted Spanish immigrants’ need for “God, Gold, and Glory,” New World natives were forced to adhere to Spanish religious and societal demands, ultimately transforming their traditional societal structures. As Rogers (2004) stated,

The Taíno of the Greater Antilles represented the last stage of the Ostionoid cultural tradition. By about AD 1100–1200, the Ostionoid people of Hispaniola lived in a wider and more diverse geographic area than did their predecessors; their villages were larger and more formally arranged, farming was intensified, and a distinctive material culture developed. They developed rich and vibrant ritual and artistic traditions that are revealed in Taíno craftsmanship...Social stratification is thought to have become more pronounced and rigid during this period as well. This stage of intensification and elaboration after AD 1100 is known as “Taíno.” The Taíno people, as characterized by archaeologists, were not a unified society, and have been categorized into subdivisions according to the degree of elaboration in their artistic and social expression. The Central or “Classic” Taínos are identified with the most complex and intensive traditions, and are represented archaeologically by “Chican-Ostionoid” material culture. They occupied much of Hispaniola [and Puerto Rico]. The “Western” Taíno occupied central Cuba, Jamaica, and parts of Hispaniola, and are also associated archaeologically with the “OstionoidMeillacan” material tradition. The Lucayan Taíno lived in the Bahamas, and the “Eastern” Taíno are thought to have lived in regions of the Virgin Islands and the Leeward Islands of the Lesser Antilles. (Florida Museum 2018, para. 4–5)

With the fall of Granada in 1492, and Queen Isabella’s expulsion (or forced conversion) of the Jewish population in the same year, Spain was left with the task of refocusing its crusading mindset. Implementing the expansionistic attitude that brought Spain territorial unity and wealth in the days of Moorish conquest, Spain set out to obtain wealth, spread Christianity, and implement proper European societal practices throughout the world... Deeming this expansion as a worldwide crusade to save the newly discovered nonChristian peoples (Cline 1993), Spain and Portugal, with the authority of the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494, divided the world between themselves to obtain wealth and spread Christian doctrine. (112)

The period of interchange and societal complexity described previously was significantly transformed by fifteenth century Spanish conquest and colonization. The following section articulates the impacts of Spanish mentalities of conquest and its reconfiguration of Taíno culture.

Writers of early New World history can be divided into two general subheadings, romanticists and scientific analysers.14 Romanticists such as Christopher Columbus and Fray Ramón Pané approached the study of Native American customs with preconceived religious and philosophical notions of natives as uncivilized barbarians, incapable of developing complex social systems independent of European or Asian contacts. These chroniclers tended to focus on the aesthetically appealing aspects of native life (e.g., artistry and dress), while openly condemning New World social practices and religious customs (Rogers

Impacts of Spanish Mentalities of Conquest on Puerto Rican Natives As a direct result of Old World notions of ingrained cultural superiority, the Spanish considered themselves to be more advanced, both religiously and socially, than societies without a Christian ideological foundation (Rogers 2004). Changes in religious and ideological attitudes towards the end of the fifteenth century thrust European countries into a process of reformation and expansionism. With the onset of the exploration movement culminating with the “discovery”13 of the New World by Christopher Columbus

Columbian enterprise was the first to demonstrate the potential that New World lands had for creating wealth and power to interested parties in Europe. 14  Both categorizations are based on the criteria established in the given text: Robert M. Carmack, Janine Gasoc, and Gary H. Gossen, The Legacy of Mesoamerica: History and Culture of a Native American Civilization (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996), 21–3. We have categorized as scientific analysers those writers referred to as scientific precursors in the original volume. The term scientific precursors suggests that Europe prior to this time was not involved with scientific thought; therefore we chose to change the categorization to scientific analysers to bring more clarity to the subject.

13  Christopher Columbus was not the first European to set foot on American soil. Many explorers before him (e.g., Leaf Erickson) reached the American coast before Columbus’s journey. Although this is true, the

8

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina

Figure 2.1. Locations of the cultures in the Caribbean when Columbus arrived.

2004). Believing that implementing European culture would effectively transform heathen native societies, romanticists manipulated traditional native customs in hopes of bringing cultural conformity and of creating an arena for Spanish domination. In contrast, writers of the scientific analysers group (e.g., Bartolomé de Las Casas) attempted to employ more systematic and objective interpretations of Spanish contact. Although still heavily laden with subjective ideologies of Christianization and conquest, these writers attempted to develop mentalities reflecting a more compassionate approach to the treatment of indigenous peoples. Seeing Spanish mistreatment of Indians as an abomination against fundamental Christian ideals, de Las Casas proved to be the first substantial combatant to the commonly held ethnocentric mentalities regarding the natives of the New World. Illustrating an opposing view for promoting Christianity, de Las Casas proposed the use of religion as a tool for supporting the indigenous cultures rather than unilaterally condemning it. As de Las Casas (1974) stated:

taught them the work of God. They have been endowed with excellent conduct, and before the coming of the Spaniards…they had political states that were well founded on beneficial laws. Furthermore, they are so skilled in every mechanical art…their skillfully fashioned work of superior refinement awaken the admiration of all nations, because works proclaim a man’s talent…. (43–5) Although still driven by the need for native religious conversion, de Las Casas’s writings are still considered some of the best narratives for documenting native customs and traditions in contrast to Pané’s more Eurocentric focus (Rogers, 2004). Given the mentalities surrounding conquest, it is important to recognize the power that Spanish writers had (and have) on the interpretation of native peoples, and, ultimately, on our interpretation of the La Mina site. As co-author Cauldwell (2015b) wrote,

[Are we permitted to treat the Indians as nonhumans?]…Is this the way to impose the yoke of Christ on Christian men? Is this the way to remove wild barbarism for the minds of barbarians? It is not, rather, to act like thieves, cut-throats, and cruel plunderers and to drive the gentlest of people headlong into despair? The Indian race is not that barbaric, nor are they dull witted or stupid, but they are easy to teach and very talented in learning all the liberal arts, and very ready to accept, honor, and observe the Christian religion and correct their sins (as experience has taught) once priests have introduced them to the sacred mysteries and

When returning to Hispaniola on his second voyage to the New World, Columbus followed the southern coast of Puerto Rico (Selections from Peter Martyr, 1998, pg 54), turned north, followed the coastline and put into a bay somewhere on the “far western edge” of [the island]. The natives call this island Borinquen – Columbus calls it San Juan Bautista – today, we call it Puerto Rico. A large number of people went on shore – but the local inhabitants fled before them. Word may have spread across the island that those in the “big canoes” were kidnapping people (as the Spanish had a habit of doing) or they could have fled due to Columbus 9

¡El Yunque se levanta! having some Caribs (known to be cannibals) onboard (Dr. Chanca to the People of Seville in 1493)15… [For better or worse, Columbus’] famous letter[s] and Pané’s Chronicles are regarded as the first “scientific observations” of the native inhabitants of the Caribbean.

write a record of their lives and beliefs (Columbus, 1847, 169). As part of his work, Pané began naming specific caves in Hispaniola from where indigenous peoples believed the first humans emerged and where they traditionally believed the sun and the moon were born. It is also important to note that Pané (1992) made the first reference to rock art in the New World, describing a painted cave (‘toda pintada a su modo’) called Iguaboina, where objects with ancestral agency (zemís/gods) resided (17). Though he did not specifically mention La Mina in his narratives, Pané’s descriptions of rock art gives meaning to the spiritual elements informing the creations of glyphs at sites, an analytical point we use in our chapter five analysis.

Shortly after Columbus began writing about the New World, in 1494, Pané’s (1999) Account of the Antiquities of the Indians became the first chronicle to discuss Taíno culture and beliefs. A ‘humble friar’ who accompanied Cristobal Colon (Christopher Columbus) on his second voyage to the New World, Pané’s accounts were not always accurate but remain significant when interpreting traditional Puerto Rican indigenous beliefs and cultural stratifications (1–2). Since much of the pre-Columbian history of Puerto Rico was either written in stone or conveyed orally, for better or worse, Pané’s accounts act as the principal colonial interpretation of Taíno culture, leaving very little native cultural legacy on which to build in modern scholarship, a point reaffirmed later in this chapter.

In addition to the dominant European theological mentality of the time, the political and economic situation of Spain greatly influenced the treatment of New World peoples. Reconquista Spain revered military achievements and economic status achieved through conquest and expansionism in Christ’s name (Rogers 2004). More than their counterparts in other European nation-states in the making, taking part in crusades exposed Spaniards to justifications for destroying foreign cultural beliefs and societal practices for the purpose of Christianization. As Cauldwell (2015b) stated,

Beginning with Columbus’s works and continuing with Pané writings, the European consciousness was influenced by a biased interpretation of Taíno life, which ultimately led to the acceptability of its destruction. Columbus’s diary of his first voyage, which he submitted to the Spanish crown upon his return to Spain, illustrated the power and negative perspective that his interpretation of Christianity caused in regards to the description of New World Indians:

The Taíno liked gold for its beauty, but they used it to make jewelry [and create offerings]. To the Spaniards gold was very valuable, and the Taínos helped Ponce de Leon and his men search for the gold they wanted… Later [,] Ponce de Leon went back to Hispaniola. He returned to San Juan in 1509, bringing more settlers and their families. He was named governor by the King of Spain. The Spaniards decided to take over the island because of the gold in its rivers and mines. They did [not] ask permission of the Taínos, nor did they treat them as people who had been kind to them [years earlier]; instead, they treated the Taínos as slaves. The Taínos, once free, now were forced to work for the Spaniards whether they liked it or not.

May Your Highness believe that in the whole world there cannot be better or more gentle people [than the Natives]. [Although dwelling in houses resembling Moorish huts, and exhibiting uncivilized societal characteristics] Your highness should take much joy in that soon you will make them Christians and will have instructed them in the good customs of your realms. (Columbus 1847, 273) Stressing various analogies of uncivilized behavior, many descriptions of Indians by early New World chroniclers depicted them as heathens and practicing various barbaric customs. We can also see this affirmed in Pané’s (1999) writing: ‘All the majority of the people…have many zemís [gods] of various sorts…they are made of stone and wood…Those simple, ignorant people believe that those idols – or, more properly speaking, demons – make such things happen because they have no knowledge of our holy faith’ (21).

Within a generation of conquest, Taíno caciques (chiefs) and communities had been reorganized under the forced conversion to Christianity and the Spanish encomienda system.16 The personal labor service clause of the encomienda, a bylaw which 16th century theologian Bartolomé de Las Casas equated to native slavery, forced the Taínos into grueling work conditions and unbearable treatment (Cauldwell, Rogers, and Schuetz, 2016). ‘The people of many towns were forced [to work] and tortured,

Though much of Pané’s writing was interwoven with ways to evangelize the Taíno people and condemnations of their beliefs, his work offers some of the first insights into the Taíno cosmological worldview (Pané, 1999, xii). His assignment was to live among the natives of Hispaniola and learn their language, document their customs, and

16  de Las Casas, in many of his works, condemned the activities of the encomienda, arguing that they were not created for the benefit of the Indian but as an institution of control and exploitation. He believed that the work the Indians were required to do reduced them to nothing more than slaves (see Bartolomé de Las Casas, In Defense of the Indians: The Defense of the Most Reverend Lord, Don Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas, of the Order of Preachers, Late Bishop of Chiapa, Against the Persecutors and Slanderers of the Peoples of the New World Discovered Across the Seas., trans and ed. Stafford Poole (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1974 [1552–1553]), 47.

15  Dr. Chanca was a well-educated, well respected, physician to King Ferdinand and Isabella and sailed with Columbus on his second voyage; later Columbus attributes Dr. Chanca with his life.

10

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina were hanged and burned because they did not want to leave idolatry, and unwillingly they received the gospel of faith’ (Columbus, 1847, 169). Fear of death and/or torture led many natives to publicly claim the acculturation of Spanish ideologies and to privately practice their own beliefs. Local informants have suggested that the Taínos fled Spanish persecution and ended up in the interior mountains of Puerto Rico, including the resettlement of the La Mina site.

academic archaeology, and suggest possible bridges towards more inclusive practices…[we believe that] [c]ollaborative work provides meaningful dialogue and opportunities for Natives and non-Natives to learn from each other. (117–23) Given the limited amount of knowledge about La Mina and our interest in giving voice to the greater La Mina/Naguabo community, we elected to take a more ethnoarchaeology approach in the remaining sections of this chapter to create a more inclusive interpretation of the Taíno past and present.

The Ethnographic Setting It is worth noting that towards the end of the 19th century historians and archaeologists began to develop more inclusive practices for identifying Taíno peoples and their cultures (Brinton 1871; Hy 1887; Bourne 1906; Fewkes 1907; de Booy 1919). However, aspects of their work still utilized Eurocentric beliefs of civilized vs. uncivilized behaviors (Rogers, 2004). According to FLMNH,

The Taíno: An Ethnohistorical Interpretation In order to understand Taíno ethnoarchaeology, we must first contextualize their native worldview and how if differs from Western perspectives of religion and culture. First, the word Taíno, meaning “good people” in Arawak language, is typically used by archaeologists to identify the inhabitants of the Greater Antilles (Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola, and Puerto Rico) who first met Christopher Columbus during his exploration to the New World. Yet, to the Taíno themselves, the cultural meaning of the word Taíno is much deeper. As part of a larger ethnographic study (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018),17 Cacique Roberto Múkaro Borrero (2018), President of the United Confederation of Taíno People and Cacique of the Guainía Taíno Tribe, offered the following explanation:

Because the Taíno themselves did not practice writing, most of the information we have about the Taíno comes from the observations of fifteenth century Spaniards in Hispaniola. Our understanding of them is therefore undoubtedly skewed toward the Spanish point of view, and there is no doubt that the Taínos must certainly have had their own set of complex set of observations about the Spaniards [though not documented]. (Florida Museum 2018, para. 3)

…Taíno means “good people,” but not in the JudeoChristian sense where good is on one side of the spectrum and evil is on the other side of the spectrum… rather, we [Taíno people] are taking about “right action.” Good meaning how do [we] act in the context of the rest of the community…are [we] doing harm to the community or are [we] a positive influence on the community…[this is how] we use the term to describe ourselves and our communities.

This Eurocentric mentality was challenged by Rouse’s 1954 seminal work, The Taínos, which still stands as the foundational framework for interpreting Taíno culture (Alegría 1978; Allaire 1987; Anderson-Córdova 1991); however, Rouse’s assertion that Taíno peoples no longer existed (30) has led many scholars to exclude modern Taíno oral histories from their research. By doing so, many scholars (either by choice or disciplinary practice) have left out contemporary Taíno voices from modern site interpretations. As Rogers and Case (2017) stated,

In essence, native people consider themselves an integral part of the cosmos, a balancing element between humans and nature.18 More specifically, the gods bequeathed the

There are many reasons for this, including an international push towards scientific analysis of remains/artifacts rather than ethno-archaeological techniques; a resistance to post-modern/postprocessual ideals of relative dating; and conflicts between oral native, and written non-native histories… in so doing, [contemporary scholars] devalue, and many times exclude, the importance of native cultural interpretations…Therefore personal memories, local myths and community traditions often go unresearched and unrecorded by archaeologists…Sadly, tribal authority is often obscured and overlooked…With the post-modernist acceptance of historical relativism and the need for more diverse, post-colonial histories for Native peoples, scholars and non-scholars alike must begin to address power dynamics and proactively foster respect between tribal and academic experts. Doing so will allow us, Native and non-Native alike, to address the cultural discord and contention in tribal and

17  This ethnographic interview titled, The Taíno People and Puerto Rico in Historical Context, was part of a larger oral history/ethnographicallybased, grant-funded project co-directed by Dr. Rhianna C. Rogers (2018-present). The purpose of this ongoing project is to create short oral history videos and OERs (open education resources), that highlight important aspects of native culture. So far, these videos include discussions related to song and dance, native identity and values, women’s roles, native education, elder perspective, sovereignty, storytelling, family, and others. Representatives from various tribes have participated in the construction of this course, including the Annishnaabe, Algonquin, Seneca, Taíno, Ojibwe, Onondaga, and the Elnu Abenaki Tribe of Vermont. Rogers, along with Dr. Menoukha Case, Donald “Flip” White (Seneca elder), and Prof. Amber Rinehart are co-investigators of this project. To learn more, see https://www.youtube.com/channel/ UCR09HQOxWam-alf2l45P4jQ 18  The term cosmic dualism in the context of the Taíno can be defined as the reciprocating nature between the spiritual and natural worlds. Humans, as the major participant in the worldly process, are required to interact with the environment, the gods, and the spirit world in a constructive way, ensuring the longevity of the culture in the area (Rogers 2004).

11

¡El Yunque se levanta! world to natives, providing they maintain the balance of nature (i.e., caring for, protecting, and keeping the world sacred). As such, humans interact with the world both spiritually and physically to ensure its longevity and balance. This concept, as well as those described next, will be revisited when interpreting glyphs in chapter five.

worldview in mind: influences of animistic power, and with specific beliefs and guides that rule their lives. All prime materials – stone, wood, clay, shell and bone – were always given a special treatment, keeping harmony with nature. That extended a distinctive sign for that culture.

Unlike the separation of cultural occupations, as has been described so far in this text by archaeologists, Cacique Borrero (2018) argued that ALL people occupying the Caribbean were (and are) both spiritually and ancestrally connected and, thus, part of the same community. A clear illustration of this point comes, again, from Cacique Borrero:

This means the importance of the Taíno art objects, including rock art, lies in the symbolic and symbiotic interplay between religion, culture, and daily activities. At the La Mina site, we can see this cosmovision reflected in use and reuse of petroglyphs (see chapter five). At La Mina, the glyphic depiction of a Taíno cacique highlights the political importance of the site. Caciques governed Taíno culture in ~1200–1500 C.E., ruling over large regions, engaging in active commerce between islands, practicing complex religious and political beliefs, and adopting elaborate agricultural techniques (e.g., irrigation systems, cultivation of elevated lands) (Rouse 1992; Keegan and Carlson 2008; Oliver, McEwan, and Gilberga 2008; Deagan 2004). They were a complex hierarchical society with unique cultural stratifications: i.e., the Taíno cacique, followed in power by the bohique (shaman), then by the nitainos (social elites and warriors), then by the naborias (or commoners and workers) (Columbus (1847). Rouse (1992) explained that Taíno ‘villages were loosely organized into district chiefdoms, each ruled by one of the village chiefs in the district, and the district chiefdoms were in turn grouped into regional chiefdoms, each headed by the most prominent district chief’ (9). At the La Mina site, the Chief’s Head boulder contains visible representations of this chiefdom-based model (see Figure 2.2).

[When I discuss Taíno culture] I use an expanded view of the Caribbean…because I include the Greater and Lesser Antilles, the Bahamas, and the southern tip of Florida. They were all part of the ancestral territories of the Taíno peoples…the way [US] people think about the concept of nationalities [is not part of the Taíno cosmovision]…[Taíno] people think about other ways of connecting to the world around us [all]. [The term goes beyond its name and incorporates also how we interacting with members of other communities, the flora and fauna, the animals and plants as well as spiritual world or the energies [gods or zemís] that [Taíno] people [believe in and] interacted with over thousands and thousands of years…we view this as a kinship that goes beyond nationality. As this quote illustrates, Taíno culture believes it is an amalgamation of preTaíno/Taíno cultural customs and encompasses a larger PanIndian cosmovision. This cosmological worldview shows the direct connection Taíno people have with their ancestors. As will be discussed in chapter five, the religious components of the La Mina glyphs and the reoccupation and reuse of the La Mina site by various native groups suggest that they too believed in (and valued) connections to their ancestors. According to FLMNH, ‘many archaeologists have emphasized [that] the Taíno were but one of the recognizable cultural groups in the Caribbean at the time of contact. They co-existed and interacted with other Ostionan peoples and perhaps even Saladoid-influenced Archaic peoples, such as the Guanahatabey of Cuba and the Caribs of the Lesser Antilles’ (Florida Museum 2018, para. 4–5). Given these interactions, understanding how the cosmological worldview influences glyph creation is critical to the interpretation of La Mina.

This cacique glyph stood at one end of the La Mina site terminus near the plaza (see Figure 2.3). Local informants indicated that Upper Cacique Cave, located at the other end of the site terminus, might have functioned as a temporary settlement. In the center of the La Mina site was a large open space, which we have called a plaza, which may have been used for political meetings, dances, and religious ceremonies. Taínos believed in the existence of many deities, immortals who lived in the spirit world. Standing out among them is Yocahú, the male spirit, and his mother Atabei or Atabeira, the cosmic matriarch or principle female spirit (Pané 1999). Following this generalized concept of cosmic dualism, or the reciprocating balance between gender, life, and nature, the Taínos aspired to create a symbiotic society that incorporated mutual reciprocity and the gendered deities. As Cacique Borrero (2018) stated,

When Columbus reached the island, he encountered large, permanent villages in Puerto Rico, each governed by a cacique, yet his interpretations failed to explain the complex spiritual and political role that this title embodied. As Méndez-Bonilla (n.d.) suggested,

[Taíno people] see everything as alive and we don’t immediately relate that, at first, to a male energy [or god]. For us, the world is consistently renewing itself. You can see that from a fruit falling from a tree and it starts to rot, it looks ugly, and out of that, a new growth can come...God for us, that Great Spirit, started out as

[t]he Taíno ‘cosmovision,’ or worldview, comes from an ancient myth about creation of men and women, of the flora and fauna, of day and night and about life after death. Taíno objects were manufactured with this 12

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina

Figure 2.2. La Mina site – Chief’s Head boulder chief/cacique.

Figure 2.3. Possible La Mina plaza.

a female energy, which we say in our own language, Atabeira. She is the cosmic matriarch and out of her was born the sun and the planets…and from there we get the male energy Yocahú, who is the spirit of the yucca [and part of the cassava family].

interact with them in certain ways and this is all part of the Taíno way of looking at things…the way we look at life. Some people say cosmovision, some people say ways of knowing [but this is how we look at the world]. We see multiple zemís represented at the La Mina site (see Figure 2.4).

In addition to worshipping their gods, the Taínos paid homage to their ancestors, believing that they became protective spirits, also called zemís, upon death (Pané 1999). As described earlier, zemís, which are carved on stone, wood, shell or bone, were spirits who had the power to influence all aspects of Taíno life. As Borrero (2018) continued,

As can be seen by the representation of this zemís glyph, Taíno peoples ascribed a spiritual connection to the La Mina site. The use of stylized symbols at La Mina (e.g., anthropomorphic representations of the Cohoba ceremony, spirals, and zemís) clearly reflects this cosmological idea. As Méndez-Bonilla (n.d.) stated,

[Taíno people] connect to the world in other ways around us. We connect with the spiritual world, or energies [gods or zemís], as real. The same way that other people see them as real. We interact with those energies [gods or zemís], people call them spirits, we

In many cases, Taíno artifacts correspond to ceremonial paraphernalia. The zemís, or idol, is the iconographic object that represents the power of nature and was 13

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 2.4. Chief’s Head boulder – Bonayel glyph.

highly used in sympathetic magical rituals. Their magicreligious worldview was a factor in the high-volume of artifacts produced. Some artifacts, for example, were believed to make chiefdoms dominate the powers of nature (in the case of objects that represented the elements). With that panorama, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic zemís were made to represent spirits that control different aspects of nature. Zemís were used not only in religious and ceremonial activities – of oracles, and activities like shamanism and funeral practice – but also in music, dance, ball game, pottery, and domestic activities. (para. 2)

As highlighted in chapter one, co-author Rex Cauldwell’s photograph research project stands as the only longitudinal research prior to this study.19 As a 15-year resident of the Barrio Cabuy and an avid petroglyph photographer who previously lived less than 2 km from the site, Cauldwell understands La Mina site better than most.20 His connection to locals, his passion for preserving glyphic history, and his interest in the site were (and are) invaluable to the preservation of this site. Cauldwell’s photos offer a photographic history of the site now slowly being lost to time. This section will discuss Cauldwell’s photography study (2006–2018) and some of his pre2015 findings.

Using ethnoarchaeology to help interpret the religious iconographic elements at the La Mina site offers one way to construct a more inclusive history and interpretation for La Mina. As further illustrated in the following section, without an ethnoarchaeological approach, our project would have never happened.

19 

Excerpt from Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell (2018):

Somewhat serendipitously, while vacationing near the El Yunque in the summer of 2014, I (co-author Rhianna Rogers) ran across a flyer for daily petroglyphic tours. It was then that I met professional photographer and petroglyphic tour guide Rex Cauldwell. During our time together, Rex took me to a variety of archaeological and petroglyphic sites around the Barrio Cubuy and El Yunque, but I found nothing was quite so impressive as the La Mina boulder. Rex’s work at La Mina and his detailed interpretation of the site intrigued me, which led to the formation of this project the same year. Rex and I were specifically intrigued by the changes occurring to the boulder; as a result, I took a series of photos in 2014 and sent them to a geologist colleague of mine in Buffalo, NY, James Schuetz (another co-author of this paper), and asked his opinions about the weathering process and geochemical accretions Rex noted at the site. All of us were interested in the impacts of this weathering process on the petroglyphs themselves and how much longer they would last before the symbols disappeared. I felt it imperative to study this site before the glyphs were lost to history. (69) 20  Rogers’s comment:

Contextualizing Caudwell’s La Mina Photographic Project (2006 – 2018) As previously mentioned, we were motivated by ethical concerns and a need for more inclusive practices to adopt an ethnoarchaeological approach. ‘Many archaeologists [including the authors of this book] have increasingly turned to ethnoarchaeology as a means to engage stake-holder communities’ claims of ownership, userights, and meanings of the past’ (Castañeda 2018, 25). Connecting the human experience within the ontological and epistemological framework of archaeology allows us to challenge the modernist roots of archaeologies and demonstrate the existence of other, more inclusive public discourses, practices and engagements with the material past, which helps us transcend the boundaries between researcher and their research topic (Rogers & Case 2017).

It is worth noting that there is a tension between professional, amateur, and academic archaeology. Some academics will not support professional and amateur research, no matter its accuracy and quality. I have found in a lot of research in and out of the US that this bias has greatly limited scientific knowledge in areas, especially in regions with little to no funding opportunities for academics. (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018, 76)

14

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina Locating glyphs, even when you know their approximate location is not easy. Even with a guide that had been there before, it took us two years of part-time hacking to re-find the La Mina glyph boulder [circa 2006]. In those days, the [forest] was dense. It took two swings of the machete to travel one foot. My guide and I were [about] 20 feet apart…Eventually we [ran] into the glyph boulder. I left the guide opening up the area around the boulder…Two years of cutting through dense forest [circa 2006–2008]…from the south [was difficult for us].

Cauldwell conducted this research as an amateur archaeologist; meaning many of his records are incomplete and draw from personal memory. Between 2015 and 2018, co-author Rogers held a series of informal conversations and email discussions with Cauldwell in order to reconstruct his work. In addition to collecting digital copies of photographs during this ethnographic interview process, Rogers requested Cauldwell to draft a narrative; we have elected to republish sections of these narratives with limited edits: [When I moved to] Puerto Rico, I became increasingly interested in the Puerto Rican petroglyphs. I have always enjoyed photography and began to photograph ancient glyphs and rock art throughout the island. During this time, I began to note how rapidly they [were] disappearing. Out of a personal desire to preserve this knowledge for future generations, I took it upon myself to find, photograph, and log as may petroglyph locations throughout the island as I could. I told OECH [Oficina Estatal de Conservación Histórica], Puerto Rico’s State Historic Preservation Office, what I was doing and they gave me their blessing to photograph glyphs. Over time, I developed a group of informants who told me about commonly known and unknown glyphs on the island. This is what led me to the La Mina boulder. I first became aware of the La Mina site through Robin Phillips, a local in the Cubuy area. He knew nothing about it except that it was a large boulder with glyphs all over it somewhere in the [forest]. At that time the local growth was so thick you could only see a foot or two into the [forest], making anything hard to find; however, after two years of searching, we re-found it. Robin stated that he had showed a few archaeologists its location over the years, but all they did was admire it for a few minutes and leave – never making it into a study. I, however, recognized its importance immediately and began to study it myself. Fifteen years later, I could read the glyphs and knew the importance of the entire glyph boulder...During my research at the site, I also discovered the Chief’s Head Boulder further into the [forest], which had also never been document[ed]. As I continued to search the area, I also found several owl glyphs a considerable distance downstream and, in late 2015, I found a large monkey glyph and a carved stone head [1 km up] the La Mina mountain. (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018, 75–76)

Perhaps the most significant problem one has in finding petroglyphs is [the lack of knowledge of the site [by] locals…most people up and down Carr. 191 had no idea that the La Mina glyph boulder even existed, let alone the importance of it. This does have its upside in that this keeps the [vandals] … away. [T]hen there is the problem of theft – if the glyph is small enough and light enough to fit in a car it [could be] stolen.23 This explains why the only glyph boulders [that are] left to investigate are the giant ones. (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.) Over a 15-year period, Cauldwell collected photographs, conducted historical research, and developed the initial site interpretation. However, as an amateur archaeological, he was not given a formal platform to share his knowledge. That changed in 2015–2016, when we presented Cauldwell’s initial findings at the 2015 International Association for Caribbean Archaeology Congress in St. Martin and 2016 New York State Archaeological Association – Houghton Chapter/Buffalo Museum of Science speaker series. As a way to give voice to this work, here is a summation of Cauldwell’s pre-2015 findings: The [La Mina] glyph boulder [Figure 2.5] has a razor edge pointing upstream and is located between two small, unnamed, headwater tributaries of Rio Blanco streams.24 When there is a flood, the front of the boulder cuts the flood waters like a ship cuts water...I do not know if this is by design or accident and there are many cuts on the boulder designed to channel water. [In my opinion, the] purpose of the petroglyph’s spirals and circles appears to be to celebrate the Cohoba ceremony (a hallucinogenic ceremony used to govern the [Taíno] community). The spirals and circles are probably what they see under their drugged trance. Once they [came] out of the trance, they [would] tell the village what the gods want them to do.

As previously indicated, La Mina has remained relatively untouched due to its location on private land and densely forested terrain.21 Cauldwell stated,22

Petroglyphs, like other relics, are, most times, impossible to accurately date. As rocks cannot, without organic material, be accurately dated – in the end it is all educated guesswork. However, organic

In addition to La Mina, a large number of glyphs, some known by archaeologists but never studied, are approximately 15-minutes away in and along the Rio Cubuy, Rio Icacos, and Rio Blanco rivers. With this large proliferation of glyphs in the area, I believe that a large village with one or more dance courts may have been present. However, since most of these sites are located on private property, as with the glyphs themselves, no study has ever been made to study this assumption. We hope, in a latter field season, to investigate this further. 22  This narrative was created on January 17, 2019. References have been inserted by co-author Rogers solely for contextualization purposes. 21 

23  Rogers’s discussion with locals in 2015 highlighted that the illegal sales of glyphs in the region happened, but no one was willing to explain if it occurred at the La Mina site specifically. 24  USGS maps confirm that neither of these streams has been formally named.

15

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 2.5. La Mina boulder.

material within the glyph cut can be dated. But this is countered by people using chalk to mark glyphs – and in doing so, rendering them useless for dating, bringing us back to where we started. If we can go back into the oldest written records of the area, such as the ancient Spanish reports of the Caribbean, we might find some written record of the locals creating glyphs. To date, I have found no written record of such. One would think that of all the thousands of glyphs around PR and other outlying islands, there [would be] at least one record – [but] no such luck. This tends to indicate that perhaps [some of] the Caribbean glyph creations predate the Taínos.25 [I know] a man who has lived next to the Rio Blanco river all of his life and played on and walked over a [different] boulder with glyphs [in the river].26 When we waded [through] the river…to see them, they were 99% worn off – [and] he could not find them [see Figure 2.6]. [This story indicates that and how] worn away glyphs [can disappear] within a single lifetime. Why? The glyphs are constantly worn away by a flooding river [tropical rainstorms] and are being walked over constantly. With a sandpaper-like rain (our rain consists of sand from the Sahara Desert mixed in with the rain), they are constantly being sandblasted. This highlights the importance of getting [the La Mina site] logged before they are gone forever. When the first [European] explorers went into the Guianas, the locals told them they had no idea who created their glyphs, which were extremely similar to those in the upper Caribbean. La Mina has faced the same fate. The glyphs were always there – and nobody remembers a time when they were not.

However, what is missing are the individual glyphs on small boulders and rocks that are typically scattered around [as well as] the rocks with glyphs on them that surround dance courts that are always in the area of large glyph concentrations. They were probably removed by local farmers to place over low areas [in order] to act as roads and bridges for carts. This is what Mason [and other archaeologists] found…had happened to many of his missing glyph boulders between his first and second visit to Caguana.27 In the case of La Mina, many glyph boulders and dance courts [may] have been destroyed to make room for sugar cane and coffee plantations. [Based on my research I believe] the dates for the glyphs at the La Mina boulder (Cubuy) in Puerto Rico could extend back to the same distant 300 B.C.E. date. The 600 AD date is significant as this is the same approximate date the Ignerí disappeared from the Ponce area and the same approximate date a super volcano (Lake Illopango in El Salvador) exploded. This means that the sky would have darkened over much of the globe for an extended period of time killing off all grown food in those areas forcing the Ignerí (and others throughout the globe) to move – thus the Ignerí disappearance… Indigenous painting of the glyphs is a controversial point. Were they or not? My opinion is that they were as I have found several that had residual paint in the grooves. All were red. At least that is the color they are now many years after they were painted…The La Mina glyph boulder is not alone at its location. I have found another boulder a little further into the jungle that even my original guide, some 20 years ago, did not know about – a large boulder I call it

A findings, as presented in chapters four and five of this book. This may be a reference to the glyphs surrounding Hippie Hole, chapter one, figure 1–1.

27  This is in reference to John Alden Mason, Excavation of a New Archaeological Site in Porto Rico (Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Congress of Americanists, 1917), 220–23

25  26 

16

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina

Figure 2.6. Hippie Hole glyphs, Rio Blanco River.

Figure 2.7. Chief’s Head boulder.

the Chief’s Head boulder [see Figure 2.7] as for the large number of Cacique heads carved into the boulder. What distinguishes this boulder is a large palate smoothed out by the artist as to have a flat area to carve his art. The hits by the curved chisels and hammer stones are still visible.

The boulder [has] many visible and irregular layers. This is not a boulder you would normally pick to check for glyphs and is probably why no one noticed them before. These glyphs are perhaps older than those on the La Mina boulder [since] they are extremely worn— or they were cut less deep. Those on the east side are 17

¡El Yunque se levanta! nothing more than circular faces and perhaps one extremely worn wrapped figure [see Figure 2.8]. Those on the south side of the palate are the more complex figures, including what I believe to be one worn figure of Boinayel, the figure one would pray to for rain, like [what I believe to be an] anthropomorphic Figure with charcoal outline, located on the south face of the Chief’s Head boulder, possibly representing the god of Rain, Bionayel, a portal guardian [to the spirit world]. There are no glyphs on the west and north sides. If you go even further downstream you will find some owl glyphs [see Figure 2.9] and going upstream you will find a large monkey glyph [see Figure 2.10]. If you follow the unnamed streams down to where they intersect with the Cubuy and Rio Blanco rivers you will find several hundred glyphs [at the Hippie Hole site] [see Figure 2.11]. (R. Cauldwell, pers. comm.) Cauldwell’s narrative provides an important, first person context for this site. Like any ethnographic work in an area with few written records, his insights have contributed significantly to the foundations of this project, as will be seen in chapters four and five.

Figure 2.8. Chief’s Head boulder; wrapped ancestor glyph with remains of a possible headdress.

Figure 2.9. Owl glyphs.

18

Creating an Interdisciplinary Context for La Mina

Figure 2.10. Monkey glyph.

Figure 2.11. Hippie Hole glyphs, Rio Blanco River.

19

3 The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting The Ethnogeological Setting

However, many rock art studies have focused on the visual characteristics of petroglyphs based on style, traits, landscape, and features (Bradley, Boado and Valcarce 1994; Tilley 1994; Chippindale and Nash 2001, 2004). We argue the combination of methods can lead to a more holistic understand of a given site. As Troncoso, Armstrong, and Nash (2018) argued ‘…[R]ock art is much more than [visual characteristics]. On the one hand, rock art is the result of a social and spatial practice, historically situated. On the other, the practice and materiality of rock art engage in a historic field of relations, where humans, otherthan-humans, substances, places, and the environment participate’ (241). Previous cultures that settled in the area of La Mina chose the site as a location of significance and did so for a reason. Interpretation of data gathered at the site and presented herein provides evidence that the people chose the site, in part, for its geological features. As was discussed in chapter two, given its location, the La Mina site is actively changing. Rock art site selection based on the interplay between the environment and function is not unique to La Mina. In Chilean sites, Troncoso, Armstrong, and Nash highlighted similar findings:

Within the framework of interdisciplinarity, understanding the intersection of ethnogeological approaches is critical. As previously stated, this project involved adopting the relatively new, yet growing, area of research termed ethnogeology, which is related to the study of human relationships with geological systems (Garcia, Semken, and Brandt 2017). As explained by Murray (2018), trends in multicultural science education support the development of underrepresented groups in geoscience by promoting non-interventionist educational techniques over imperialistic and integrationist techniques, especially related to Native American students. Further, creating relations between geology and native culture’s planetary awareness bridges the cultural divide often observed between modern science and local native peoples. The research presented here expands on this concept by integrating past and current environmental understandings from Puerto Ricans with La Mina and regional specific geological studies. The intention is not only to explain the geological context of the La Mina, but to do so while involving the perspective of local inhabitants.

The historicity of these practices shows how the practices of marking rocks were related to very different ways of inhabiting and creating the world. Although some practices and entities remain similar, their positions in the weaving of relations changed as new entities became relevant participants (petroglyphs)…This is why we argue that painting and carving rocks are not merely two examples of the same practice of marking rocks, but rather two very different activities differently related with other practices and entities. What paintings and petroglyphs brought to the residential camps are different assemblages, different relations to the landscape, to the community, to substances, memories, and the past…. (17)

The ethnogeological adaptation provided in this study contributed to the interdisciplinarity of the research by more explicitly furthering the bridge between the archaeological and geological components of the project (Garcia, Semken, and Brandt 2017). Further, in conjunction with ethnoarchaeology and anthropological activism, the ethnogeological content offers a framework for understanding not only the physical and archaeological context of La Mina, but also the past and present peoples of Puerto Rico, their connection to the earth, and hardships they have (and continue to) overcome. Geological processes intertwining with cultural perceptions create a focal point where geological-minded people (those thinking about and making observations of the earth formations) are changed by their geological environment. This change can manifest into cultural choices (such as religious connotations), which are based on geological observations: minerals, riverbed, caves, etc. The study presented herein used data about past cultures and their relationship with geological phenomena such as caves, streams, rock art, and therefore contributes to the growing body of ethnogeology. As Troncoso, Armstrong, and Nash (2018) elaborated, ‘Rock art, then, cannot be understood as an ahistorical materiality in isolation of other practices and materials, reified as a communication device or as a rigid landscape marker. Rock art is dynamic, embedded in complex meshworks of sensorialities, materialities, bodies, relations, and affects’ (259).

The remainder of this chapter pulls together the geological sciences in order to further contextualize the intersection of site function and interdisciplinarity. Environmental Setting Physiography Puerto Rico is the smallest of the Greater Antilles Islands, located between Hispaniola to the west and the U.S. Virgin Islands to the east. This location is proximal to the transition from the Greater Antilles to the Lesser Antilles Islands, which geographically follows a spatially oriented arc pattern, southward to South America. The land area of the island is approximately 8,897 square km (Miller and Lugo 2009) with a generally 21

¡El Yunque se levanta! rectangular shape. The longer direction of the island is oriented in the west to east direction. In dimensions, the island is 56 km north to south and 176 km west to east. The island lies approximately between latitudes 17°58′ north/18°32′ north and between longitudes 65°15′ west/68°00′ west. This location, along with the Greater Antilles Islands, separates the Atlantic Ocean to the north from the Caribbean Sea to the south (Birdsey and Weaver 1982).

Beyond the typical precipitation averages, the major impact of hurricanes cannot be understated. Miller and Lugo (2009) have described Puerto Rico in the following terms: The island is in the hurricane belt off the western Atlantic and Caribbean….Hurricanes are Puerto Rico’s number one weather problem because of the catastrophic high winds and waves, large volumes of rain, and the enormous structural change they can produce on natural ecosystems, and on human populations and their infrastructure. Most hurricanes are peripheral and produce minor effects, but those termed killer hurricanes, owing to their intensity and direct hits, have the potential to produce enormous damage and hardship. (21)

Climate The climate of Puerto Rico is the result of multiple factors including an elevated mountainous highland area, existing in a longitudinal orientation down most of the interior of the island. These mountains, typically in an east-west orientation, with peaks as high as 1,000 meters (4,000 feet), interact with the westerly trade winds and the sea, creating a diverse climate and, subsequently, a diverse habitat. The result of the elevation, the sea, and the trade winds is a large variability in range of precipitation. Throughout the year, rainfall is nearly evenly distributed, although from May to November the precipitation is slightly higher. Meanwhile, the warm sea breezes moderate fluctuation in temperature. According to Miller and Lugo (2009), the smallest daily fluctuation of temperature occurs in the coastal plain areas at 5–8 degrees C and the largest exist in the mountains at 8–12 degrees C.

The 2017 hurricane season, including Irma and Maria, provide recent examples of the devastation and hardship these events bring to a susceptible island such as Puerto Rico (see chapter six for more details.) Ecology There is a very diverse and elaborate flora comprised of both native and alien species on Puerto Rico. According to Miller and Lugo (2009), a vast majority of the 3,100 species are native and over 180 of the species are of vascular plant families. Meanwhile, approximately 300 species are naturalized aliens. The large diversity on the island can be attributed to the variable climate and topography, which create diverse habituates. From the central mountains exhibiting deep valleys and steep slopes to the areas of low precipitation and dry/rocky coastlines, these diverse regions create habitats that support a complex flora.

As a representation of its geographic and climatic complexity, the island and surrounding outlying islands are divided into 11 unique regions, each exhibiting individuality in landforms and climate (Pico 1974). More simplistically, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has subdivided the island into six climate regions (Figure 3.1), which represent the confluence of topographic relief and orientation to prevailing trade winds (From Gomez et al. 2014). The east-west trending mountains, as noted previously, affect the prevailing winds, thereby creating zones that geographically follow the topography and the wind orientation.

Murphy, Stallard, Larsen, and Gould (2012) suggested that ‘like many other Caribbean islands, Puerto Rico was heavily forested (about 95 percent) prior to European settlement’ (15). Furthermore, Miller and Lugo (2009) described PreColumbian Puerto Rico as tropical but having:

Within the eastern interior region (where the La Mina site is located), the precipitation is highest, with mean annual total rainfall of 4,305 millimeters per year (mm/ yr) (Gómez-Gómez, Rodríguez-Martínez, and Santiago 2014). The relatively high rate of rainfall observed in the Luquillo Mountains is, in part, due to the rapid elevation change from sea level coupled with the easterly trade winds. Meanwhile, in southwestern Puerto Rico near Guánica and Ensenada the precipitation is lowest, with a mean annual total rainfall of 768 mm/yr. (Gómez-Gómez, Rodríguez-Martínez, and Santiago 2014). Based on these data, it can be realized that there is a large range in precipitation on the island, varying by a factor of 5.6 times. The confluence of precipitation and topographical relief demonstrates how the Luquillo Mountains represent the wettest and steepest terrain of Puerto Rico with some of the largest streams and rivers, as discussed in the hydrology section.

…no coconut palms, no grapefruit or orange trees, no coffee groves, no mangoes, no flamboyán or African tulip trees with their beautiful flowers, and no sugarcane fields. The mangroves that hugged the coasts were larger and much more widely distributed. The Taíno people that lived on the island mostly fished and grew corn, yucca, yams, and cotton to supply their needs. In the 500-plus years since Columbus discovered Puerto Rico (1493, second voyage of discovery), the introduction and growth of nonindigenous European and African human populations has resulted in enormous habitat alteration throughout the island. In addition, thousands of alien species of plants and animals have been introduced, both intentionally and accidentally. Populations of some native species have undergone dramatic declines, whereas many introduced species have become naturalized…. (1) 22

The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting

23 Figure 3.1. Climatic subdivision of Puerto Rico and outlying islands.

¡El Yunque se levanta! Knowing this alteration in ecology and the likely tree density of the La Mina area, it is possible that this area was heavily forested, a notion supported by Cauldwell’s narratives (see chapter two). The shallow soils and abundance of rock (bedrock, boulders) have deterred cultivation in this area.

of the Luquillo Mountains drain in separate directions. La Mina site is located in the smaller Icacos watershed, which is located at elevations between about 620 and 832 m, and has an aspect of east, southeast, and southwest. A ridge approaching 800 m in elevation separates the Icacos and Mameyes watersheds (Murphy, Stallard, Larsen, and Gould 2012). Within these upper elevations of the Luquillo Mountains, five peaks are higher than 1,000 m; the highest, El Toro (1,075 m), is located between the Icacos and Canóvanas watersheds.

The Luquillo mountain region, the location of the La Mina site, experiences tropical to humid climates and is the only tropical rainforest in the U.S. national forest system (Jennings, Douglas, Treasure, and González 2014). As seen in Figure 3.2, the United State Department of Agriculture (USDA n.d.) classifies the La Mina area as humid mountains and valleys. To the east and south, the land is classified as humid coastal plains and semiarid coastal plains. Like the rest of Puerto Rico, the Luquillo Mountains are also ecologically diverse: ‘At nearly 29,000 acres, it is one …. of the most biologically diverse of the national forests hosting hundreds of animal and plant species, some of which are found only here’ (USDA n.d.).

Due to significant rainfall, steep terrain, and shallow/ fine grained soil, northeastern Puerto Rico has a dense stream network draining the Sierra de Luquillo rainforest. Figure 3.4 demonstrates this dense stream network as well as the La Mina site located within the watershed classified as HU12 (named Rio Blanco near mouth) and HU10 (named Rio Anton Ruiz and Rio Fajardo watershed) (United States Geological Survey [USGS] n.d.). More specifically, the site lies within the Rio Blanco watershed, directly located on a first order stream (i.e., a stream with no tributaries/near the beginning of the stream), near the confluence of a separate first order stream, thereby creating at second order stream on the southern boundary of the site (i.e., below Chief’s Head boulder at the southern area of the site). This second order stream joins Rio Blanco approximately 2.3 km east-south-east, where Rio Blanco becomes a third order stream, and 1.2 km downstream of the junction of Rio Cubuy (2rd order) and Rio Icacos (also a 3rd order stream).

Topography While there are currently five named peaks above 1,000 meters in the Sierra de Luquillo Mountain Range, this mountain chain essentially appears as a single mountain as viewed from the coast. Meanwhile, the La Mina site is on the topographic inflection where a moderate grade changes to very steep grade (aggressive walking/climbing) if coming from the southeast (where the coastline is located). Given the site locations and the regional topography, the La Mina site, by all accounts, is at the base of the mountain (or in this case a mountain range). Figure 3.3 provides the contours: light 100 ft. (light line weight contours) and dark 1000 ft. (heavier line weight contours) of northeastern Puerto Rico, with the site locations demonstrating this relationship. Travelers on foot would have likely followed streams up the natural topographical gradient and, upon reaching La Mina site, they would have reached extremely steep terrain. While the steep terrain is climbable, it would have taken significant effort and only some in the community (those with excellent footwork and steep terrain climbing skills) would have likely traveled much farther than the area of the site.

Locally, La Mina site is bounded on the west and east by two small (first order) steams flowing from the north to the south. The area between these two stream channels is of slightly higher elevation (2 – 4 meters) than the streambeds themselves. Assuming this stream network was similar to what it was 400 years ago, it is reasonable to assume that locals traveling by foot northward along streams would have observed the La Mina area to be at the start of the streams, possibly near small springs that represent the very highest headwaters of powerful rivers to the south. So not only does the site area represent the furthest reaches people might reasonably travel to the base of the mountain (described previously), this location is at the beginning of a dense stream network flowing from the mountain.

Hydrology Puerto Rico is generally mountainous, with ranges oriented in an east to west direction. Flat-lying coastal plains and alluvial valleys surround the central highlands. Deeply incised streams and rivers create aggressively steep terrain in many portions of the island. Due to accelerated weathering in the north, watersheds have shifted the topographical divide of the island to the south where slower weathering is observed on the drier southern slopes (Ramos-Ginés 1999). According to Miller and Lugo (2009), there are hundreds of mapped streams on Puerto Rico, with 50 classified as rivers. Six of these rivers drain the Luquillo Mountains. In the steep, high elevations, the three watersheds (Mameyes, Icacos, and Canóvanas)

Geological Setting Similar to other areas of the western hemisphere, early Europeans began exploring Puerto Rico for a variety of resources, including those of mineralogical value. Fray Ingo Abbad y Lasierra (1866) wrote the first known geological recording of Puerto Rico, with chapters on topography as well as gold silver and other minerals (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). The interest in the natural resources continued following Spain’s cession of the island to the United States in 1889. Hill (1889) conducted one of the first U.S. reconnaissance 24

The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting 150

15

300

0

80

0 0

0

90

40

00

400

600

0 50 3

600

400

900

150

Hippie Hole

La Mina

50

200

Duque

150

El Mangó Pueblito Del Río

150

150

Río Blanco

Daguao 0

10

Naguabo Peña Pobre

20

100

0 20 0

0

20

Cueva del Indio

50

50

0 10

150

50

0

0 15

10

1 50 200

70 0

0

0

20

0 50

10

0 90

0

0 60

90

800

500

200

800

Benítez

Lomas

100

150 Antón Ruíz

200

30 0

50

100

50

Las Piedras

La Fermina Punta Santiago

100

20

Bajandas

100

0

Humacao

300 300

100

100 150

50

Buena Vista

Legend Regional Site Locations Municipalities

Reference Map

Regional Locations and USDA Major Land Resource Boundaries

Major Roads

USDA MLRB Humid Coastal Plains

Scale

Humid Mountains and Valleys Semiarid Coastal Plains

1:27,000 0.3 0.6 0.9

0

Semiarid Mountains and Valleys

1.2

Kilometers

Figure 3.2. Regional locations and USDA major land resource boundaries.

missions of Puerto Rico for the geology and mineral resources and published in the United States Geological Survey’s twenty-ninth annual report (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). Thereafter, Puerto Rico

was extensively studied by geologists (from 1889 to present) as the result of the following factors: occupation of Puerto Rico by the United States, vigor for natural resource development within the United States, and close 25

¡El Yunque se levanta!

0

Reference Map

0.5

1

1.5

2

Kilometers 200 foot contour intervals

El Yunque

El Cacique Pico del Oeste

El Toro

Pico del Este La Mina Site

Hippie Hole Site

Cueva del Indio

Figure 3.3. Topographical map of eastern Puerto Rico demonstrating the location of La Mina site at the base of steep topography.

geographic proximity of Puerto Rico to the U.S. mainland. Beyond mineralogical and other natural resources, Puerto Rico has been studied by a variety of local and mainland U.S. institutions, which have provided a thoroughly researched history of climate, ecology, hydrology, and geology of the island.

Puerto Rico (and the Virgin islands) is located on a microplate (of the Caribbean Plate), which is part of the seismically active Caribbean-North American Plate boundary (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). According to Chaytor (n.d.), the Caribbean Plate moves in a left-lateral motion (towards the east relative to the North American Plate) parallel the Puerto Rican trench at approximately 2 cm/year. Furthermore, the Puerto Rican trench is the deepest part of the Atlantic Ocean and is associated with most negative gravity anomaly on earth, indicating the presence of an active downward force (Chaytor n.d.).

Puerto Rico is a volcanic island-arc located on the Caribbean-North American Plate boundary, formed by volcanism and sedimentation within tectonically active plate boundaries (Murphy, Stallard, Larsen, and Gould 2012). The island core is mostly volcanic and plutonic rocks with younger sedimentary rocks deposited overtop. The island is bounded by deep oceanic tectonic structures. To the north is the Puerto Rican Trench, to the south is the Muertos Trough, to the west is the Mona Canyon, and to the east by the Anegada Passage (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998).

Briggs and Akser (1965) and Cox and Briggs (1973) subdivided the island of Puerto Rico into northeast igneous, central igneous, and southwest igneous provinces on the basis of the perceived presence of major strike slip faults or fault zones (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals 26

The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting

Reference Map

0

650

1,300

2,600 Meters

La Mina Site Hippie Hole Site

Cueva del Indio

Hydrology Unit Río Blanco 0

0.9

1.8

2.7

3.6

Kilometers Figure 3.4. Stream network and relevant watershed, northeastern Puerto Rico.

Team 1998). Along the northern coast, they identified the middle tertiary and younger sedimentary rocks. The La Mina site is located within the northeast ingenious geological province and a volcanoclastic regimen south of the central mountains quartz-diorite granodiorite. Chapter five provides a more detailed analysis of the site scale geology and results of the local geological characterization.

in terms of a rock fall. This is very relevant to this study, because, as presented in chapter five, earthquake(s) and associated ground movement provide the mechanism and the evidence that La Mina cave was one time large but is now collapsed. Due to the proximity of significant tectonic features and activity, the likelihood for large earthquakes to have occurred in recent occupational periods is highly likely. Tuttle et al. (2005) have suggested the site to have been occupied from A.D. 1200 to 1500. In fact, several earthquakes have been documented. According to Tuttle et al.,

Mass Wasting – Earthquakes, Land Slides, Mudslides There exists a high degree of probably that large earthquakes have occurred since the first glyphs were carved into La Mina boulder. The regional and tectonic information presented in this chapter outlines this likelihood and demonstrates that the La Mina site was altered by mass wasting. Not only is there regional context but, as observed at the site, there is also direct evidence

... several large to very large earthquakes have struck Puerto Rico in the past 400 years. These include a moment magnitude (M) 7.5 event in 1943 located northwest of Puerto Rico, a M 7.3 event in 1918 27

¡El Yunque se levanta! centered in the Mona Passage, a M ~7.3 event in 1867 in the Anegada Passage, a M ~7.3 event in 1787 possibly related to the Puerto Rico trench, and a M ~6 event in 1670 in western Puerto Rico.... (264)

example of the severity of these events, we can look to the hurricane season of 2017 when hurricane Irma and Maria significantly changed the landscape of the island: Hughes and Morales Vélez (2017) catalogued approximately 40,000 landslides as the result of hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017. Within approximately 2–4 km north of the site, a large landslide blocked the only local road (Rte. 191), which was not cleared for months, blocking all vehicular traffic.

Grindlay, Mann, and Dolan (1997) and Dolan, Mullins, and Wald (1998) have described the significant offshore and onshore faults and potential seismic activity. Prentice and Mann (2005) noted that the location of the island between the Puerto Rico trench and the Muerto trench suggests the possibility of Holocene faults onshore that could represent an important seismic hazard to the island. While most seismic research has focused on the more significant activity of offshore faulting, Prentice and Mann documented Holocene faulting on at least one fault in southwest Puerto Rico.

Regional Petrology Northeastern Puerto Rico, including the area of the site, is geologically dominated by intrusive and volcanic rocks, while topographically the site is dominated by the El Yunque region (i.e., Sierra de Luquillo Mountains). Dybas (2013) described El Yunque as ‘a remnant of an ancient supervolcano named Hato Puerco. The volcano was one of the region’s largest and most active volcanoes during the Cretaceous period 145–66 million years ago’ (915). The shape and form of the Sierra de Luquillo Mountains could have posed cultural importance to early peoples, especially with a past history related to volcanoes and or volcanic eruptions. We see mountains playing a role in site selection at other sites in Puerto Rico, such as Tibes near Ponce and Caguana Ceremonial Park in Utuado (Torres et al. 2014).

There are two significant onsite fault zones transecting east-west through the island of Puerto Rico: Great Southern and Great Northern Puerto Rico (see Figure 3.5 from Tuttle, et al. 2005). Glover and Mattson (1960) and Erikson, Pindell, and Larue (1991) have suggested both are active during the Tertiary Period with a left-lateral displacement. Moya and Mercado (2006) observed sand dikes and other evidence of seismic activity (intruding into a cultural horizon) while working with archaeologists at the Barrio Quemados site east of Mayagüez. The Great Northern Puerto Rico Fault Zone, also known as the Cerro Mula-Qebrada San Francisco Fault, is just south of the El Yunque region, thereby abutting the area of interest. The Cerro Mula-Qebrada San Francisco Fault forms the significant east-west lineation and topographic low between Sierra de Luquillo Mountains and Humacao. The U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team (1998) show a truncated smaller fault trending from near the eastern coastline along the contact of sedimentary formations and the igneous/core of El Yunque directly towards the La Mina site, also located on this regional geological contact.

As noted previously, the site is located near the change in slope, from the steep slopes highlands to moderate terrain within the northeastern igneous province (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). This change in slope is associated with the contact of the intrusive rocks of El Yunque (Hornblende quartz-diorite porphyry) and the volcaniclastic rocks located to the south (e.g., volcanic breccia, hyaloclastite breccia, conglomerate, volcanic sandstones), as shown in Figure 3.7. Since the intrusive rocks are more resistant to weathering than surrounding volcaniclastics, the El Yunque region is a predominant topographic feature of the island. According to the USGS (n.d.) GIS database, the site is located near the contact between Alluvium of Quaternary age (recent) and the Lomas Formation of Cretaceous age (145.5 and 65.5 million years ago, respectively). The Lomas consists of volcanic breccia, hyaloclastite breccia, conglomerate, volcanic sandstone, pillowed and non-pillowed lava flows, and rarely volcanic lithic mudstone (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). This variety of volcanic/ sedimentary rock types was presumably generated during active volcanic processes to the north, which were then locally deposited, whether directly or indirectly (see Figure 3.8).

As noted previously, there is rock fall observed, which happens to lean on the La Mina boulder and cover part of a glyph (see Figure 3.6). This rock, much larger than a person could have moved, has fallen off other similar rock to the north, which must have happened after the glyph was drawn (relative dating). Knowing that only a large tectonic event would have created this rock fall, along with the known tectonic activity of the region (presented previously), the mapped faults that are delineated to immediately southeast of the site, and the proximity of the Cerro Mula-Qebrada San Francisco Fault, there is clear and direct evidence that a large tectonic event has occurred at the site after the spiral glyph (under the corner of the rock fall) was drawn.

Soil Types

In addition to mass wasting as the result of seismic activity, Puerto Rico is also subject to mass wasting from precipitation and climatic events. Provided the location, climate, and the steep terrain, Puerto Rico is very susceptible to mass wasting due to landslides, especially those induced by large rain events such as hurricanes. As an

In the volcanoclastic areas of the Luquillo Mountains the soils are predominantly comprised of a thin 0.8 – 1.0 m layer of organics, covering a shallow to deep saprolite. Saprolite soils are a deeply weathered bedrock, which, over time, have been altered by chemical process and 28

The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting

29

Figure 3.5. Map of Puerto Rico showing principal faults.

¡El Yunque se levanta! the Luquillo Mountains are typically low in quartz minerals (which are resistant to chemical weathering); therefore the rock weathers to secondary minerals such as clay (Murphy, Stallard, Larsen, and Gould 2012). Soils in the volcanoclastic regimes are generally quartz poor and they are composed predominantly of basic feldspars and ferromagnesian minerals (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). In areas of dense clay content, the infiltration is reduced, leading to more significant overland flow, especially considering the high moisture content of the rainforest. This increase in overland flow likely increases the down cutting of small rills and gullies, adding to the topographic structure of the area. It should be noted, however, numerous quartz-rich bedrock formations were observed, including volcanic sandstone, in the site area. Although these volcanoclastic are primarily quartz, the sedimentary nature of these deposits is prone to mechanical weathering. As this book has highlighted so far, the study of La Mina and its people/culture therefore represents the union of ethnoarchaeology and ethnogeology. Inclusion of local, present day perspectives and observations expands the ethnogeological aspects of this study into present day cultural conditions. Information provided by local residents, such as an historic mine located at higher elevations, other petroglyphs in the area, and water diversion of a stream at the site, are examples of this present day ethnogeology. Based these concepts, it is clear how the interdisciplinary aspects of this research have manifested into the very ethnogeological components of this study. As such, the interdisciplinary merging of the disciplines in this study is inseparable (see chapter four).

Figure 3.6. Photograph of rock fall leaning on glyph, demonstrating a large mass wasting event has occurred since the glyph was drawn.

leaching of minerals. Although the original bedrock is broken down, in most cases saprolite retains some of the original rock structure and in some cases similar but altered mineralogy. The volcaniclastic materials within

Figure 3.7. Photograph of presumably volcaniclastics sandstone similar to La Mina, with mottled discolouration due to variable oxidation of the matrix material.

30

The Ethnogeological, Environmental, and Geological Setting Legend Geology

Kh Kta

Reference Map

Formation

Kfa

Kfa

TKh

Kd - Daguao

Kfa

Qa

Kf

Kta

Kdh Dioritehornblendi...

Qa

Kfa - Fajardo

Kfa

Kta

Kfd - Figuera Lava and Daguao Formation Interbedded

Kta

La Mina

Kh - Hato Puerco Frm. Klo - Lomas

Hippie Hole

Qa

Kf

KfKfa Kf

Klo

Klo

Klo

Kpgg - Granodiorite of the plutonic complex of Punta Guayanes

Kfa

Kta

Kta

Kf Kf

Kd Kd Klo

Klo

Kpi Kpsq Kra

Klo Kpi

TKqd

Qa

Kslg

Klo TKha

Qb

TKh - Hornblende quartz-diorite porphyry

Kpi

TKqd - Quartz diorite-granodiorite

Kpi

Klo

Kpi

Klo

Qa

Ksl Ksl

Kpi

Qa

Klo TKha

0

Regional Site Locations

0.5

Qs

Scale

31

Qa

Qb

1

1.5 Qb

Kilometers

Figure 3.8. Regional geological map based on USGS National Map GIS Database, survey site locations.

Kd Qb

Fault

Kra

Kra

TKhaTKha TKha TKha

TKha Qa Klo Municipalities Klo

Klo Klo TKha

Locations Kra Kra with Geological Formations Kpi

Klo

Klo

Kra Kra

TKha Hydrothermally altered rock TKk

Ql

Kra

Kd Kd

Legend

TKhaKlo

Kfd

Kd

KdTKha Qa

Klo

Kpi

Ql

KdTKha

TKqd

Klo

Kpi

Kd

Kd

TKqd

TKqd TKqdTKqd TKha TKha

Klo Klo

Ql

Qa - Alluvium

Qs

Kd

TKqd

Kta - Tabonuco Formation

Qa Kf

Kh

Kf - Figuera Lava

Ksl

Kf Qa

Kfa

2

4 La Mina Project Methodology As previously stated, the uniqueness of this manuscript is its interdisciplinary approach to the analysis and interpretation of the La Mina site. Interdisciplinary approaches provide a comprehensive way of thinking about and analysing complex problems that cannot be solved through one discipline alone (Meeth 1978; Stember 1990). Utilizing a more inclusive methodological approach, our framework offers us a way to transcend Eurocentric views of Indigenous peoples and position their thoughts and voices at the center of our site interpretations. Fortunately, recent projects by amateurs (e.g., Cauldwell), CRM professionals (e.g., Hayward), and academics have pushed for a more inclusive approach to rock art (e.g., Roe). However, more work still needs to be done. Roe (2005) stated, ‘We cannot continue to treat [rock art] in a marginal realm of inquiry, sprinkling disconnected images through the literature. Instead, we must attempt to use it as another line of evidence to help understand the cultures of Puerto Rico’ (297).

of petroglyphs and pictographs, with rock art in caves, along waterways, and on boulders aligning ceremonial or public enclosures (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2017; Hayward, Atkinson, and Cinquino 2009). Roe, Hayward, and Cinquino (2018) continue to be key players in analysis of Puerto Rican rock art research. Hayward, Atkinson, and Cinquino’s (2009) edited volume, Rock Art of the Caribbean, and Roe et al.’s (2005) “Rivers of Stone, Rivers Within Stone: Rock Art in Ancient Puerto Rico” continue to be staple references for rock art analysis. The edited volume Archaeologies of Art: Time, Space and Identity by Sanz et al. (2016) provided comparative analysis of stylistic traits, occupations, and cultural identity from rock art sites across the globe, including sites in Puerto Rico. Though there has been a literature review gap in Puerto Rican research of late, Hayward and Cinquino are expected to publish a 2020 article to situate current lesserknown Puerto Rican rock art research from 2015–2020 into the broader rock art conversation (Michele Hayward, pers. comm.).

Our work fits well in this trend for more inclusive methodological practices. We believe that combining the fields of ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and anthropological activism offers a more holistic interpretation for this site and the people occupying it. Given that each of the co-authors represent a different entry point into this conversation, we felt compartmentalizing one’s expertise into a singular discipline (like archaeology, geology, or activism) lent us a more restrictive interpretation of data. Through the adoption of the relatively new, yet growing, area of scientific research termed ethnogeology and activist anthropology with the more established field of ethnoarchaeology adds to the uniqueness of this work (Garcia, Semken, and Brandt 2017). The underlying premise of this chapter is to provide a synthesis between the ethnoarchaeological, ethnogeological, and activist anthropological methods and, in doing so, expand the current understanding of the past and present culture of Puerto Rico through the adoption of an innovative interdisciplinary framework.

Historically speaking, many rock art studies have been restricted to the first two classes found on immovable or relatively stationary rock structures (Dubelaar, Merkling, and Argana 1999, 1–2), although comparisons of designs across different media are certainly incorporated. Additionally, Caribbean rock art researchers employ a range of terms and meanings in their research: The term rock art, normally found in the literature refers to both carved and painted motifs on natural rock surfaces. Rock figures, images, designs, and motifs serve as alternative vocabulary. Petroglyphs refer to carved, pecked, ground, or other agency-produced designs. Pictographs cover painted or drawn images that are also, though less regularly, referred to as rock paintings. The terms type, style, school, and tradition are utilized frequently without consideration of their technical meanings. (Hayward, Atkinson, and Cinquino 2009, 2) The various elaborated types or typologies have been used as a means to order rock art data. The categories are derived from identified attributes that then function as analytical units to examine inter-site and/or intra-site similarities and differences (see Cinquino, Hayward, and Schieppati 2003; Dubelaar 1995, 27–31). As mentioned previously, the use of style, with school and tradition as loose classifications, remains problematical. Many times these rock art categories have been differentiated based on variously defined complexes of shared aesthetic and physical traits. Styles, schools, or traditions are intended

Contextualizing Puerto Rican Rock Art Research: A Short Literature Review As a relatively unknown site, the context for La Mina is limited. As previously discussed, this issue has been further compounded by scholarly disagreements between cultural sequences in the Caribbean, varied petroglyphic classifications on the island, and incomplete records for archaeological sites within the El Yunque rainforest (see chapter two). It is worth reiterating that Puerto Rico is well-known as one of the region’s highest site densities 33

¡El Yunque se levanta! to be higher-order classification units rather than types, as well as to be aids in the study of temporal and cultural differentiation. Yet, linkages of these visual proveniences or even types with particular geographical areas, cultures, or chronological periods have met with limited success. To try and address these shortcomings in rock art analysis and expand on the knowledge in this region, we decided to adopt the petroglyphic classification methods created by Alvarez (1988) and Roe (2005) as well as Roe’s methodology for drawing petroglyphs to scale on heavygauge clear plastic.28 We also combined Chanlatte-Baik’s (2013) and Roe and Hayward’s (2009) temporal sequences in order to create an up-to-date cultural chronology for the site. Additionally, we used high-resolution imagery, global positioning systems (GPS), geographical information systems (GIS with ESRI ArcMap), and field sketches to provide a detailed analysis of the site.29 Ethnoarchaeological and ethnogeological data were collected during and after the La Mina study and provided a link between the physical attributes of La Mina and the inhabitants (past and present) of Puerto Rico. Finally, we compiled our findings into the following logs: the La Mina: Visual Catalogue, the Lab Photo Log: Geological Samples, and the Lab Photo Log: Archaeological Remains. The information collected in these catalogues is the first to categorically analyse and discuss the cultural transition of this site. We then used this data, in conjunction with our ethnographic research, to create a more holistic interpretation for La Mina. In the following subsections and associated appendices, we provide a complete description of methodologies as well representative examples (e.g., geological and archaeological samples and site images) from our catalogues. It is our hope that the dissemination of this data will contribute to Puerto Rican rock art studies, encourage more research in the understudied El Yunque region, and expand the discussion beyond physical attributes of artifacts and rock art into more broad interdisciplinary understanding of Puerto Rican material culture, past and present.

Forest in Municipio de Naguabo, Puerto Rico. The specific purpose of this study was to assess the petroglyphs (rock art) and place them into a broader archaeological and geological site context. As a Phase 1 study, our first priority was to conduct a pedestrian survey and map the site. Figure 4.1 is the first comprehensive rendering of La Mina site in 2015, prior to Hurricane Maria.30 Cauldwell Photographic Methods (2006–2018) As highlighted in chapter two, Cauldwell’s (2006–2018) longitudinal photographic study at La Mina was a critical component of our project. Given the importance of his research, this section will discuss the methods he employed to photograph the site just prior to our Phase I study. It is important to note that most of Cauldwell’s methods were originally published in a 2014 Ancient American magazine article titled “A Study of Caribbean Petroglyphs” and are also found in an unpublished 2015 manuscript titled “Part 1: How to Photograph Petroglyphs” (Cauldwell, 2015a). We elected to include a combination of these publications here, making only minor edits and comments, to maintain his original voice: [All photos were taken with] a wide-angle shot… showing enough of the area around the boulder, including easy-to-spot [features in order] to find the location years later…—[A]s the first rule of petroglyphs [I began my search were known glyphs existed]…—as you rarely find them all [the] first time around…[I took] several shots from all angles at different times of day— as the camera [and micro and macro adjustments] may have picked up additional glyphs that the naked eye cannot see. The camera [was] adjusted [in order to] have all the glyphs in perfect focus—that sometimes means a large depth of field…[I would] shoot early morning or late afternoon—never mid-day. With glyphs[,] you are looking for shadows—shadows disappear mid-day…If there are groups of glyphs on the boulder, [I shot] each group separately. Many times the meaning of a particular glyph comes from understanding the glyphs around it…[when shooting I would] look for a flattened section that has been lowered from the surrounding area as to create a palate—[I then looked] closely and [found and documented with a micro lens] dimpled hammer stone hits…[I shot diagnostic elements of glyphs using]…a macro lens…to see the individual chisel hits.…. [I took] macro (extreme close up) photos of the glyph’s grooves. This allows detailed study of the groove. Sometimes you can spot individual hammer and chisel hits along with alignment marks...Never chalk a glyph.31 Doing so sometime ruins it for later organic evaluation. If a

Field Methods Between August 1, 2015 and August 8, 2015, Dr. Rhianna C. Rogers, James Schuetz, P.G., and Rex Caudwell conducted a Phase I geological and archaeological survey of La Mina, a previously unrecorded pre Taíno/Taíno site located on private property near the El Yunque National 28  The use of Roe’s (2005) field methods for drawing petroglyphs on heavy-gauge clear plastic affixed to the La Mina rock was a costeffective way to meet the expectations of the land owner and agreements with community members, and to be as non-invasive as possible (see Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2017). Additionally, given the focus on ethnoarchaeology, ethnogeology, and activist anthropology, it was crucial for us to adopt a method that was inclusive and took into consideration the needs and wants of the local community. 29  We acknowledge that La Mina could have benefitted enormously from techniques like reflectance transformation imaging (RTI), which would have shown details that are difficult to see (Zeppelzauer et al. 2016). However, as a personally funded project on private property that was based on community agreements with the town and locals, it was not possible at the time (see Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2017). It is our hope to return to the site and conduct additional research once current socio-cultural issues subside on the island.

30  It is worth noting that Hurricane Maria destroyed the homestead above La Mina in 2017. Due to safety concerns and hazardous materials now located on the grounds of the former homestead, we have not returned to conduct additional fieldwork, as previously intended. 31  Rogers’s comments: As will be seen, some of La Mina’s glyphs were “chalked” during Cauldwell’s study. When asked why this was done, Cauldwell suggested that glyph degradation made it difficult to see their locations with the “naked-eye” and those customers who joined his petroglyph tours wanted to purchase images that they could “see.”

34

La Mina Project Methodology

Carretera 191

Gate

House Wood Easment C

Garage Chicken Coup

Upper Cacique Cave

Pool

Gravel Parking

Lower Parking

La Mina Site Collapsed Cave

C

Feature Key

La Mina Boulder

C

Cave Transect Footpath

Legend Streams Roads (abandon)

Transect 1

Paved Road

Chief’s Head Boulder

Property Line Terrace Level Upper Middle Lower

Figure 4.1. Upper and lower La Mina site map.

glyph has to be marked, splash water on the glyph [in order to] make it stand out. Some [photographers] use latex impressions or tracings [like what we elected to do in the 2015 field season], but doing so may remove some loose particles of the rock and doesn’t show the glyphs that are invisible to the naked eye [,] but show up on a photo. I prefer a complete hands-off method as much as possible. However, if something must be used to mark the glyph, I use a small soft brush soaked in charcoal water (charcoal briquettes in jar of water) that

easily washes off with the rain. [I] never shoot a glyph or glyph rock when there are sections of the boulder in shadow and others in bright light. The splotched design confuses the eye. To study the glyph, put the image into Adobe Elements or equivalent [photo editing software], and [make adjustments to the photo] using various contrasts, colors, filters, etc.…For shooting in the dark, [I] illuminated the glyph with the peripheral light from a flashlight—just enough to allow the camera to focus…. (Cauldwell 2014, 37–8) 35

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 4.2. Field investigation of La Mina boulder.

Field Methods (2015 Season)

site predictability (i.e., along the two La Mina unnamed streams surround the site; near the abandoned mill road; in the Upper Cacique Cave; and near lower elevation areas, which might have held water in earlier periods). Our goal was to locate artifacts with possible associations to the site petroglyphs. We were unable to create a sampling grid based on the uneven terrain, changes in elevation, exposed boulders/bedrock, and a thin layer of organic soils. Instead, we employed a systematic pedestrian survey model where the co-authors Cauldwell, Schuetz, and Rogers stood five meters apart and walked the entirety of Sr. Alex Lopez Rodriguez’s property.32

Building on Cauldwell’s photographic methods, our 2015 study used the project research question (see chapter one); a desktop analysis of known archaeological, historical, and environmental databases/research in the region; and ethnographic field notes to construct an appropriate methodological design. Given the site’s location near other known petroglyphs (e.g., Hippie Hold and Cueva del Indio), its location within a tropical/humid rain forest, and its potential to contain additional petroglyphs in its uneven terrain, we decided to traverse a 1 km2 area of potential effect (APE), regardless of ground surface visibility (see Figure 4.2).

32  It is important to reiterate that we did not know the exact termination of Sr. Lopez Rodriguez’s property. As stated by Cauldwell in Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell (2018),

Our Phase I pedestrian reconnaissance survey consisted of Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell traversing the entire APE on foot, spaced at approximately 10–20 meter intervals. Generally speaking, this initial survey was done to determine the location of potential test pits, transects, possible features, and affiliated sites, and to determine the overall site terminus. More specifically, we hoped to locate and identify additional above-ground features such as rock shelters, associated petroglyphs, and historic-period foundations; it was not our goal to identify individual or isolated artifacts at that time. During our initial survey, we also looked for locations characterized by high, well-drained elevations and adjacent to a potable water source(s) as possible indicators of areas of high

With a lot of land still under the old Spanish land grant, system (created between 1500–1900) and without a modern survey of the region, many of the property lines around La Mina were questionable. Not to mention that some properties have been abandoned in the area and records of former owners were not well documented. In addition, many local informants and property owners could not identify where one property ended and another began. Despite my efforts to look up official records in Cubuy and San Juan, I was unable to definitively determine property lines for La Mina in the local township. Meaning, inadvertently, we could have been working on more than one property, but there would be no formal way to tell. Even house locations are in question since the system is so outdated; for example, some houses are listed on one person’s property and taxes were assessed to that plot of land, yet in reality the house is located on another person’s property and local agreements have been made to adjust lines to compensate the inaccuracies on file with the government. This, obviously, leads to

36

La Mina Project Methodology

880

900 Boulder La Mina

Feature Key

860

Cave Cave Transect Legend Bridge

84

0

Chief's Head Boulder

GPS Points Upper Terrace Stream Middle Terrace Lower Terrace Transect Streams Roads (abandon) Topography (20 feet)

Terrace Level Upper

0 5 10

20

30

40 800 Meters

820

Lower Middle

Figure 4.3. GPS and compass mapping.

La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders (see Figures 4.5 and 4.6), was created and shovel tests were excavated at 5-meter intervals, unless obstructed by rock.

We also recognized that our test pits, without heavy machinery, would yield limited artifacts, ecofacts, and geofacts; however, given the continued use of this site by native peoples, we felt it important to look for more contemporaneous remains. In Figure 4.3, we show a sideby-side comparison of our field survey map and our GPS pedestrian survey map.

Additional environmental samples were collected from around the APE, including a comparative sample of surface and subsurface environmental remains (i.e., potential ecofacts and geofacts) and geological samples for descriptive analysis. Shovel tests excavated for the project were to be 30–50 cm2 by 1 m; however, when overburden and environment refuse were encountered, we were limited to relatively shallow pits, between 12–30 cm below the surface (see Figure 4.7).

Given its location near the El Yunque rainforest, the La Mina site was entirely covered with vegetation, including old growth trees, exposed rocks/boulders, and leaf litter. As noted in chapter three, geological and environmental contexts were documented, mapped, and defined in order to denote the correlation of glyphs to associated landforms, terraces, and other site environmental features (see Figure 4.4 field sketch). Areas near breadfruit trees, potentially indicative of historical occupations, were also noted and tested for the presence of cultural remains. The distribution of all test pits and archaeological finds were incorporated into the GIS database, combined with a digitized/rectified plot of the environment, and mapped.

When possible, we dug until sterile subsoil was encountered. All soils were screened using a ¼ mesh screen. Few alluvial soils were encountered along T1, which decreased the probability for deeply buried deposits; however, when alluvial soils were encountered, like those along the unnamed stream yielded, we were able to find historic artifacts (see Figure 4.8). All diagnostic objects were documented in the field, and later added to the appropriate catalogue, bagged, and documented.

In addition to the initial pedestrian survey, we conducted GPS and tape and compass mapping as well as test pitting along Transect 1 (T1) and the unnamed stream NW of the La Mina Cave. The methods of the initial pedestrian reconnaissance were significantly different from the systematic pedestrian GPS/tape measure surface mapping of the site. During this part of the study, we mapped all three affiliated terraces, including orientation, GPS location, and distance. T1, a 49 meter transect between

Laboratory Methods (2015 Season) Cultural remains recovered from all archaeological occurrences (AO) and archaeological sites (AS) were analysed following these methods. All archaeological materials have been permanently stored with Assistant Director Victor Torres of the Cueva del Indio Archaeological Park. This facility is a limited-access building located at the site facility. Cultural remains collected in the field, including artifacts, ecofacts, and geofacts, were processed in the laboratory according to the following laboratory procedures:

extreme confusion and is some cases houses and land cannot be sold. What is worse is that even with accurate, modern surveys, some properties like these cannot transfer custody since many local agreements are never formalized in writing. These issues made it even more difficult for me to find and secure permissions for the site. After numerous conversations with community officials, I ultimately was led to speak with Alex Lopez Rodriquez who the community determined owned the parcels of land that contain both the La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders.” (77–8)

1. Artifacts (e.g., ceramics, lithics, faunal modified faunal remains, modified shell remains, modified wood remains) were further categorized into artifact type based upon macroscopic and microscopic (Meiji 10x 37

¡El Yunque se levanta! 920

900

Stream Diversion Upper Cacique Cave 880

900

La Mina Boulder Stream TP

Cave 1

5

3 2 4

86 0

6

Feature Key Cave

84 0

8

Footpath

9

Bridge

Chief's Head Boulder

Legend Test Pit transect

82 0

Streams Roads (abandon) Topography (20 feet)

Terrace Level

Scale 0

5 10

20 800

Upper

30

40 Meters

Lower Middle

Figure 4.4. La Mina site map with terraces and transect 1.

binocular microscope) identification, form, function, assemblage, and provenience. 2. Ecofacts (e.g., seeds, food remains, associated unmodified shell remains, associated unmodified faunal remains, associated unmodified wood remains, and coprolites) were categorized according to use, association, and provenience. 3. Geofacts (associated geological occurrences in a site provenience) were quantified by type, weight, and count. Geofacts were characterized by rock classification, mineralogical identifications, grain size, and likely genesis. (Sutton and Arkush 2001, 33–4.)

geological classification(s) and preliminarily evaluated. Once processed in the lab, materials were sub-divided into three categories: pre-Columbian, historical, and non-ceramic items. When artifacts could be identified as either pre-Columbian or historical diagnostic type(s), they were sorted by provenience into the aforementioned subtypes: cultural, ceramic, and non-ceramic groupings. Additionally, ecofacts and geofacts were categorized and grouped according tentative classification, association, and provenience, and then placed into pre-established nonceramic chronologies. Cleaning techniques were based on best practices for preservation of the specimens (National Park Service 2006). Only one potential diagnostic prehistoric artifact was discovered (a possible carved crystallized object in La Mina Lot #51) and only a few historic/modern

Specimen bags were documented in the field, written into field specimen (FS) catalogues by archaeological and 38

La Mina Project Methodology

Figure 4.5. Transect 1, test pit #1.

Figure 4.6. Transect 1, test pit #1.

Figure 4.7. Transect 1, test pit screening.

Figure 4.8. Transect 1 (T1), bagging remains.

39

¡El Yunque se levanta! goals of the analysis focus on this type of material. The goals of this analysis were to:

artifacts were found (e.g., hand wrought nails and a modern tile) in Lot #52. No representative geofacts were located at the site; however, possible ecofacts were collected, bagged, photographed as well (see shells in Lots #41, 44, 50). All collected objects were assigned accession numbers and were entered into a respective catalogue. All materials were recorded in the Lab Photo Log: Archaeological Remains using the data fields listed in Table 4.1.

Items that could not be identified were labeled as unidentifiable (uni.) and recorded as such in the logs.

1. Examine the spatial range of human activities evidenced by the lithic assemblage and identified here as archaeological sites. 2. Identify the time periods these sites were utilized/ occupied in the project area. 3. Identify the lithic reduction techniques and geologic source locations evident in the recovered assemblage. As a part of the analysis, lithic artifacts were documented for a range of variables including type, condition, maximum dimension, length, width, thickness, weight, raw material, colour, presence of cortex, and utilization. All variables were documented and can be found in Appendix F, Figure F.1. 4. Type identifies or describes the form (and or) function of the specimen. Values for type in this analysis included biface thinning flakes, block shatter, decortication flakes, flakes, cores, and utilized flakes. 5. Condition identifies the part of the lithic present in the specimen. Values for condition include complete, proximal, distal, medial, lateral, and unspecified. 6. Maximum dimension is the largest possible measurement taken on the specimen, recorded in millimeters. 7. Length is the measurement from the proximal to distal end on complete lithic specimens. If a specimen is incomplete, the measurement is taken on the lateral axis or arbitrarily, recorded in millimeters. 8. Width is the measurement across the medial part of a complete lithic specimen. This measurement is also taken across in-tact medial planes or arbitrarily, recorded in millimeters. 9. Thickness is the greatest measurement taken perpendicular to the length and width measurements. This measurement is taken on all specimens, recorded in millimeters. 10. Weight is measured for all specimens in grams to the hundredth decimal place (Meiji 10x binocular microscope). 11. Raw material is the general type that best describes the mineralogical composition of the lithic. Variables in this analysis included silicified coral, fine chert, and coarse chert. 12. Colour is documented by the recorder. Multiple colours may be documented for one lithic. 13. Cortex refers to the percentage of cortex estimated on the lithic. 14. Utilization is any evidence of wear scars, polish, or manipulation.

Analytical Methods

Classification Methods

Most specimens collected in the field were categorized as historic/modern materials and one lithic; therefore, the

Petroglyph Classification Methods

Table 4.1. Data Fields 1. Photo Numbers 2. Quantity of Items 3. Descriptions 4. Provenience 5. Remarks

Representative diagnostic items also were photographed and recorded. Data recorded in the Lab Photo Log: Geological Remains were recorded using the data fields listed in Table 4.2. Table 4.2. Data Fields 1. Photo Numbers 2. Quantity of Items 3. Descriptions 4. Provenience 5. Remarks

To ensure complete and consistent recording of rock art, it was proposed that a standardized form be created in recording of these features. Therefore, all glyphs were recorded in the La Mina Petroglyph Catalogue using the data fields listed in Table 4.3.33 Table 4.3. Data Fields 1. Photo Numbers 2. Petroglyph Measurements 3. Substrate 4. Stone Type 5. Remarks

As discussed in chapter two, Puerto Rican rock art does not currently have a universal typology. With this in mind, our research employed a combination of current standards, including Rodríguez Alvarez’s (1988) and Roe’s (2005) rock art typologies and a combination of

33  It is important to note that, due to size, we have not included the petroglyph photo log in this publication. It is available upon request.

40

La Mina Project Methodology Roe and Hayward’s (2009) and Chanlatte-Baik’s (2013) cultural chronologies as well as some significant studies that have contributed to the joint understanding of rock art in this region (Dubelaar, Merkling, and Argana 1999). The following classifications were taken from Rodríguez Alvarez’s (1988) and used in this study:

1986b) recognized several techniques of petroglyph making activities of which some are found along the Blanco River. These are: 1. Plane line. The rock surface is peeled off by rubbing, using a blunt implement and moistened sand. This type of technique produces lines that have no clear depth. 2. Grinding. A groove line is made on the surface of the rock by friction. 3. Pecking. This is a technique in which the rock surface is pecked with a stone chisel, directly or with the help of a hammer stone. This technique produces rows of closely adjoined dots or pits, which are run together into a grove by technique 2. 4. Modeling. A part of the rock, like a protruding corner, is chosen for its shape and sculptured into a figure, using the [stylized] lines. 5. Leveling. This is technique of lowering the surface of the rock, using the Type technique that outlined the motive of the figure. (Dubelaar 1986a, 899–900)

1. Abstract geometric designs. This type includes concentric circles, concentric diamonds, and other simple geometric symbols. 2. Colonarie (Capá) style. This type refers to pecked or incised curvilinear lines that are found on boulders or rock shelter walls. Bullen (1975) stated that the Colonarie style petroglyphs are the same as those referred to as Capa by Frasseto (1960, fig. 9) at the Icacos Petroglyph Group, the only National Registered archaeological site near La Mina. 3. Representations of face. a. Simple face. This subgroup consists of a circle surrounding three dots, or a small circle in which one dot has been elongated, indicating a mouth. b. Developed face. Similar to the previous subgroup, but it has a nose, ears and hair or rays. c. Complicated faces. This subgroup is more elaborated, showing ornaments like earrings. 4. Sun symbols. Circular figures with rays that could represent the sun. 5. Swaddled figures. This type refers to figures that have a head or face with a body that is commonly rectangular in shape. The body could have diagonal, curved or horizontal lines, suggesting a body wrapping. 6. Utuado type figures. Under this type, Bullen (1973) identified two subtypes: a. Squatting female figures. This subtype is a squatting anthropomorphic figure with a circle over its bending legs. According to Olsen (1971), this motive could represent the deity Atabeira, the Arawack goddess of fertility, in the act of childbirth (37–9). b. Yocahu male figures. This subtype consists of an oval face with large eye sockets, slit eye with a triangle between nose and mouth. The face has thick lips in which the central grove is well marked. (Bullen 1975, 101)

In addition to these principle classification methods, we consulted a variety of sources to supplement our interpretations (Bérard 2013; Chanlatte-Baik 2013; Rodríguez Alvarez 1991). Non-Ceramic Classification Methods Non-ceramic remains were grouped using the following chronologies: Sutton and Arkush (2001), Deagan (1987, 2002), FLMNH Historical Archaeology Digital Type (Florida Museum n.d.-a), FLMNH Historical Archaeology Collections (Florida Museum n.d.-b), and the Society of Historical Archaeology. In the United States, the most widely used and respected non-ceramic classification methodology is that currently used by FLMNH and created by Deagan (1987, 2002). These approaches were employed in our research to classify all diagnostic non-ceramic remains. However, in order to simplify the definitions currently used in these classifications, I have utilized the definitions and artifact classifications from both Sutton and Arkush’s (2001) text and the SHA website. The popularity of the FLMNH historical non-ceramic classifications relies on their ability to combine attributes, styles, decorations, and temporal frameworks from across the New and Old Worlds into a few, universally accessible reference sources. Given the expansive time span attributed to this collection (~A.D. 800/900–present) and the general difficulty determining exact time frames for non-ceramic material use, I generally applied the temporal classifications of the pre-Columbian period (~A.D. 800/900–1542) and historical periods (A.D. 1542– present) to the analysis of non-ceramic remains.

Apart from these seven types recognized by Bullen (1975), Rodríguez Álvarez (1998) included three additional types in the list: 7. Zoomorphic. Representation of birds, mammals, reptiles and arthropods. 8. Head on rectilinear body-feet. This type represents a simple face on a rectilinear body with non-squatting legs. 9. Handholding anthropomorphic. This type represents two or more figures holding hands.

Geological Methods As Troncoso, Armstrong, and Nash (2018) pointed out, geological processes intertwining with cultural perceptions creates a focal point where geological-minded brains (people thinking about and making observations

In addition to the several styles of the rock engravings in Puerto Rico, the petroglyph makers used different techniques of incising the rock surface. Dubelaar (1986a, 41

¡El Yunque se levanta! of the earth formations) are changed by their geological environment. This change can manifest into cultural choices (such as religious connotations) that are based on geological observations: minerals, riverbed, caves, etc. The methods presented here include data about past cultures and their relationship with geological phenomena such as caves, streams, rock art, and therefore contribute to the growing body of ethnogeology. Previous cultures that settled in the area of La Mina chose the site as a location of significance, and did so for a reason. Evidence gathered at the site and presented here provides strong evidence that the people chose the site, in part, for its geological features such as the streams, the topography, and the cave(s). The study of La Mina and its people/culture therefore represents the union of ethnoarchaeology and ethnogeology. Inclusion of local, present day perspectives and observations expands the ethnogeological aspects of this study into present day cultural conditions. Information provided by local residents, such as an historic mine located at higher elevations, other petroglyphs in the area, and water diversion of a stream at the site, are examples of this present day ethnogeology. Based on these concepts, it is clear how the interdisciplinary aspects of this research have manifested into the very ethnogeological component of this study. As such, the interdisciplinary merging of the disciplines in this study is inseparable from its ethnogeological nature.

the site datum were recorded. Point measurements such as La Mina, caves, the bridge, and other notable features were recorded as waypoints and collected after visually identifying stability in the GPS locational data. Non-point information such as streambeds, the test pit transect, and site terraces were digitally surveyed as GPS “tracks.” The tracks were recorded while slowly walking along the feature while the GPS was set to track mode. To the extent practical, GPS accuracy was assessed in three ways: (1) assumed potential difference between measured and actual coordinates based on GPS listed digital accuracy at the time of a single measurement, (2) drift in accuracy during the day, and (3) random scatter in measurements. With the exception of a few anomalies, the GPS collected data with sufficient accuracy for this Phase 1 investigation. Point measurements identified an absolute accuracy (difference between measured coordinates and real-world coordinates) of approximately 2–3 meters, which was better than expected given lack of a base station for correction and the considerable tree cover. Meanwhile the data collected at test pits waypoints, transect track, and terrace tracks suggest the relative accuracy was approximately 1 meter. Geological Rock Descriptions Geological descriptions followed a lithological method with only a minor attempt at interpreting genesis and/or relationships to previous published literature. This was a deliberate attempt to avoid discrepancy between existing documented nomenclature and newly interpreted data. However, these lithological descriptions were determined by first understanding the overall regional-geologicaldepositional environment and knowledge of geological environments from previous works (most notably, U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). In chapter three, the USGS GIS database-metadata file demonstrated that local areas are volcanoclastic formations (i.e., Lomas and Tabonuco formations consisting of volcanic breccia, hyaloclastite breccia, conglomerate, volcanic sandstone, pillowed and non-pillowed lava flows, and rarely volcanic lithic mudstone) (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998). Meanwhile to the north and up-slope (higher slope areas of El Yunque) exists an igneous intrusive material (i.e., daguao, a hornblende quartz-diorite porphyry) (U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Team 1998), potentially a part of a larger batholith forming El Yunque. In chapter three, Figure 3.8 also demonstrates notable alluvium in the site area extending downstream into the valley to the south.

Several standard field geographical and geological methods were utilized in completing the Phase 1 Archaeological and Geological Study; additionally unique site-specific techniques were developed for sensitive areas of the site. These techniques are listed and described next. Survey Measurements: Manual and GPS Hand survey measurements were taken as part of the Phase 1 Study to provide relevant spatial relationships throughout the site features and to provide analog backup measurements to the GPS data. A local site reference point (site datum) was established and used as a unified point from which bearings and directions were taken. The site datum was located with a stake and survey tape, positioned approximately 2 meters east of the northern portion of La Mina’s east-facing side. Distance and bearing measurements were taken from the site datum with a basic compass and 100-meter measuring tape. Bearings were measured with either a Brunton® compass (James Schuetz) or a field compass (Rex Caldwell). A Garmin Dakota 20 GPS collected digital data and data were uploaded to GIS using Environmental Systems Research Institute’s (ESRI) ArcMap 10.1 (SP1). Figure 4.9 illustrates the data workflow process employed for this project.

Local site-specific lithological descriptions were developed from the documented genesis of the area, previously described regional formations, and field examination of mineralogy and structure. A 10x hand lens was used to visually identify mineralogical components and provided the basis for the site-specific classifications. Overburden and bedrock determinations supported an understanding of potential individual rock migration as the result of mass wasting (e.g., landslides), which were accounted for in the lithological descriptions. Relative dating observations were made when comparing rock fall and accretional growth to petroglyphs.

During each GPS measurement a minimum of five satellites were typically required before recording a data point. Any locations that did not have five satellites were re-measured or noted as having questionable reliability. At the beginning and end of each field day (and occasionally during the day), redundant measurements of 42

La Mina Project Methodology

GPS Measurements (waypoints and tracks)

Process GPS data based on accuracy and precision

Correcon and verificaon

Field Hand Measurements

Compare and revise as necessary

Delineate Map Features

Produce Map 1 - n

Flow Diagram Represenng GPS processing and migraon to geographical informaon system Figure 4.9. Location survey data flow chart.

A non-destructive technique was developed for rock identification proximal to the La Mina site by comparing weathering patterns and outside surfaces with fresh rock of similar type from distal locations of the La Mina site. As few fresh samples were observed, these were left in-situ to be as un-intrusive as possible. Fresh samples from outside the site area were used as a surrogate rock type. These surrogates were then used to identify rock types at and around La Mina boulder and Chief’s Head boulder without imprinting new anthropogenic features onto the historically significant site. Small samples, from outside the site, were photographed and logged (see appendix C).

zones between formation types, stratigraphic horizons, lineation within rocks, and other notable features. For geological bearings, a magnetic declination of -13º measurements was used, based on NOAA and the commercial website, Magnetic-Declination (www. magnetic-declination.com). Soil Descriptions During test pitting (methods described in chapter four), soils types were identified and described prior to screening and archaeological feature identification. Soils texture from test pitting were identified and described with the Modified Burmister Classification System (Burmister 1970) and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (García-Gaines and Frankenstein 2015). Fine-grained soils were classified by hand using a thread roll test where moist soils are rolled to a thin thread until the smallest thread is formed. The approximate diameter of this thread is then

Structural Strike and Dip of Features Measurements of orientation (strike) and dip of significant bedrock features were measured with a Brunton® Compass. Types of features included contact 43

¡El Yunque se levanta! compared with look-up tables to identify silt to clay ratios. Sand and proportions were identified visually. Conclusion The study of La Mina and its people/culture represents the union of ethnoarchaeology and ethnogeology. Inclusion of local, present day perspectives and observations expands the ethnogeological aspects of this study into present day cultural conditions. Information provided by local residents, such as an historic mine located at higher elevations, other petroglyphs in the area, and water diversion of a stream at the site, are examples of this present day ethnogeology. Based these concepts it is clear how the interdisciplinary aspects of this research have manifested into the very ethnogeological component of this study. As such, the merging of the disciplines in this study are represent its interdisciplinary nature. The interdisciplinary nature of this research (and book) has become the paramount concept that continues throughout each chapter. These interconnected disciplines and their purposeful overlap make the intersection of ethnology, archaeology, geology, and activism a critical component of this study.

44

5 Interpretation and Analysis The analyses performed in this study specifically illustrate the research questions and strategies presented in chapter one and methods described in chapter four. In this chapter, all site features and diagnostic archaeological and geological remains are analysed to determine the cultural context and significance of the La Mina petroglyph site. In the following sections, we have developed a localized chronology for the La Mina site and associated geological and archaeological assemblage as well as identified petroglyph forms, styles, and function using pre-existing chronologies.

ethnoarchaeological premise of this work. As Cauldwell stated: One reason [the La Mina] petroglyph boulder is unique is that it was designed to do something specific and is still doing it today...The [La Mina] glyph boulder has a razor edge pointing upstream and is located between two small unnamed streams. When there is a flood the front of the boulder cuts the flood waters like a ship cuts water as it pushes ahead [see Figure 5.1]. I do not know if this is by design or accident and there are many cuts on the boulder designed to channel water [see Figure 5.2]…the indigenous race (probably the Igneri or Pre-Taíno) may have considered water magical. The locals still do. In the Rio Cubuy, a river a short distance away, I have found further evidence of water channeling in the igneous granite (quartz diorite). There are locations [in other parts of] the world that have what some call water glyphs or water/cup glyphs35 – in particular the Southwest United States – these do not seem to be related to these specific glyphs. Petroglyphs, like other relics, are most times impossible to accurately date.

As indicated in chapter one, we developed the following research question and objectives: 1. What is the cultural context and significance of the La Mina petroglyph site? Based on this question, we developed the following research objectives: 1. Understand and/or construct a ethnoarchaeological, ethnogeological, and activist anthropological context for the La Mina site and its surroundings; 2. Identify the cultural and temporal phases of the represented rock art and classify their symbolic and stylistic elements; and 3. Determine how La Mina fits into the greater boulder art sequence for ancient Puerto Rico. In the following sections, we provide a summary of these findings. Cauldwell’s Project Interpretations34 As we have continually mentioned, Cauldwell’s findings in his photographic study are a critical piece of this study. In 2016, Cauldwell presented the initial interpretation of the La Mina site at the International Association for Caribbean Archaeology Congress in St. Martin. Though some of Cauldwell’s assertions do not fully align with project interpretations in our 2015 field study (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2016), we felt it important to present his findings as a starting point for our own analysis and discussion. As before, we have left much in his interpretation in his own voice, adding in citations and edits as necessary, to continue with the

Figure 5.1. La Mina NW side. 35  This statement is in reference to the early/middle formative period research conducted in the U.S. southwest on water and cup channeling glyphs. See Michael L. Terlep, “Water, Pitch, and Prehistoric Indexes: An Analysis of Cup and Channel Petroglyphs from the Arizona Strip,” in American Indian Rock Art, 39 (2013): 29–40.

Although the 2015 project followed current scientific methods and practices, Cauldwell’s longitudinal, photographic research project did not. As a result, we have elected to keep Cauldwell’s findings in narrative format and his research separate for the rest of our analysis.

34 

45

¡El Yunque se levanta! the entire La Mina boulder was devoted to such a ritual. Even though I came to this conclusion independently, research on this indicates that others have already come to the same conclusion. In rock art, spirals and hallucinogenic rituals are definitely interrelated – with many papers38 and reports already written on it. [For example,] researchers Tom Froese, Alexander Woodward, and Takashi Ikegami from Tokyo recently published a comprehensive study of over 40,000 years’ worth of cave paintings around the world and noted that the spiral-like and labyrinth designs...didn’t just pop up by coincidence. Specifically known as “Turing instabilities,” these hallucinations are common after ingesting a number of different plants with psychoactive properties. The patterns resemble “neural patterns” that mimic the structural makeup of the brain.39 Thus[,] the spirals, circles and lines were almost certainly carved to illustrate or honor what the indigenous race was seeing in hallucinogenic rituals. The Taínos of the Caribbean called this ritual the [C]ohoba ceremony – as most likely did their predecessors. Thus the La Mina petroglyphs, and perhaps others, may not fall under the classification of art as they were created for the specific purpose of honoring or giving information via a hallucinogenic ritual. It is also my opinion that the arc direction of the spiral is significant – whether it was carved clockwise or counterclockwise starting from the inside. Perhaps one direction is indicative of spiraling up to confer with the zemís (the Taíno spirits) and then spiraling down as the drugs wore off. Figure 5.2. La Mina carved water channel, close-up view.

What is [my interpretation of the] singular zoomorphic parrot petroglyph? For this, we need to understand the mythology of another group of ancients: the South American Arawaks. Many archaeologists have linked the South American Arawaks as alleged distant relatives to the Taínos. I.M. Thurn, who lived with the Arawaks in the 1800s, stated that their mythology told of the day [on] which various Arawak groups or families got together and determined that they were getting too plentiful and they needed to somehow separately identify themselves. The method they chose40 was to use animals, plants, birds, and place locators as family [or clan] names. Thus one could speculate that the parrot petroglyph [Figure 5.4] was such an identifying

When examining the sides of [the La Mina] boulder, you will note that it is covered almost exclusively with exceptionally deep spirals, lines, and circles. [I believe] the purpose of the petroglyphs spirals and circles appears to be to celebrate the [C]ohoba [C]eremony.36 An example of on the spirals is provided in Figure 5.3. [In my opinion and conversations with locals] there is ample evidence to connect spirals and other geometric designs to hallucinogenic ceremonies[,] which, in turn, are immortalized into rock....37 Perhaps spirals and circles were part of what they were seeing in their hallucinogenic dream state and [that is] why they were so often carved into rock….[As I have seen in other glyphs in the Antilles, it may also] show the actual astral traveling and conference with a zemí…perhaps

38  See Jack Pettigrew, “Iconography in Bradshaw Rock Art: Breaking the Circularity,” in Clinical and Experimental Optomotry 94, no. 5 (2011): 403–417; Marianne Freiberger, “Uncoiling the Spiral: Maths and Hallucinations,” +Plus Magazine (2009), https://plus.maths.org/content/ uncoiling-spiral-maths-and-hallucinations; John R. Baker, “The Nature of Shamanism: Substance and Function of a Religious Metaphor,” in Anthropology of Consciousness 7 (2) (1996): 28–30; and Francisco J. Carod-Artal (2015). “Hallucinogenic Drugs in Pre-Columbian Mesoamerican Cultures,” in Neurología (English Edition) 30, no. 1 (2015): 42–9. 39  See Tom Froese, Alexander Woodward, and Takashi Ikegami, “Turing Instabilities in Biology, Culture, and Consciousness? On the Enactive Origins of Symbolic Material Culture,” in Adaptive Behavior 21, no. 3 (2013), 199–214. 40  See Everard F. Im Thurn, Among the Indians of Guiana: Being Sketches Chiefly Anthropologic from the Interior of British Guiana (London: K. Paul, Trench & Company, 1883).

36  Rogers’s commentary: In the 2015 analysis, we affirm a connection between channeling, the glyphic elements, and the proximal location of archaeological features near hydrological features (i.e., rainforest and unnamed streams). 37  Rogers’s note: Chanlatte-Beik (2013) argued that the Huecoids were a group of artists who focused on cosmological artwork. The Saladoids were a group of cultural stratified and skilled artisans who created elaborate ceramics and ceremonial centers, and brought with them a semi-developed agricultural system (García Goyco n.d.-b.) They first settled in the northeastern tip of the island, at the Hacienda Grande Village Site in Loíza, and slowly settled throughout the island (Roe 1985; Rouse & Alegría 1990.)

46

Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.3. La Mina NE side – spiral (petroglyph C).

Figure 5.4. La Mina NE side – parrot (petroglyph A.1 – A.2).

symbol claiming the surrounding area as belonging to the [p]arrot family or clan.41 Thus these specific glyphs are not created for art’s sake as first opinions tend one to believe.

The La Mina glyph boulder is not alone at its location. I have found another a little further into the jungle that even the guide did not know about – a large boulder I call the Chief’s Head boulder as for the number of chief’s heads carved into the boulder [including a possible sun glyph; see Figure 5.5]. What distinguishes this boulder is a large palate created by the artist as to have a smooth area to create his art. The boulder is a sedimentary type boulder with many visible and

41  Rogers’s note: Though this is an interesting interpretation, it is much more likely that the parrot represents the critically endangered parrot called the Puerto Rican Amazon (scientific name, Amazona vittata), also known as the Puerto Rican parrot, or iguaca.

47

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 5.5. Chief’s Head boulder, SW side.

irregular layers. This is not a boulder you would pick to check for glyphs and is probably why no one noticed them before. These glyphs are perhaps older than those on the La Mina boulder as they are extremely worn – or they were cut less deep. Those on the east side are nothing more than circular faces and perhaps one extremely worn wrapped figure (seen in 2015 without a wrapped body as Glyph O) [see Figure 5.6]. Those on the south side are the palate and the more complex figures including one of Boyanel, the figure one would pray to for rain. There are no glyphs on the west and

north sides. If you go even further downstream you will find some owl glyphs [reclassified as wrapped figures] and going upstream you will find a large monkey glyph. Indigenous painting of the glyphs is a controversial point. Were they or not? My opinion is that they were as I have found several that had residual paint in the grooves. All were red. At least that is the color they are now many years after they were painted. The locals were able to create many colors. (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.)

Figure 5.6. Chief’s Head boulder, SW side (glyph O).

48

Interpretation and Analysis 920

900

Stream Diversion Upper Cacique Cave 880

900

La Mina Boulder Stream TP

Cave 1

5

3 2 4

86 0

6

Feature Key Cave

84 0

8

Footpath

9

Bridge

Chief's Head Boulder

Legend Test Pit transect

82 0

Streams Roads (abandon) Topography (20 feet)

Terrace Level

Scale 0

5 10

20 800

Upper

30

40 Meters

Lower Middle

Figure 5.7. La Mina site map with terraces and transect 1.

Cauldwell’s research, photographs, and interpretations have been a critical piece of the broader interpretation provided next. Not only did his photographs highlight glyphs no longer visible during our field season, but also his insights into local beliefs and connection to the community made this research possible.

Figure 5.7). Given the identification of what appears to be a possible plaza between the La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders graphically depicted in profile view in Figure 5.8, we felt this was a possible location to find both ancient and historic artifacts. Of the 11 shovel tests excavated along T1, nine yielded positive results (see Table 5.1), which is the archaeological log and includes a listing of achieved objects found during the study). In addition to the 49 meter transect and the investigation of positive shovel tests, one target area NW of the La Mina cave and near the adjacent unnamed stream was identified as an area of higher probability. Two test pits were dug in this area, but only one yielded historic artifacts. Two surface collections were also made in the

2015 Project Interpretations Field Results The results of the fieldwork can be described in 13 components. The first component consists of the 49 meter test pitting Transect 1 (T1) between the La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders, which is shown on the site map in 49

¡El Yunque se levanta!

50 Figure 5.8. Artistic interpretation of La Mina site profile.

Table 5.1. La Mina Photographic Log, Archaeological Remains Photo Number (1) 0115 R. Caudwell (2) 42 100–4075 R. C. Rogers

(3) 43 100–4076 R. C. Rogers (4) 44 100–4077 R. C. Rogers (5) 45 100–4078 R. C. Rogers

51

(6) 46 100–4079 R. C. Rogers (7) 47 100–4080 48 100–4081 49 100–4082 R. C. Rogers (8) 50 100–4083 R. C. Rogers (9) 51 100–4084 R. C. Rogers

Bag Weight1

Provenience2 La Mina Test Pit #1, Transect 1 15 cm2 by 12 cm 8 /3/ 2015 R. C. Rogers (1) rock 682.0 mg (1) rock La Mina Test Pit #2 (2) Large Shells 62.8 mg (2) large uniface snails Transect 1 (3) small spiral (3) small spiral uniface shells 7.4 m about 3 m off transect small shell fragments small fragments of shells 10–12 cm 8/3/15 R. C. Rogers (2) seeds 62.8 mg (2) seeds breadfruit tree La Mina Test Pit #3 (1) uniface spiral shell 146.8 mg (1) uniface spiral Transect 1 (1) med. snail shell (1) med. uniface snail shell 12 m 8/3/15 R. C. Rogers (1) shell 72.2 mg – 62.8 mg (l) small spiral uniface shell La Mina Near Test Pit 2 Surface collection 8/01/15 R. C. Rogers (2) eggs 66.0 mg (2) reptile eggs La Mina Test Pit #6 (l) shell 62.8 mg (l) uniface snail shell Transect 1 25 m, 15 cm 8/3/15 R. C. Rogers (1) egg 64.2 mg – 62.8 mg (2) reptile eggs La Mina Test Pit #6 (1) uniface snail shell Transect 1 25 m, 15 cm 8/3/15 R. C. Rogers (22) shells 62.8 mg (22) shells La Mina- Test Pit #8 (1) seed 82.8 mg (1) seed Transect 1 (2) rocks (2) rocks 37 m 8/3/2015R. C. Rogers (6) complete spiral shells 160.0 mg (6) complete spiral shells La Mina Test Pit #9 (42) parts of spiral shells Transect 1 (42) parts of spiral shells 62.8 mg (1) seed – breadfruit (1) seed – breadfruit 8/3/2015R. C. Rogers La Mina 62.8 mg (1) crystallized stone (1) crystallized stone Cave near modern pool 338.6 mg (2) natural clay (2) natural clay 8/6/2015 R. C. Rogers (1) rock (l) rock (2) hand wrought nails c.a. 1600–1800 La Mina Waterhole bag weight = 62.8 mg (2) nails (1) modem tile #1 nail: (1) tile (near ax/datum #7) L = 21.3 mm, W=9.17 mm, H 7.31 mm (6) rocks (6) rocks R. C. Rogers weight = 1.07 g #2 nail L = 45.54 mm, W = 4.36 mm weight = 57 g 1370.2 mg 62.8 mg

Description (5) small spiral uniface shells (1) uniface snail shell

Note: 1 Bag weights were collected in the field. Instances when measurements were not exact, a range was noted. 2 Measurements, when provided, describe the distance from the datum point to the test pit. Source: From 08/06/2015 photographical field log by R. C. Rogers. Courtesy of James W. Schuetz, 2020.

Remarks Possible ecofacts

Same as photo 0115

Historic tree Same as above Test Pit 2 Possible ecofact Possibly not anything

Possibly not anything

Possible lithic (crystal zed structure) possible ecofacts Possible ecofacts Probably not anything but good sample of test pit (3) artifacts

Interpretation and Analysis

(10) 52 100–4085 53 100–4086 (close up of nail) R. C. Rogers

Quantity (3) rocks (6) shells

¡El Yunque se levanta! site, one near the Upper Cacique Cave and the other near test pit #2. As discussed in chapter four, boulders, exposed bedrock, and dense root networks prevented us from digging much below 30 cms with small hand tools.

COMPONENT 4: Investigation of Shovel Test 3 Shovel Test 3 (tp-3) was located 12 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck bedrock (most likely a subsurface portion of the La Mina boulder.) The immediate area was also disturbed by the complex root systems created by breadfruit trees within the APE. Two shells and two seeds were collected from the site. We observed an abundance of modern organics, including leaf litter, tree roots, and bark. A representative sample of possible ecofacts was collected from the pit for lab analysis.

The investigations performed by our team during this Phase 1 survey ultimately resulted in the designation of one archaeological site with three affiliated terraces and three separate archaeological features: the La Mina boulder, the Chief’s Head boulder, and miscellaneous petroglyphs along the unnamed streams. COMPONENT 1: 49 Meter Survey The main component42 of our fieldwork performed for this project was the 49 meter transect that crossed the project area. This survey yielded seven positive shovel tests (tp-1, tp-2, tp-3, tp-5, tp-6, tp-8, and tp-9). One of these tests yielded a single lithic flake (tp-8). A few shovel tests yielded modern ecofacts (tp-1, tp-4, and tp-8). Only one test pit near the unnamed stream bisecting the site (i.e., test pit X2 near axiom/datum7) yielded multiple historic remains.

COMPONENT 5: Investigation of Shovel Test X Shovel Test X (tp-x) was located 15 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). No digging occurred at this test tip because it was located on top of solid bedrock. We skipped it and moved to the next test pit. COMPONENT 6: Surface Collection near Shovel Test 2 Surface Collection 1 (sc-1) was located near st-2. One shell was collected for lab analysis.

COMPONENT 2: Investigation of Shovel Test 1 Shovel Test 1 (tp-1) was located on the NE side of the La Mina boulder. It yielded mostly organic, modern material. The immediate area appeared to be disturbed by the complex root systems created by breadfruit trees within the APE. Six shells and three rocks were collected from the site. We observed an abundance of modern organics, including leaf litter, tree roots, and bark. The representative sample of possible ecofacts was collected from the pit for lab analysis.

COMPONENT 7: Investigation of Shovel Test 4 Shovel Test 4 (tp-4) was located 20 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). Limited digging occurred at this test tip, 2 cm below the surface, because it was located on top of solid bedrock. We skipped it and moved to the next test pit. COMPONENT 8: Investigation of Shovel Test 5 Shovel Test 5 (tp-5) was located 25 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck bedrock. The immediate area was also disturbed by the complex root systems created by breadfruit trees within the APE. Two modern reptile eggs and one shell were collected from the pit.

COMPONENT 3: Investigation of Shovel Test 2 Shovel Test 2 (tp-2) was located 7 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck bedrock (most likely a subsurface portion of the La Mina boulder). The immediate area was also disturbed by the complex root systems created by breadfruit trees within the APE. Five shells, a few shell fragments, and one rock were collected from the site as shown in Figure 5.9. We observed an abundance of modern organics, including leaf litter, tree roots, and bark. A representative sample of possible ecofacts was collected from the pit for lab analysis.

COMPONENT 9: Investigation of Shovel Test 6 Shovel Test 6 (tp-6) was located 30 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck bedrock. The immediate area was also disturbed by the complex root systems created by breadfruit trees within the APE. Two modern reptile eggs and one shell were collected from the pit. COMPONENT 10: Investigation of Shovel Test 7

An archaeological feature consists of any evidence of archaeological remains that can be documented. The designation of an archaeological feature is typically assigned when cultural remains have been identified but there is not enough evidence to declare an archaeological site is present. We define an archaeological site as two or more archaeological features found to be in association with one another and within 40 meters from each other.

42 

Shovel Test 7 (tp-7) was located 37 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). Limited digging occurred at this test tip, 8 cm below the surface, because it was located on top of solid bedrock. We skipped it and moved to the next test pit. 52

Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.9. Representative shell collections, test pit #2.

COMPONENT 11: Investigation of Shovel Test 8

COMPONENT 12: Investigation of Shovel Test 9

Shovel Test 8 (tp-8) was located 40 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1) and located on the lower terrace (see green terrace provided in the site map).43 It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck a complex root system and bedrock. As mentioned previously, a single crystallized flake was recovered from this test pit at a depth of 10 cm. Figure 5.10 provides rendering of the crystal. We did not feel the flake was associated with the pre-Columbian occupation of this site; however, we noted that it was unusual to find quartz crystal in an A Horizon top soil, indicating that it may have a historic connection to the site. No additional archaeological remains were discovered in this pit. Despite the limitations on digging in this pit, we encountered a large amount of organize materials: 22 shells, two seeds, and two rocks, which were collected.

Shovel Test 9 (tp-9) was located 45 meters SW on Shovel Test 1 (tp-1). It yielded mostly organic, modern material. We were forced to stop digging 15 cm down because we struck bedrock. Forty-eight shells and one breadfruit seed were collected from the site. COMPONENT 13: Surface Collection near Upper Cacique Cave Surface Collection 2 (sc-2) was located near the Upper Cacique Cave. No artifacts were discovered, but two rocks, one quartz and one (1) piece of natural clay, were collected for lab analysis. COMPONENT 14: Surface Collection and Test Pit (X2) Near Unnamed Stream Surface Collection 3 (sc-3) and test pit (X2) was located near the unnamed stream bisecting the site, just NW of

Field notes indicated we encountered a bedrock and roots on the surface at 40 meters; we decided to move back 3 meters to the soil test pit. 43 

53

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 5.10. Dorsal (right) side of utilized flake fragment from shovel test 8.

proximal margin show that this flake was probably an informal tool that was perhaps used for scraping or cutting (e.g., Keely 1980). Ground disturbing activities were noted during fieldwork. These surficial specimens were likely displaced onto the modern surface by the ground disturbing activities. The discovery of one informal tool may mean that this archaeological occurrence is potentially culturally significant, but the disturbances across the site and our inability to dig below 30 cm at most test pits at the site made making a strong correlation impossible. Analysing La Mina’s Rock Art Addressing Differences between Regional Typologies As mentioned in chapter two, there are a number of discrepancies in the cultural classification associated with Puerto Rican sites. This is a common issue among the dating of rock art worldwide. As Bednarik (1995) stated, Stylistic dating of rock-art, on which the “cultural” attribution of most…rock-art sites…is based on the beliefs of some practitioners that they possess the ability to detect stylistic characteristics in a corpus of rock-art they are very familiar with. The precise criteria for this ability, why it should exist at all, and how the criteria could be expressed in a testable form remains entirely unclear. (881)

Figure 5.11. Surface collections from unnamed stream, NW of La Mina cave.

the La Mina cave. Historic artifacts were discovered, but we were unsure of their association with the La Mina site. Two hand wrought nails, one blue tile, and six rocks were collected for lab analysis (see Figure 5.11).

There is no real way to address the current inconsistencies in the analysis of Puerto Rican rock art. We have, however, elected to combine multiple cultural and classification sequences within our interdisciplinary approach, including Chanlatte-Baik’s (2013) and Roe and Hayward’s (2009) chronological sequences chronologies, along with Rodríguez Alvarez’s (1988) and Roe’s (2005) rock art typologies to create a tentative, qualitative seriation for La Mina (Dubelaar, Merkling, and Argana 1999). As we (and others) have mentioned previously, more work needs to be done in this area to better classify the petroglyphs, Table 5.2 provides a summary of the chronology of these sequences.

La Mina Material Culture Interpretation The vast majority of remains collected were determined to be modern ecofacts and culturally insignificant in relation to the pre-Columbian and colonial petroglyphs within the site. Shovel test 8 (st-8) yielded one crystalized flake (broken) made from quartz crystal (see Figure 5.10 and Appendix A, Figure 1A, Figure 2A). The morphological characteristics and possible presence of polish along the 54

Interpretation and Analysis Table 5.2. Chanlatte-Baik (2013) and Roe and Hayward (2009): Chronologies Combined (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 1542) Chanlatte-Baik (2013)

Roe and Hayward (2009)

Chanlatte-Baik (2013)

Dates

Dates

Sequence

Archaic Period (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 460)

Sequence 2

Lithic Age (4000 – 2000 B.C.E)

Preceramic (6000 B.C.E. – C.E. 500)

Lithic Age Complexes

Lithic Age Complexes

Archaic Age (2000 – 300 B.C.E.)

Aceramic (500 – 400 C.E.)

Archaic Cultures

Archaic Cultures

Early Saladoid

Early Saladoid

Late Saladoid

Epi-Saladoid

Early Ostionoid

Epi- Saladoid

Late Ostionoid

Pre-Taíno

Late Ceramic Age – Contact Period (1200 – 1500 C.E.)

Later/Latest Ostionoid

Taíno

Contact Period (1500 –1542 C.E.)

Classic Taíno

Historic Taíno

Early Ceramic Age – First Phase (300 B.C.E. –350/400 C.E.) Agroalfarero Periods (500 B.C.E. – C.E. 1492)

Roe and Hayward (2009) Sequence 1

Early Ceramic Age – Second Phase (350/400 – 600 C.E.) Late Ceramic Age – First Phase (600 – 900 C.E.) Late Ceramic Age – Second Phase (900 – 1200 C.E.)

Agroalfarero I – La Huenca/Huecoids (~170 – 700 C.E.) and Saladoid (~700 C.E.) occupations

Agroalfarero II – Ostionoid/PreTaíno occupation

As was previously mentioned, we adopted Roe’s (2005) drawing method to catalogue all visible petroglyphs on the La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders. We have included a comprehensive list of all petroglyphs encountered during our 2015 study in appendixes A, B, D, and E. All associated images were included in the La Mina Petroglyph Catalogue. It is worth noting that petroglyphs denoted as dotted lines represent glyphs noted by Cauldwell in his 2006–2015 photographic study; these are no longer visible in our 2015 study. Approximately 35 abstract geometric design petroglyphs were identified on the La Mina boulder and another six petroglyphs were located on the Chief’s Head boulder. All visible petroglyphs were draw and grouped in localized parings (A-P, respectively). Figure 5.12 provides a complete recreation of La Mina boulder’s eastern face with petroglyphs recreated in 1:1 scale with Roe methods, placed in relation to one another on a large wall and then photographed.

rock shelter sites, we determined that La Mina utilized the Colonarie (Capá) style, ‘to pecked or incise curvilinear lines’ (Rodríguez Alvarez 1988, 626). Additionally, the glyph-making methods of pecking (use of chisels to carve and create the glyphs) and modeling (use of natural elements to model into a ceremonial or related cultural element) to develop the water channel along the top edge of the La Mina boulder appear to be the primary construction methods used at the site (Rodríguez Alvarez 1988). Along this side of the boulder, we found evidence of the following diagnostic traits and classified them using the methods articulated previously. Phallus/Phallic Imagery One of the most unique glyphs at this site is the ejaculating phallus (glyph D). Roe, Meléndez, and DeScioli (1999) suggested that the phallus is a direct representation of shamanic potency. The fact that it is both erect and ejaculating towards the carved water channel, which carries water towards the La Mina Cave below, suggests a strong connection between sexual intercourse and the birthing of the world. Roe, Meléndez, and DeScioli further suggested that phallic iconography is associated with the Cohoba ceremony at sites across Puerto Rico as well as to the cyclical birth and death of the world (and its occupants),44 which we support.

FEATURE 1: NE Side of La Mina Boulder Located at Feature 1 (F1), along the NE side of La Mina, we observed and documented 15 unique spiral glyphs – called ‘abstract geometric designs’ by Rodríguez Alvarez (1988, 627) and ‘concentric circles’ by both Rodríguez Alvarez (1988, 624) and Roe (2005, fig. 8–13). Of significant importance, we documented one phallic glyph, of Colonarie (Capá) style, with associated ejaculation connecting to the carved water channel along the top of the boulder (glyph D). We also documented one anthropomorphic/ zoomorphic parrot glyph and wing (glyph A.1 and A.2), and what appears to be one anthropomorphic/zoomorphic turtle glyph. Like the nearby Rio Blanco and the Icacos

44 

Rogers’s Cohoba ceremony comments: I have taken part in similar cosmological rites in the Maya world. During the summer of 2006, I observed a ChaChac ceremony held in the Maya community of Telchaquillo, an hour to the south of Mérida, located next to the pre-Columbian capital Mayapan. The

55

¡El Yunque se levanta!

56 Figure 5.12. All NE La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods).

Interpretation and Analysis assume that this connection most likely places this within the Saladoid occupation period. However, the depth of the parrot carving (roughly 2 cm at its deepest point) and turtle carving (1–1.5 cm deep) as compared to those on the Chief’s Head boulder (averaging .3 to .9 cm, respectively) indicates that later peoples (both the Ostinoids and Taínos) may have re-carved these glyphs and continued their ritualistic use of them at this site.

Anthropomorphic/Zoomorphic Turtle and Parrot Glyphs The representation of both the parrot and stylized turtle glyph illustrates a strong connection to zoomorphic traits at this site. Both Rodríguez Alvarez (1988) and Roe (2005) suggested different ideas for the creation of these types of symbols. Rodríguez Alvarez (1988) suggested they simply represent the zoomorphs present at the site, while Roe (2005) suggested they represent a cosmological, anthropomorphic connection between humans and the creatures they encountered. It is important to note that Waldron (2011) suggested, and we agree, that parrot glyphs in Saladoid tradition represent a strong connection with water features. In his analysis of Saladoid ceramics, Waldron stated:

FEATURE 2: NW Side of La Mina Boulder Located at Feature 2 (F2), along the NW side of La Mina, we observed and documented 14 unique spiral/ concentric circle/abstract geometric glyphs, varying in size and complexity (see Figure 5.13). In addition to these glyphs we also observed one glyph that looked to be a stylized infinity symbol, though now extremely worn (glyph L). Of note, four of the spirals appeared to connect to the natural water drainage grooves along the boulder and traveling down to the La Mina cave just below, illustrating intentional modeling of the rock (Rodríguez Alvarez 1988). Roe and Rivera’s (1995) interpretations support, and we concur, that these spirals represented a connection to water and cosmology. During their analysis of petro glyphs at Barrio El Palo (Pueblito Carmen, Guayama) site in the southern Puerto Rican highlands, Roe and Rivera created the following site interpretation:

In the Antilles, Saladoid potters quite frequently also placed night birds on spouts (Figure 23 b) so that across the Saladoid territories parrots and hunting birds were given this apparently privileged place at the nexus of the shoulder, neck and handle of water vessels… Many have slightly raised eyes encircled by concentric incisions that emphasize these eyes or perhaps evoke color marking of specific species…While it is relatively difficult to pick out specific psittacid species among these adornos, many are painted solid red….45 (459–63) The representation of this glyph on the active La Mina boulder (i.e., a space where water can flow over the glyphs and down into the La Mina cave) aligns with the cosmological importance of the site. Interestingly enough Waldron (2011) suggested that abstract representations of turtles, like the one represented at La Mina (glyph E), are not indicative of Saladoid occupations from Venezuela and may represent other occupations. This also supports the idea that the affiliated Huecoids may have also frequented this site and added to or created their own glyphs. One can

Perhaps the boulder functioned as the marker of a ritual location celebrating water’s role in crop fertility and in ancestral rebirth (cognate lowland South Amerindian cosmoses often identify the dark and watery Underworld as the realm of the dead [Roe 1982]). In any case, spirals or concentric circles, another El Palo motif, seem to connote whirlpools in both regions. Perhaps the concentric circles containing small faces (Figures 4–10, 4–12, 4–14) personify such whirling eddys. (448)

ChaChac (or Cha’Chak), dedicated to the pre-Columbian god of rain Chac, is performed annually by Maya farmers to usher in the rainy season. The purpose of this festival is to bring rain, believed to be given to the Maya through Chac’s celestial favor during times of drought in the northern lowlands. The entire community participates in this ceremony, which requires the offering of prayers, sacred items, and the first fruits of the community’s harvest each year. During this ceremony, Maya women usually prepare mead (sacred breads), cooked underground over fire-heated rocks called a pib, balche’; saka (sacred maize gruel); and pulque, a mixture of maguey sap fermented into a liquor. These foods are then provided to the community’s male elders and local shaman who place the offerings in front of a ka’an che’ (translated as sacred altar). Built annually, the ka’an che’ typically is constructed on the outskirts of tow, near a sacred cenote, which in Maya cosmology represents the birthplace of the world. As part of the ceremony, the shaman consults his zaztun (a sacred crystal) and places the offerings prepared by the town’s women on the ka’an che.’ This rite is to represent a connection between the underworld, earth, and sky, considered by the Maya as the main celestial planes. The connections between the Taíno Cohoba ceremony and the Maya ChaChac illustrate the Pan-Indian cosmology. The connections between genders, material culture, water, caves, and the ritualistic birth of the world are both apparent. Interestingly enough, our discovery of a crystal artifact at the La Mina site could be a more modern Taíno interpretation of the Maya zaztun, but that is impossible to determine definitely. 45  Cauldwell mentioned that he observed the use of red pigment on the glyphs during his 2006–2015 photographic study of La Mina.

Given the similarities between the Guayama and La Mina, it is likely that this same interpretation is applicable. Though no faces were observed in the spirals, the connection between the water flow, glyphs, water channel, and passage water to the La Mina cave is quite clear. As was seen in chapter one, Frassetto (1960) chalked both the natural and carved grooves on the NW side of the La Mina boulder during her visit to the site in 1957. Though not mentioned, we assume she believed, as we do, that these glyphs represented an extension of the natural erosion patterns along the boulder and down to the cave and illustrated a connection between water, boulder, cave, and a native cosmology. FEATURE 3: SW Side of Chief’s Head Boulder Located at Feature 3 (F3), along the SW side of the Chief’s Head glyph, we observed and documented a total of six unique glyphs (see Figure 5.14). Using Rodríguez Alvarez (1988) and Roe (2005), we documented a possible Incipient Chiefdom – Chief’s Head with crown (a probable Chican Ostionoid glyph) in glyph group F. Glyph N represents a 57

¡El Yunque se levanta!

58 Figure 5.13. All NW La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods).

59 Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.14. All La Mina boulder glyphs (using Roe’s 1:1 scale drawing methods).

¡El Yunque se levanta! possible Elenan Ostionoid simplified Chief’s Head with crown. Glyphs O, P, and G represent neoTaíno modern simple faces, most likely in Uado-type figures. Roe and Rivera (1995) suggested that the later Elenan rayed face or solar glyph (represented as glyphs O and P on the Chief’s Head boulder) illustrates a shifting focus from the anthropomorphic being itself to their status in society (which can also be seen in the more complex crowned rayed face depicted as glyph G). Glyph G may represent a worn wrapped ancestor, a simple face represented as a swaddled figure, based on Cauldwell’s descriptions of the glyph. Glyphs O and P appear to be a possible solar image/sun.

be associated with ball courts and plazas. The cosmological connection is worth noting, but it is equally likely that the monkey glyph represents the presence of actual monkeys that once lived in the region. For example, on the island of Cayo Santiago, just 1 km from mainland Puerto Rico, a troop of 1,000 rhesus macaque monkeys still flourishes on the island. Therefore, it is not a stretch to assume that monkeys once roamed El Yunque. Yet despite these debates, it is worth highlighting that Saladoid peoples were artists and created hybridized monkey-human imagery in rock art and ceramics quite frequently. As Waldron (2011) stated, …these simian features closely resemble the stylizations of anthropomorphs that appear in Saladoid ceramics. Even the laterally located nostrils so typical of the Platyrrhini branch of primates from which New World monkeys all descend do not clearly distinguish monkeys from people in Saladoid ceramics. Some stylized noses could represent nose ornaments worn by humans...Identifications of monkeys can thus be over-reported or under-reported in surveys of Saladoid ceramics, especially if the Saladoid penchant for hybrid imagery is not taken into consideration. (454)

FEATURE 4: Miscellaneous Glyphs In 2016, co-author Cauldwell located Feature 4 (F4) along two unnamed streams less than 2 km downstream from the La Mina site. He observed and documented what appear to be four unique glyphs: an anthropomorphic monkey glyph and what he described as owl glyphs (though they appear to be a series of wrapped royal ancestors or portal guardians). The following section provides a brief discussion of said glyphs; however, given the fact that Rogers was not present during their discovery, these findings are classified as tentative and need further investigation.

Given these varied perspectives, additional research is needed for a complete interpretation of this glyph; however, it supports the cosmological connection already present on other glyphs at the site.

The Monkey Glyph It is worth mentioning that there is some debate about the identification of monkey glyphs in current Puerto Rican petroglyph interpretations. Prehistorian Manuel García Arévalo (1997, 115) suggested that monkeys are false classifications and, instead, represent anthropomorphic interpretations of zemís. Herrera Fritot and Youmans (1946) support this noting that the monkey glyph is more likely a ‘humanized faces that highlight[s] the isomorphism between these animals and the souls of the dead’ (69–83) (see Figure 5.15).

Wrapped Ancestors (aka Cauldwell’s Owl Glyphs) Cauldwell’s location of “owl glyphs” also added to La Mina’s context. Though we have reclassified them as wrapped ancestors, their connection to the water elements of the site are crucial (see Figure 5.16). These wrapped ancestor glyphs depict three anthropomorphic figures. We believe each represents a member of a possible royal and/or cosmological family: a crowned figure, a crowned figure with possible zemí,

Bullen (1971) suggested that monkey face glyphs are a common occurrence throughout the Caribbean and tend to

Figure 5.15. Monkey glyph found 1 km downstream from La Mina site.

60

Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.16. Wrapped ancestor glyphs found 1 km downstream from La Mina site.

and child with an associated zemí. It is quite possible that all of these figures represent anthropomorphic zemís or a cosmological view of the La Mina royal lineage. Either way, Roe and Rivera (1995) suggested that the placement of such glyphs along waterways, like the ones at the La Mina unnamed stream, may have indicated ancestral ownership of the territory. We also suggest, in light of the strong cosmological connection to water at La Mina, that these ancestors may have been affiliated with the royal lineage of the site itself and represented the spiritual connection of La Mina’s cacique with a zemís.

the phallic glyph,46 and the collapsed La Mina cave where the water runs to when raining. We believe there could be a connection to the birthing process (the La Mina collapsed cave – the birthing cavity – and the phallic glyph located on the boulder itself). This may indicate a convergence of male and female fertility (cosmic dualism). As mentioned by Borrero (2018) in chapter two, the acculturation of specific gender relations as dictated by the practices of cosmic dualism, gender reciprocity, and parallelism provided natives with the means to gain power, status, and authority in society. Joyce (2000) has argued native peoples believed that both men and women believed that the gods created the baby during

La Mina Petroglyph Interpretation

46 

Cauldwell offered an alternative theory as to the purpose of the phallic glyph on the La Mina boulder; however, much of it is not supported with evidence. Later in this chapter, we will be discussing this in greater detail. Unlike our findings in 2015, Cauldwell suggested that the phallic symbol was not associated with fertility; rather it was an extension of the Cohoba ceremony. Here is an excerpt from Cauldwell:

The petroglyphs at the site represent an excellent crosssample of cultural occupations. Based on this study and our analysis of the petroglyphs at this site, we have tentatively determined the La Mina site was primarily used during the Early Elenan/Late Chican Ostionoid occupation (~600–1200 A.D.) and later reused by the Taíno as a religious location for the Cohoba ceremony, post Spanish contact (Cauldwell 2015). We believe that the Saladoids and Huecoids were also present at the site, as mentioned earlier, but it is difficult to tell if there is a clear demarcation of cultural occupations based on our stylistic classifications alone. We noted a clear connection to water, as indicated by the channeling and focus on water within the glyphic elements. Of significant importance is the connection between the water (natural and carved) on the La Mina glyph, the carved water channel,

As embarrassing as it might be to some to fully understand the purpose of the La Mina petroglyph boulder you must also study the singular, large phallic petroglyph carved on it – its presence on this particular boulder is significant – even the number of lines within the phallic petroglyph are important. In my opinion, the presence of the petroglyph has to do with…[the] cohoba ceremony…It seems the hallucinogenic drug may also be a capillary/vein dilator. The participant will be in the classic cohoba knee-elbow position, sitting on a duho (small stool), eyes wide open (bug-eyed) – sometimes the arms will be shown thrashing, other times with the palms out – and almost always with an erection. Examples are shown in woven cotton cloth figures, effigy vessels, pestles, and other objects on display in various books and museums. But the phalli’s uniqueness doesn’t stop there. It is the only phallic petroglyph I know of that shows ejaculation. (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.)

61

¡El Yunque se levanta! pregnancy and, if provoked, the baby could be taken away. In essence, both men and women viewed pregnancy as an interdependent activity comprised of both cosmic and human components. Therefore, one can assume that the occupants of La Mina recognized the birthing process as an extension of the sacred as do their contemporary counterparts, the Taíno.

Lomas Formation (e.g., volcanic breccia, hyaloclastite breccia, conglomerate, volcanic sandstones), and the steep terrain north of the site (potential for mass wasting). As described in chapter four, bedrock and overburden boulders were classified with site-specific nomenclature, based solely on geological description without relation to other classifications, such as those described by USGS. This not only eliminated the potential discrepancy, but also provided a local subset of geological descriptions given that other classifications are more broadly defined. The following rock types were identified and classified at the La Mina site: stratified volcanics, volcanic breccia, volcanic sandstone, hornblende-quartz-diorite, and basalt.

Geological Interpretation The geological and environmental setting, as well as the site specific observations provided next, helps us understand the environmental space in which the inhabitants who created the glyphs of La Mina site resided. Beyond the interpretations of the glyphs previously discussed, it is conceptually simple to understand that the inhabitants were drawn to the site, not only because of rocks on which they carved, but because of the regional and local environmental setting. As indicated in following sections, studying and understanding the aspect of this geological setting adds a substantive understanding into motivations of the people who carved La Mina and what was appreciated in their cultural.

The stratified volcanics are undulating bands of aphanitic felsic bands that appear slightly altered in places with sulfide and olivine-like assemblages. While little metamorphism is known to occur, the stratification and mineral texture suggest the formations succumbed to diagenesis or slight metamorphism. Given the volcanic nature of the region and the regionally identified hydrothermally altered formations, it is plausible this alteration was manifested via slight contact metamorphism or hydrothermal alteration. In our project, volcanic breccia are described as fine (centimeter) to large (decimeter) sized clasts of presumably felsic and intermediate volcanics (see Figure 5.17). Due to non-destructive sampling, no fresh samples were broken at the site and no surrogate was available. The breccia is of a typical variety, with large clasts ranging from sub centimeter size to greater than 10 cm and accreted with a fine grain matrix. Overall grain size distribution is apparently bimodal but with significant skewness towards the large diameter clasts. Within the clast distribution there appears to be a relatively large gradational distribution, demonstrating a lack of sorting and high energy depositional environment.

Terrain and Hydrology The La Mina site is proximal to a regional topographic breakin-slope on the south side of the El Yunque Mountains. As such, the regional terrain consists of general two general types: lowlands to the south and southeast of the site, with gently sloping hills grading to river and streams, and elevated upland areas with steep grades of southwest aspect. The lowlands areas are of a coastal lowland type; meanwhile the uplands are foothills and ascending regions into the volcanic mountainous terrain of the El Yunque. More specifically, the USDA has assigned the area of the site as humid mountains and valleys, with the lower elevations to the east as humid coastal plains and semiarid coastal plains. Locally, the site has a southwest aspect of approximated 10 degrees, with elevations ranging from 250 to 275 meters AMSL (above mean sea level) (820 to 900 feet AMSL). The La Mina site is bounded on the west and east by two small steams flowing from the north to the south. The area between these two stream channels is of slightly higher elevation (2 – 4 meters) than the stream beds themselves. During 2015 fieldwork, a local water diversion (small handmade dam and PVC piping) was diverting the stream from its apparent typical (potentially natural) course in the western stream (west of La Mina) to the eastern streambed (east of La Mina), which presumably would have had less flow without this water diversion. The water diversion essentially eliminated flow from the western stream, leaving only isolated pools at the time of the 2015 fieldwork. It should be noted, however, that during the August 2015 fieldwork the region was under drought conditions.

While mineral identification was not confirmed due to lack of fresh samples or sufficient surrogate, the assemblage appears predominately felsic with a high percentage of quartzofeldspathic content and, in some cases, chert-like clast were identified. The volcanic sandstone can be described as fine grained, well sorted, quartz sandstone at the La Mina site (see Figure 5.18). The grain-to-grain texture exhibits a tight interlocking texture, with seemingly very low porosity (similar to a quartzite), also indicating potential alteration. The quartz minerals have a slight iron-colour staining indicative of trace mafic (iron) mineralogy associated with the sandstone. This rock type with its homogeneous, fine grained mineralogy resulted in the large, granular, yet relatively smooth, boulders such as the La Mina boulder eastern/northern faces and the Chief’s Head boulder on which the petroglyphs were carved. In a way, this rock type, because of its grain size distribution, mineralogy, tendency to form large semi-flat/slight rounded surfaces, and structural integrity, was the most readily available palate for carving. Volcanic sandstone boulders adjacent to La Mina site have undergone significant dissolution channeling, similar to what is observed on La Mina boulder, suggesting the grainto-grain structure of the sandstone is susceptible to chemical weathering (described in more detail in following section).

Site Petrology and Geological Classification A mixture of rock types (bedrock and overburden) were identified at the site. The heterogeneity is due to several factors, including proximity of the site to the Alluvium/ Lomas contact, the geological classifications of the 62

Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.17. Volcanic breccia at La Mina cave (10 cm scale).

Figure 5.18. Volcanic sandstone with interlocking quart grains.

63

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 5.19. Fine grained layered volcanic.

exception of the basalt, which was equally strong) and was resistant to chemical and physical weathering.

It was often observed that the volcanic sandstone was found in what is described here as a fine grained layered volcanic, which represents a series of volcanic material laid in a series of presumably horizontal beds at the time of deposition. See Figure 5.19 for a small sample as an example.

The coarse-grained basalt is of typical composition (although scarcely identified/inspected) with minor sulfides (potentially pyrite), but generally unremarkable. Grains are visible to the naked eye, but smaller than what would be considered a gabbroic texture. The basalt grain size distribution is homogeneous, with generally a light/dark colour speckled appearance, and appears gray overall. Colour and felsic content, relative to pyroxene and hornblende, suggest the mineral assemblage is skewed toward a more dioritic composition. All findings were combined into a geological log, included in Table 5.3.

The hornblende-quartz-diorite was unremarkable but appears similar to the ecocene porphyritic hornblende quartz diorite mapped north of the site (Krushensky and Schellenkens 1998). This rock type is a fine-grained mixture of quartzofeldspathics and hornblende with minor associated mafic mineral. The diorite was significantly stronger than other rock types at La Mina site (with the 64

Table 5.3. La Mina Photographic Log, Geological Samples Photo Number(s)

Quantity

Description

Provenience

Remarks

65

(1) Rock sample

Geological sample 1 of 2, 2 cm W by 7 cm L: fine grained layered volcanic, quartz rich with sulfides Appears altered, olivine-like assemblages in places

Geological sample south of bridge 08/02/2015 J.W. Schuetz P.G.

Tentative analysis light green, fibrous mineral (radiating)

(2) P8030074, 75

(1) Rock sample

Same – 2 of 2 9.5 by 5.2 cm wide

Same as above

N/A

(3) P8030076

(1) Rock sample

Same as above

Same as above

N/A

(4) P8030077

(1) Rock sample

Geological sample 2 8.5 cm L by 6.3 cm W Basalt (?) with sulfides

Geological Sample #2 Potential pyrite occurrence west stream – same latitude of datum point 08/02/2015 J.W. Schuetz P.G.

(5) P8030078, 79

(1) Rock sample

Same as above with macro lens

Same as above

N/A

(6) P8030078, 79 (7) P8030080

(1) Rock sample (1) Rock sample

Same as above with macro lens Geological sample #3 – 9.5 cm L by 6.2 cm W diorite

Same as above Geological sample #3 north side of historic road 08/03/2015 J.W. Schuetz P.G.

N/A Maybe overburden

(8) P8030081, 882

(1) Rock sample

Same as above with macro lens

Same as above

N/A

(9) P8030081, 82 (10) P8030083

(1) Rock sample (1) Rock sample

Same as above with macro lens Geological sample 4 – 6.8 cm L by 3.8 cm W volcanic sandstone

Same as above Geological sample #4 west stream 08/03/2015 J.W. Schuetz P.G.

N/A Glyph surrogate, easily weathered

(11) P8030084, 85

(1) Rock sample

Same as above

Same as above

Same, used modeling clay to hold up (sample)

(12) P8030086

(1) Rock sample

Sample 5, 11.5 cm L by 7.0 cm W volcanic sandstone w/ quartzite-like texture

Geological sample #5 west stream 08/03/2015 J.W. Schuetz P.G.

Less weathered than sample #4, gray

(13) P8030087, 88

(1) Rock sample

Same as above

Same as above

N/A

Source: From 08/06/2015 photographical field log by J. W. Schuetz P.G.

Interpretation and Analysis

(1) P8030069, 70

¡El Yunque se levanta! Soil Classification

classic examples of dissolution channeling; however, on the face of La Mina boulder it appears the carvings and the natural channels are integrated, intentionally and unintentionally. For this reason, differentiating between natural and anthropogenic features is challenging and encourages speculation.

Test pits were dug to investigate the subsurface for artifacts and soil type. Surface soils at La Mina site are dominated by organics due to tree litter (fruit, leaf, etc.) and other understory vegetation. In particular the breadfruit tree produces large numerous fruits, which fall to the ground and decay into organics. Given the size of the fruit, number of trees, and quantity of fruit, these species likely contribute a significant mass to the soils. Below the layer of organic rich humic soils is a mixture of silt clay with minor proportions of sand and gravel. The test pit soil classification logs varied from silt and clay, trace sand, trace gravel with organics to clay and silt, trace sand, trace gravel with organics. In terms of the USCS the soils ranged from OL to ML.

Biogeochemical Processes Two types of biogeochemical processes are likely affecting the La Mina site: biogeochemical accretion growth on the face of the glyph47 and enhanced dissolution weathering via biological acids from decay of tree litter, most notably breadfruit, directly on the La Mina boulder. Small, cm size accretions were observed on the La Mina boulder, including areas that were carved (see Figure 5.20). The accretions appear to be the result of the biogeochemical process by microbiological populations residing on the rock surface. While the accretion growth rate is currently unknown, this may serve as means for dating (relative or absolute).

Geomorphological Relevance Three types of geomorphological processes appear to be relevant to the La Mina site: dissolution weathering via hydrolysis, biogeochemical mineralization, and mass wasting. These geomorphological concepts, observations, and interpretations are not only relevant to the specifics of the scientific research, but give reflection upon the interdisciplinary and activism components of the project. As such, the need for further study and documentation could not be more relevant, given the environmental climate that places these historic features at risk to weathering and erosion, and a cultural climate that has seen limited motivation for documentation and or preserving this fragile history. Furthermore, the starting foundations of this study spawned from observation of weathering by Rex Cauldwell and biogeochemical mineralization observed by Rhianna Rogers and shared with James Schuetz. Therefore, if it were not for the weathering and mineralization, the glyphs may have never been studied.

As mentioned previously, weathering of the La Mina boulder was likely caused by dissolution and hydrolysis. Dissolution typically involves carbon in the atmosphere creating a slightly acidic precipitation (natural occurring). At the La Mina site, there is a likelihood that dissolution is being enhanced by decay of organic matter directly on the rock itself. During the 2015 field season, breadfruit were observed on top of La Mina, having fallen from the adjacent tree and striking the rock with a free fall impact. Upon and after impact the fruit (~30 cm in elliptical length) was shattered and then broken down by biological processes (i.e., decay). Biological decay creates significant acids that were observed visually (insects and rotten fruit) and olfactorily (pungent odor). Given the acid generation on the rock itself, which is then locally transported down the face of the rock with precipitation, this directly increases the potential for dissolution weathering.

Dissolution Weathering and Hydrolysis

Mass wasting is the process of gravity pulling rock or soil downslope. A localized, small-scale rock fall (a type of

Dissolution weathering is the process of rainwater weakening the cohesive matrix of a rock such that the small grains of rock at the surface are separated and fall away from the body of the mass. As dissolution weathering progresses, it can create channels that direct water and further erode the rock surface, exacerbating the channel. Hydrolysis is the process of water chemically interacting with minerals to form new minerals that are typically weaker than the original mineral. A typical example is how certain rocks weather to clay. These two processes of dissolution and hydrolysis can work together to change the face of a rock. The La Mina boulder and Chief’s Head boulder are volcanic sandstone; therefore the carved surface is composed of quartz grains bonded by finer grained matrix (potentially carbonate, or other mineralogy). While quartz is resistant to dissolution and hydrolysis, the matrix minerals bonding the grains together are susceptible to chemical weathering such as hydrolysis. La Mina boulder and surrounding rocks have

Another oddity that sets the La Mina petroglyph boulder apart from other such petroglyph boulders is that it bleeds. Within many of the petroglyphs are small stalagmite type rock formations extending straight out from within the cut itself. It was obvious that the glyphs were not cut around them – that they appeared to grow straight out of the cut after it was created. It looks as if molten rock was shot into the glyphs from an exploding passing asteroid. The true answer came from two geologists, each giving the same answer years apart. As stated by Cauldwell, ‘One day I was showing said glyphs to a New York state archaeologist, Dr. Rhianna C. Rogers, and asked her “how-in-the-world-did-this-get-here” problem. She photographed the tiny rock formations with her cell phone and sent it to a geologist friend, James Schuetz. He immediately offered a similar hypothesis another geologist gave me years previous when I showed him the glyphs’ (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.). That is, after the petroglyph was cut into the boulder, mineralized water slowly seeped out of the cuts forming small mineral accretions. That being said, can the accretions date the petroglyph cut? This would be something that Cauldwell would still like to study. The only issue would be the removal of a small piece for analysis. That would need some permissions from Puerto Rico and the United States Army Corp of Engineers. Furthermore, the analytical dating techniques would need to be verified and the risk of petroglyph damage assessed.

47 

66

Interpretation and Analysis

Figure 5.20. Geochemical or biogeochemical accretions developed over petroglyphs.

Figure 5.21. Rock fall that overlaps La Mina boulder carvings.

mass wasting) was observed at La Mina boulder, where has fallen onto the petroglyph as shown in Figure 5.21. This boulder approximately (0.5 × 0.5 × 0.5 meters) had fallen off a separate boulder and currently leans on one of the glyphs, indicating the rock fall happened after the glyph was carved. This is a classic form of relative dating in that the carving must predate the rock fall because the carving could not have been cut behind the leaning rock.

This evidence directly supports the concept of active mass wasting at the La Mina site since the time when the carvings were drawn. Considering that significant earthquakes have occurred in the last 400 years, as described in chapter three, combined with this observed rock fall, gives substantial evidence that considerable ground shaking may have occurred since the site was active. 67

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 5.22. Drawing and photograph of La Mina cave.

On the west side of the La Mina boulder in Terrace 2 an opening between 2-meter high rock formations (and boulders) was observed. Upon walking into this opening, one is surrounded on all three sides by rock: volcanic breccia to the north, stratified volcanics to the east, and La Mina boulder (west side) to the south. On the north side of the opening, the volcanic breccia leans upwards and outward with a small cave (grotto) at the base. The small cave (approximately 1/2 meter deep) was weathered by undercutting of the breccia, and is still actively weathering based on loose gravel and sand inside the small cave. Existence of the same breccia formation was observed as bedrock on the south side of the opening and as loose boulders on the ground floor of the opening.48

the very upland side of the opening provided a mechanism for undercutting and probably flow through some of this formation during high rain events; and (4) the former cave had collapsed due to lack of integrity of the breccia material because of the nature of the rock and significant likelihood of large earthquakes in the area. Standing in the open area surrounded by the sidewalls of what was very likely a large cave during the time of the carvings gives the distinct impression that the ground surface in the open area is actually the roof the cave. As stated previously, several boulders on the ground floor of this open area are, in fact, volcanic breccia, further supporting this argument (see Figure 5.22). Geomorphological Summary

These observations suggest (1) the volcanic breccia (a structurally weak rock, prone to clastic separation) existed across the opening from the small cave to La Mina boulder’s west side; (2) the breccia would have been weathered by undercutting much as it is today, producing a much larger cave than is currently present; (3) streams on

Erosional and weathering features such as dissolution weathering, localized mass wasting, and biogeochemical accretions have affected or potentially affected the site. Dissolution weathering has created dissolution channels in the face of La Mina boulder that appear to be part of carving itself. However, this tendency for erosion has been degrading the depth of the carvings over time and placing the future of La Mina at risk. La Mina is proximal to mapped and documented geological faults, which may have cause localized mass wasting (local

48  There could be a connection to the birthing process (the now collapsed La Mina cave – the birthing cavity – and the phallic glyph located on the rock itself). This may indicate a convergence of male and female fertility (cosmic dualism).

68

Interpretation and Analysis cave collapse, movement of overburden boulders, etc.), thereby altering the site since the time of the carvings. Lastly, small clastics growths were documented on the carved portion of the glyph indicating an active biogeochemical process that has occurred since the glyphs were carved. These post-carving growths may serve as a potential for dating. This summary expresses not only the physical process that place La Mina at risk, but demonstrates the need in archaeological projects to involve other disciplines such as geology, geomorphology, and geochemistry to more fully understand the context of a site. Beyond the physical setting and risks, the enthogeological component of the site – at the base of the mountain, near first order streams, and proximity to caves (which were created through geological forces) – further demonstrates the value of the interdisciplinary approach. Without drawing conclusions across boundaries of scientific and cultural disciplines and or removing these boundaries, the conclusion of this study would lack the connection to the culture and improved understanding of past and present Puerto Rico.

69

6 Puerto Rico Se Levanata: Resilience and Perseverance in Times of Crisis As previously mentioned, Puerto Rico has experienced many situations in the past few decades that have highlighted both the resilience of its peoples as well as the socio-economic issues affecting its ability to thrive. When we published our initial findings for the La Mina petroglyph site in 2017 (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2017), Puerto Rico was hit with devastating category 4 and 5 hurricanes, causing unprecedented destruction at the La Mina site and co-author Rex Cauldwell’s forced relocation off the island in 2018. As a form of Puerto Rican resilience, the moniker Puerto Rico se Levanta emerged that same year, highlighting the people’s desire to rebuild and advocate for positive change. However, corruption scandals in 2019, subsequent protests, and the ousting of Puerto Rican officials once again plunged the island into socio-economic uncertainty and hampered the rebuilding efforts. That same year, a series of devastating earthquakes rocked the already fatigued island, affecting communities still reeling from the natural disasters and corruption scandals from prior years. If that were not enough, the island currently finds itself in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 and experiencing further revenue losses resulting from a decrease in its staple economic venture, tourism. Despite these issues, while working on this book we have seen time and time again the resilience of Puerto Ricans, from communities coming together to share resources to the emergence of grassroots organizations and individually led relief efforts to counteract the corruption and natural disasters occurring around them. This chapter will highlight our desire to support the community around La Mina through the use of activist anthropology.

contacting co-author Rex Cauldwell, whose home was within the eye of the storm. We also lost contact with the landowner, Sr. Alex Lopez Rodriguez, and eventually learned that his homestead located on the site was destroyed (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.). As reported by the American National Red Cross (2019), ‘Maria was the most intense hurricane to hit Puerto Rico in more than 80 years, causing devastating losses for residents and massive damage to key infrastructure across the island. [Over] a year later, many communities remain without reliable access to clean water, electricity, cellular service, and essential healthcare needs’ (para. 8). As co-author Cauldwell, whose house is within 2 km of the La Mina site and within the eye of the storm, stated shortly after the storm in 2017, We are alive and in survival mode. Carrying water by hand- will have no electricity for what they are projecting [is] another year – working with a generator. W[e] were in the eye of the storm. It picked up our large fridge and threw it across the carport jamming the front door closed. It also picked up my gen[erator] and threw it across the entire porch. A giant of a boulder… [m]issed our house by 40 feet and is too big to move. The Army Corps [o]f Engineers is working on the problem. The road was lost [around] many places but we can get out via an alt route. (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.) Because of unstable conditions in the area, large swaths of time elapsed between authors’ communications. Sadly, a year later, in our next major communication, the conditions had still not improved. As Cauldwell stated in mid-2018,

La Mina in the Post Hurricane Maria Era: An Activist Anthropological Approach

[as I mentioned to you before,] [t]he area was hit pretty hard...A giant boulder came down the mountain and blocked the road. It is so big that they are leaving it [for now]. It missed my house by [40] feet. We now drive off the road around it. Large portions of the road up the mountain are missing. I have no idea what has changed at the glyph site- I am sure it is not the same or if we even can get in…The area may not be accessible [to enter the site] as [there are a] number of trees and brush [blocking access to] it…The area was hit quite hard with 250 mph winds…The guy who lives [at La Mina] lost his roof and the interior was totaled. The other houses adjacent to the property are totaled as well…no one lives there anymore. We may not have power for another year. Everyone runs on generators. In many areas up the road [Ca. 191] we now have only one lane…there is no electricity so [many people] are going solar.... (Rex Cauldwell, pers. comm.)

The devastation left by Hurricane Maria in 2017 drastically impacted our work on this project. The La Mina region, which is located in the SE portion of the island and within the epicenter of the storm, has been (and still currently is) in the process of recovery. As reported in the National Hurricane Center’s Tropical Cyclone Report, Maria’s center crossed the southeast of Puerto Rico near Yabuc[o]a [located approximately 24 km SW of La Mina] around 115 UTC [on] 20 September, [2017] and the hurricane’s maximum winds at that time were near 135kt [or 155.355mph], i.e., just below the threshold of category 5 intensity. (Pasch, Penny, and Berg 2019) As one would suspect, this devastating hurricane destroyed vast portions of the island, including large portions of the Naguabo region. For over six months, we had difficulty 71

¡El Yunque se levanta! Because of our direct involvement in the community, we realized that we had two choices: ignore the current situation occurring in the region or embrace our communal connections and help. We chose the latter.

site. After numerous conversations with community officials, I ultimately was led to speak with Senior Rodriquez whose property contained the La Mina and Chief’s Head boulders.49 (Rogers, Schuetz, and Cauldwell 2018, 77–78)

Contextualizing La Mina Recovery Efforts Using Activist Anthropology

As a result, the insufficient administrative records led to major obstacles in funding the recovery of Naguabo municipality.50 To supplement limits on federal funding, grassroots organizations, agencies, NGOs, and individuals across the globe have been contributing to Puerto Rico’s limited resources. The drastic rise of grassroots movement on and off the island has illustrated what can be accomplished through the solidarity of communities. It is with this grassroots frame in mind that we entered into the activist anthropological phase of our project.

One of the unexpected result of long-lasting recovery efforts post-Hurricane Maria is the psychological aftermath of living in a constant state of flux. In 2019, co-author Cauldwell was interviewed by CBC News: The National in a segment titled Puerto Rico’s Mental Health Crisis: A Consequence of Hurricane Maria. He reiterated the narrative stated previously and specified that the road (Ca. 191) was blocked by a massive boulder for three months and that the region itself was without power for nine months. During the report, individuals mentioned many people still did not have roofs on their homes; some rarely slept, afraid of burglars; and municipalities have little to no funding to help these people recover. As an interviewee indicated, many were looking for the ‘gift of normalcy.’ The report also mentioned Naguabo residents are still waiting for FEMA aid, since FEMA will not give money without having a deed to the house. This problem, of what some might consider typical administrative property information, pre-dates Maria and affected the ability of our La Mina study. As Cauldwell stated in AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology:

Activist anthropology is predicated on the idea that we need not choose between first-rate scholarship on the one hand and carefully considered civic engagement on the other. Contrarily, this approach emphasizes those involved in the research process are holders of knowledge (Borda 2001) and important to the interpretation process. It avoids extractive methods that reiterate power inequalities between researcher and researched (Askins 2009) and it deconstructs boundaries between the academic world and its Other – aka the real world (Chambers, 1998). We believe that the application of activist anthropology to this project enhanced the empirical breadth and the theoretical sophistication of our work rather than impede it. As Hale (2001) stated:

I also encountered issues regarding securing permissions from stakeholders…It took a large amount of time to find the owner of the property and get permission to study the site. With a lot of land still under the old Spanish land grant system (created between 1500–1900) and without a modern survey of the region, many of the property lines around La Mina were questionable. Not to mention that some properties have been abandoned in the area and records of former owners were not well documented. Also, many local informants and property owners could not identify where one property ended and another began. Despite my efforts to look up official records in Cubuy and San Juan, I was unable to definitively determine property lines for La Mina in the local township. Meaning, inadvertently, we could have been working on more than one property, but there would be no formal way to tell. Even house locations are in question since the system is so outdated; for example, some houses are listed on one person’s property and taxes were assessed to that plot of land, yet in reality the house is located on another person’s property and local agreements have been made to adjust lines to compensate the inaccuracies on file with the government. This, obviously, leads to extreme confusion and is some cases houses and land cannot be sold. What is worse is that even with accurate, modern surveys, some properties like these cannot transfer custody since many local agreements are never formalized in writing. These issues made it even more difficult for me to find and secure permissions for the

activist research: a) helps us better to understand the root causes of inequality, oppression, violence and related conditions of human suffering; b) is carried out, at each phase from conception through dissemination, in direct cooperation with an organized collective of people who themselves are subject to these conditions; c) is used, together with the people in question, to formulate strategies for transforming these conditions and to achieve the power necessary to make these strategies effective. (para. 2) 49  Rogers’s notes: Based on the permissions we decided to stop surveying when we reached clear property line markers. These markers included a historic mill road, fences, and dense foliage. It is possible that the full extent of the site was not included given the fact that we stayed within Sr. Rodriguez’s property lines. 50  In a 2020 article, “Disaster Colonialism: A Commentary on Disasters Beyond Singular Events to Structural Violence,” Rivera discussed the term ‘disaster capitalism,’ which refers to efforts by capitalists to benefit from shocks to economic, environmental, or social systems in order to push through interventions which may otherwise be rejected by the population. Rivera argued that, while disaster capitalism is a concern in Puerto Rico and the larger Caribbean, one cannot examine these issues without also considering how they intersect with the history of colonialism in the region, and thus proposes viewing these events through the lens of ‘disaster colonialism’ (2). Disaster colonialism as a term would recognize that continuously poor preplanning and response to disasters contribute to the perpetuation of ‘colonial ways of being’ (Rivera 2020, 3). The author noted that Hurricane Maria, for example, caused more damage in Puerto Rico than Hurricane Harvey caused in Texas, yet Texas received three times more aid workers from FEMA and significant post disaster reconstruction funding was withheld from Puerto Rico.

72

Puerto Rico Se Levanata

Figure 6.1. Rogers leads participants engaging in a deliberative conversation.

work, school, or wherever they could remotely connect (see Figure 6.1).

Though our original 2015 Phase 1 research design did not explicitly include this approach, the ethnographic and activist work that we have conducted in the region throughout the project illustrates its implicit importance to our perspective. We also believe that activist anthropology can (and does) make a crucial contribution in helping to resolve the various Eurocentric crises afflicting the field and helps towards creating a more inclusive 21st century anthropology. Next, we have described the various activist anthropological subprojects that have grown organically out of the larger La Mina study.

A concluding sentiment from this deliberative discourse was that we (students, faculty, community members, and others) need to reconsider some of the ways we think about and talk about topics in order to develop a safe climate for people to engage in intellectual, interculturally competent dialogues about difficult topics. The conversation concluded with the general idea that we all have the power to impact communities in and out of the academic framework. As stated by Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Scholar D. M. Williams (2010),

Example #1: A Deliberative Conversation – Puerto Rico and Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts

The very presence of individuals from different backgrounds result in diversity. Climate, on the other hand, refers to the experience of individuals and groups…In a health[y] climate, individuals and groups generally feel welcomed, respected, and valued. A healthy climate is grounded in respect for others, nurtured by dialogue between those of different perspectives, and is evidenced by a pattern of civil interactions among community members….Not all aspects of a health[y] climate necessarily feel positive – indeed, uncomfortable or challenging situations can lead to increased awareness, understanding, and appreciation. Tension, while not always positive, can be healthy when handled appropriately.

In 2017, Rogers, in her capacity as a professor and as college-wide coordinator of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary at State University of New York (SUNY), sponsored a deliberative conversation51 on the topic of Puerto Rico in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria. The purpose of this conversation was to increase cultural awareness, interaction, and discussion among students, faculty, and staff around the ongoing recovery efforts (and issues) in Puerto Rico. As a part of this conversation, students were offered mini lectures by professionals and faculty (i.e., geologists, political scientists, and archaeologists) as well as personal testimonials from people with family on the island. The goal was to create a space for the college community to discuss the aftermath of the hurricane as well as to find tangible solutions to support recovery efforts in the region. The uniqueness of this presentation was that it was simultaneously held at various SUNY Empire campus locations across New York State as well as telecast online through the video conferencing tool, Zoom. As a result, the greater college community could participate from home,

Therefore, we must acknowledge that being uncomfortable for some may led to acceptance and cross-cultural understanding for others. By creating healthy spaces for dialogue, individuals or groups who feel isolated, marginalized, and even unsafe are given voice. Example #2: Community Outreach – Donating to Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts

Deliberative conversations were first created in the political science fields to engage diverse populations across socio-cultural and socio-political lines. See Patricia Moy and John Gastil, “Predicting Deliberative Conversation: The Impact of Discussion Networks, Media Use, and Political Cognitions,” in Political Communication 23 no. 4 (2006), 443–460.

51 

Building on the deliberative conversation, many people approached Rogers and wanted to contribute to recovery efforts in Puerto Rico. As such, Rogers, along with 73

¡El Yunque se levanta! co-author Schuetz and book illustrator Dennise Rodríguez Ávila, partnered with churches, college radio hosts, and private companies to collect and ship goods to the island (see Figures 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6). These donations went beyond the other types of short-term shipment of supplies, and became a continued effort of weekly shipments for a number of months after Maria. While single donation efforts are a welcome/needed gift and gratifying to the donor, ongoing donations provide longevity to those in need and create a deeper more powerful experience to the donor. Furthermore, ongoing giving encourages conversation around the tragedy

and emphasizes the longevity of need, which is often forgotten. This type of continued donation also provides hope to those still surviving, knowing that they have not been forgotten. Example #3: Community Outreach – Continuing the Conversations Given our belief that we should continue to assess the situation, Rogers and book illustrator Dennise Rodríguez Ávila conducted informal interviews with residents to get a current sense of Puerto Rico’s recovery. In January

Figure 6.2. Donations collected by authors reaching Puerto Rico.

Figure 6.3. Iglesia Metodista La Roca Pastor Luis A. Estrella with donations collected by authors.

74

Puerto Rico Se Levanata

Figure 6.4. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation site, Camuy, PR.

Figure 6.5. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation truck going to Utuado, PR.

Figure 6.6. Iglesia Metodista La Roca donation site, Camuy, PR.

75

¡El Yunque se levanta! 2019, friends and family members who currently live on the island were asked the following questions:

[I saw the great devastation that Maria caused in the area of El Yunque and the towns that surround it. A close friend owns a pharmacy in Las Piedras and told me how difficult the months were after María. His pharmacy became a help center for many people in the area. Since the building has an electric plant, it was able to supply many residents of the area with medicines and basic necessities. It is very touching to hear him and his sister and how proud they feel to have been able to sustain the business in the midst of the crisis and at the same time help so many people.]

• How do you feel PR is doing, post Hurricane Maria? • The El Yunque region was one of the areas hardest hit. Have you heard anything about or know anyone affected by the Hurricane in this region? Three individuals responded to this request and following are their responses.52 Omar Hernandez Conversation (January 7, 2010), Bayamón, PR

Rafael G. Fuentes López Conversation #1 (January 5, 2019), Maunabo, PR

Q: How do you feel PR is doing, post Hurricane Maria?

Q: ¿Como sientes que Puerto Rico está progresando a más de un año del huracán Maria? [How do you feel PR is doing, post Hurricane Maria?]

A: La recuperación de Puerto Rico luego de María fue lenta, tomando en cuenta la dependencia total que tenemos de la energía eléctrica y su único proveedor, la Autoridad de Energía Eléctrica. Este huracán hizo tambalear todas las áreas de nuestra vida. Afectó nuestra ya deteriorada economía, nuestros trabajos e infraestructura; pero también nos trajo grandes lecciones para cómo prepararnos mejor. Puerto Rico se está recuperando todavía, pero es imposible desvincular este proceso de la crisis económica que enfrentamos y las medidas que está tomando el Congreso de los EEUU a través de la Junta de Control Fiscal.

A: El Progreso de PR es muy lento, lamentablemente la politiquería ha hecho que por la burocracia el proceso sea demasiado despacio. [Progress in Puerto Rico is very slow, unfortunately politicking has made the process too slow for the bureaucracy.] Q: La region de El Yunque fue de una de las áreas más afectadas. ¿As escuchado o sabes de alguien en el area que fue afectado por el huracán?

[The recovery of Puerto Rico after Maria is slow, taking into account the total dependence we have on electric power and its sole provider, the Electric Power Authority. This hurricane shook all areas of our lives. It affected our already deteriorated economy, our jobs and infrastructure; but it also brought us great lessons for how to prepare better. Puerto Rico is still recovering, but it is impossible to de-link this process from the economic crisis we are facing and the measures that the US Congress is taking through the Fiscal Control.]

[The El Yunque region was one of the areas hardest hit. Have you heard anything about or know anyone affected by the Hurricane in this region?] A: El Yunque fue muy afectado pero hay áreas que no se han recuperado en el central de la Isla, el huracán entró en el area sureste, entre Yabucoa y Maunabo, estas áreas fueron las últimas en ser atendidas. Te envío algunas fotos…Vivo en la misma resistencia en Maunabo. ... El huracán Maria marcó definitivamente la viva en PR no nos hemos recuperado del todo, pero Puerto Rico se levanta con la ayuda de Dios.

Q: The El Yunque region was one of the areas hardest hit. Have you heard anything about or know anyone affected by the Hurricane in this region?

[El Yunque was very affected but there are areas that have not recovered in the central of the Island, the hurricane entered the southeast area, between Yabucoa and Maunabo, these areas were the last to be served. I send you some photos [see Figure 6.7)]…I live in the same resistance in Maunabo....Hurricane Maria definitely marked the life in PR we have not recovered completely, but Puerto Rico rises with the help of God.]

A: Vi la gran devastación que ocasionó María en el área del Yunque y los pueblos que lo rodean. Un amigo cercano es dueño de una farmacia en Las Piedras y me relató lo difícil que fueron los meses luego de María. Su farmacia se convirtió en un centro de ayuda para muchas personas del área. Ya que el edificio cuenta con planta eléctrica, pudo suplir a muchos residentes del área con las medicinas y artículos de primera necesidad. Es muy conmovedor escucharlo a él y su hermana cuán orgullosos se sienten de haber podido sostener el negocio en medio de la crisis y a la vez ayudar a tanta gente. 52 

Rafael G. Fuentes López Conversation #2 (January 14, 2019), Maunabo, PR Q: ¿Como sientes que Puerto Rico esta progresando a mas de un año del huracán? [How do you feel PR is doing, post Hurricane Maria?]

All translations by R. Rogers.

76

Puerto Rico Se Levanata

Figure 6.7. Flooding days after Hurricane Marie in Maunabo, PR.

A: Bien lenta. El gobierno no tiene los recursos para ayudar a tanta gente. Hay mucha necesidad en el centro de la isla. Hay mucha gente que no tiene las facilidades para solicitar ayudas. Especialmente gente mayor, que quizás no tienen familiares en la isla y están esperando que alguien los ayude. Hay miles de casas totalmente dañadas, parcialmente dañadas o abandonadas. En algunas casas dañada puede ser que estén viviendo en parte de la casa. En otras casas que eran de dos plantas, dos familias pueden estar viviendo en una planta de la casa. Cientos de puentes fueron sustituidos por puentes provisionales. En las carreteras no se arreglaron los postes o carreteras que eran de dos carriles ahora solo funcionan con uno. Sobre todo, ‘aquí se vive muy bien. Las tiendas siempre están llenas. Las carreteras e iluminación de los campos están malísimas, pero todavía se consume muchísimo.’ Va a tomar muchos años la recuperación total. Todavía no se ha visto el impacto de la recuperación de la infraestructura. Sí, se nota la depresión, especialmente en las personas mayores.El programa ReHace recibe muchos grupos extranjeros voluntarios, que vienen a la isla ayudar a reconstruir hogares y quedan enamorados con la isla. El grupo, en Camuy, tiene voluntarios ya organizados para todo el año (2019).

damaged or abandoned. In some damaged houses they may be living in part of the house. In other houses that were two stories, two families may be living on one floor of the house. Hundreds of bridges were replaced by temporary bridges. On the roads the posts or roads that were two lanes were not fixed, now they only work with one [see Figure 6.8]. Above all, “we live very well here. The stores are always full. The roads and lighting of the fields are very bad, but we still have a lot (to consume).” It will take many years for the total recovery. The impact of infrastructure recovery has not yet been seen. Yes, the depression is noticeable, especially in the elderly. The ReHace program receives many volunteer foreign groups, who come to the island to help rebuild homes and fall in love with the island. The group, in Camuy, has volunteers already organized for the whole year (2019).] Luis Javier Ocasio Rodríguez Conversation (January 13, 2019), Hatillo, PR Q: How do you feel Puerto Rico is doing, post Hurricane Maria? A: El Puerto Rico post Huracán María es uno completamente distinto. Desde el aspecto económico ha inyectado presupuesto a proyectos importantes de infraestructura. Sin embargos, muchos proyectos en curso carecen de planificación estratégica. Por otro lado, el Boricua, una nueva generación se levanta con ideas innovadoras y deseos de construir un nuevo PR.

[Very slow. The government does not have the resources to help so many people. There is a great need in the center of the island. There are many people who do not have the facilities to request aid. Especially older people, who may not have family members on the island and are waiting for someone to help them. There are thousands of houses totally damaged, partially

[The Puerto Rico post Hurricane Maria is a completely different one. From the economic point of view, it has 77

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure 6.8. Building destruction after Hurricane Marie in Maunabo, PR.

Figure 6.9. “Stronger than Maria” sign, Island of Vieques.

injected budget into important infrastructure projects. However, many ongoing projects lack strategic planning. On the other hand, the Boricua, a new generation is (being) raised with innovative ideas and desires to construct a new PR.]

authors of this text, feel it is part of our ethical obligation to preserve these sites for future generations. Additionally, we hope that our reflections also highlighted the importance of community when working in underfunded or economically marginalized areas such as Puerto Rico. Since many of these sites are being preserved by locals, many times without support from outsiders, we believe it is important to include them. In doing so, we found a cultural resiliency and pride that was (and is) reflective of larger Puerto Rican culture. Some good examples of this are the positive signs and sayings throughout the island to promote recovery, such as Puerto Rico Se Levanta (Puerto Rico is rising) or the sign included in Figure 6.9. As such, we strongly believe [Puerto Rican] thoughts, views, and interpretations should always be taken into consideration since they reflect the personal beliefs and practices of the island. Having an understanding of local beliefs and a respect for local customs and practices can only enhance projects. Our hope is this work, our approach, and the data we collected well help clarify the role of La Mina in the overall scientific landscape.

Example #4: Community Outreach – Donating Post2019, Government Unrest, and Earthquakes With the continued political and environmental struggles in 2019, Rogers, along with book illustrator Dennise Rodríguez Ávila, partnered with churches to collect and ship goods to the island. The hope was to continue to contribute to the positive dialogue and rebuilding efforts across the island. However, these efforts were cut short with the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic. Final Thoughts As previously stated, Puerto Rico is an important island for understanding the succession of cultural occupations in the Caribbean; however, lack of support and funding have prevented it from influencing the scientific community as much as it should. These issues are further compounded by the limited governmental infrastructure on the island and lack of external funding supports from the United States and abroad, especially in the post-Hurricane Maria era. Despite these issues, we hope that other scholars and professionals understand the importance of this site and the need to preserve it and others on the island. We, the 78

Appendix A Project Photographs (2006–2019)

Figure A.1. Turtle glyph without chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2006.

Figure A.2. Turtle glyph with chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2006.

79

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure A.3. Spread-eagle stick figure without chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream. Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2006.

Figure A.4. Spread-eagle stick figure with chalk, located ~1 km south of the La Mina site, along either the SE or SW stream. Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2006.

80

Appendix A

Figure A.5. Channel along La Mina boulder. Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2006.

Figure A.6. Chief’s Head boulder –Micro view evidence of chisel/hammer stone hits used to construct a glyph. Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2006.

Figure A.7. Phallic symbol. Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2006.

81

Appendix B Representative 2015 Field Photos

Figure B.1. Upper cacique cave. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

Figure B.2. Drawing La Mina using Roe 1:1 methodology. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

83

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure B.3. Drawing La Mina using Roe 1:1 methodology. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

84

Appendix C Geological and Archaeological Lab Photos

Figure C.1. Basalt rock. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

85

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure C.2. Basalt rock. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

86

Appendix C

Figure C.3. Volcanic sandstone. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

87

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure C.4. Volcanic sandstone with quartzite-like texture. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

88

Appendix C

Figure C.5. Sea shells, T1, TP-1. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

Figure C.6. Sea shells, T1, TP-2. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

89

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure C.7. Historic artifacts. Photo by Rex Caudwell, 2015.

90

Appendix D Petroglyph Photos

Figure D.1. NE Side of La Mina – A.1-A.2 glyphs. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

Figure D.2. NE Side of La Mina – B glyph. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

91

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure D.3. NE Side of La Mina – B and I glyph groups. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

Figure D.4. NE Side of La Mina – C glyph group. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

92

Appendix D

Figure D.5. NE Side of La Mina – D glyph. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

Figure D.6. NE Side of La Mina – E glyph. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

93

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure D.7. NW Side of La Mina – H.1-H.2 glyphs. Photo of illustration by Rhianna Rogers, 2019, based on Roe 1:1 methodology.

94

Appendix E Petroglyph Photos in Chapter 5 Renderings

Figure E.1. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03770). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

Figure E.2. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03771). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

95

¡El Yunque se levanta!

Figure E.3. NE Side of La Mina (image reference DSC03769). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

Figure E.4. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03789). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

Figure E.5. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03790). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

96

Appendix E

Figure E.6. NE Side of Chief’s Head Boulder (image reference DSC03896). Photo by Rex Cauldwell, 2015.

97

Appendix F

Lithic Artifact

99 Figure F.1. Lithic artifact. Type: lithic/ bi-facial flake. Condition: mostly complete with represented tetrahedral shape along the longitudinal axis; cleavage plains along the same longitudinal axis were unweathered. Maximum dimension: .89 cm. Length: .86 cm. Width: .64 cm. Thickness: .29 cm. Weight: 4.0 grams (Density: 2.65 grams per cm³). Raw material: quartz crystal. Color: clear/opaque. Presence of cortex: Undetermined. Utilization: flaked stone tool or projectile point – possible religious offering.

Bibliography Abbad y Lasierra, Fray Íñigo. (1788) 1866. Historia geográfica civil y natural de la isla de San Juan Bautista de Puerto-Rico. Madrid: en la imprenta de Don Antonio. Reprint, Puerto Rico: Librería de Acosta.

of the Americas Cultural Initiative, produced by Rhianna Rogers et al., YouTube video, 47:17, https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpa7qR4EYL4. Bourne, Edward Gaylord. 1906. “Columbus, Ramón Pané and the Beginnings of American Anthropology.” American Antiquarian Society. https://archive.org/ details/columbusramonpan00bour.

Alegría, Ricardo E. 1965. “On Puerto Rican Archaeology.” American Antiquity 31 (2): 246–49. Alegría, Ricardo E. 1978. Apuntes en torno a la mitología de los indios taínos de las Antillas Mayores y sus orígenes suramericanos. San Juan: Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Puerto Rico y el Caribe, Museo del Hombre Dominicano.

Brady, James E. and Keith M. Prufer. 2005. In the Maw of the Earth Monster: Mesoamerican Ritual Cave Use. Austin: University of Texas Press. Bradley, Richard, Felipe Criado Boado, and Ramón Fábregas Valcarce. 1994. “Rock Art Research as Landscape Archaeology: A Pilot Study in Galicia, North-West Spain.” World Archaeology 25 (3): 374–90.

Allaire, Louis. 1987. “Some Comments on the Ethnic Identity of the Taino-Carib Frontier.” In Ethnicity and Culture, edited by Reginald Auger, Margaret Glass, Scott MacEachern, and Peter McCartney, 127–33. Calgary: Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary.

Briggs, Reginald P. and J. P. Akers. 1985. Hydrogeologic Map of Puerto Rico and Adjacent Islands (No. HA197). Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey.

American National Red Cross. 2019. “Hurricane Maria Relief and Recovery.” https://www.redcross.org/aboutus/our-work/disaster-relief/hurricane-relief/hurricanemaria-relief-information.html

Brinton, Daniel G. 1871. The Arawack Language of Guiana in Its Linguistic and Ethnological Relations. Philadelphia: McCalla & Stavely. Bullen, Ripley P. “Petroglyphs of the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.” Paper presented at the Fourth International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, Reduit Beach, St. Lucia, July, 1971.

Anderson-Córdova, Karen. F. 1991. “Hispaniola and Puerto Rico: Indian acculturation and heterogeneity, 1492–1550.” PhD diss. Yale University. Askins, Kye. 2009. “‘That’s Just What I Do’: Placing Emotion in Academic Activism.” Emotion, Space and Society 2 (1): 4–13.

Bullen, Ripley P. “Certain Petroglyphs of the Antilles.” Paper presented at the 5th Congress for the Study of the Precolumbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, The Antigua Archaeological Society, Antigua, W.I., July, 1975.

Bednarik, Robert G. 1995. “The Côa Petroglyphs: An Obituary to the Stylistic Dating of Palaeolithic RockArt.” Antiquity 69 (266): 877–83. Bérard, Benoit. 2013. “The Saladoid.” In The Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Archaeology, edited by R. Rodriguez Ramos, 184–97. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burmister, Donald. “Suggested Methods of Test for Identification of Soils.” In Special Procedures for Testing Soil and Rock for Engineering Purposes: Fifth Edition, edited by ASTM Committee D-18, 311–23. West Conshohocken: ASTM International, 1970.

Birdsey, Richard A., and Peter L. Weaver. 1982. “The Forest Resources of Puerto Rico.” U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. https://www.srs.fs.usda. gov/pubs/5544.

Cancel-Sepúlveda, Mario R. 2008. “Culturas agroalfareras o arahuacas.” Puerto Rico: su transformación en el tiempo. https://historiapr.wordpress.com.

Borda, Orlando F. 2006. “Participatory (Action) Research in Social Theory: Origins and Challenges.” In Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, edited by Peter Reason and Hilary Bradbury-Huang, 27–37. London: SAGE.

Castañeda, Quetzil E. “The ‘Ethnographic Turn’ in Archaeology: Research Positioning and Reflexivity in Ethnographic Archaeologies.” In Ethnographic archaeologies: reflections on stakeholders and archaeological practices, edited by Quetzil Castañeda and Christopher N. Matthews, 25–61. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2008.

Borrero, Roberto Múkaro. “Taino Cacique Roberto Múkaro Borrero – The Taino People and Puerto Rico in Historical Context,” December 31, 2018, in SUNY Empire State College – Year of the Indigenous Peoples

Cauldwell, Rex. 2014. “A Study of Caribbean Petroglyphs.” Ancient American Magazine 18 (104): 36–8. 101

¡El Yunque se levanta! Cauldwell, Rex. 2015a. “Part 1: How to Photograph Petroglyphs.” Unpublished manuscript, January 17, 015. Typescript.

to the New World: Letters and Selected Documents, edited and translated by Richard H. Major. London: The Hakluyt Society, 1847.

Cauldwell, Rex. 2015b. “Trails of History- Columbus’ True Route to Hispaniola in 1493.” Unpublished manuscript, January 17, 015. Typescript.

Cox, Dennis P., and Reginald P. Briggs. 1973. “Metallogenic Map of Puerto Rico.” U. S. Geological Survey. https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/i721.

Cauldwell, Rex, Rhianna C. Rogers, and James Schuetz. 2016. “Interpreting the La Mina Site.” Talk at the 26th Annual International Association for Caribbean Archaeology Congress, St. Martin, July 19–25, 2016.

Curet, L. Antonio. 2006. Ancient Borinquen: Archaeology of Native Puerto Rico. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. David, Nicholas, and Carol Kramer. 2001. Ethnoarchaeology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CBC News: The National. “Puerto Rico’s Mental Health Crisis a Consequence of Hurricane Maria.” Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, September 17, 2019. Video, 13:54. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=DNEwkwXlCAU

Dávila, Ovidio. 1976. “Apuntes sobre el Arte Rupestre Prehispánico de Puerto Rico.” Cuadernos Prehispánicos 4: 62–8.

Chambers, Robert. 1998. “Beyond ‘Whose Reality Counts?’ New Methods We Now Need?” Studies in Cultures, Organizations and Societies 4 (2): 279–301.

Deagan, Kathleen A. 1987. Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800. Vol. 2. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Chanlatte-Baik, Luis A. 2013. “Huecoid Culture and the Antillean Agroalfarero (Farmer-Potter) Period.” In The Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Archaeology, edited by William F. Keegan, Corinne L. Hofman, and Reniel Rodríguez Ramos, 171–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Deagan, Kathleen A. 2002. Portable Personal Possessions (Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and the Caribbean, 1500–1800 – Volume 2). Washington DC: Smithsonian Books. Deagan, Kathleen. 2004. “Reconsidering Taino Social Dynamics After Spanish Conquest: Gender and Class in Culture Contact Studies.” American Antiquity 69 (4): 597–626.

Chaytor, Jason D. n.d. “The Northeast Caribbean – Plate Techonics in Action.” NOAA. Accessed May 12, 2020. https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/okeanos/explorations/ ex1811/background/geology/

de Booy, Theodoor H. N. 1919. Archeology of the Virgin Islands 1. New York: Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation.

Chippindale, Christopher, and George Nash, eds. 2001. European Landscapes of Rock-Art. London: Routledge.

de Las Casas, Bartolomé. Bartolomé de Las Casas to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, 1552–1553. In In Defense of the Indians: The Defense of the Most Reverend Lord, Don Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas, of the Order of Preachers, Late Bishop of Chiapa, Against the Persecutors and Slanderers of the Peoples of the New World Discovered Across the Seas. Translated and edited by Stafford Poole. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1974.

Chippindale, Christopher, and George Nash, eds. 2004. The Figured Landscapes of Rock Art: Looking at Pictures in Place. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chirinko, Robert S., Ryan Chiu, and S. Henderson. “What Went Wrong?: The Puerto Rican Debt Crisis, the ‘Treasury Put,’ and the Failure of Market Discipline.” CESifo Working Paper Series #7558, Munich, Germany, March 2019. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=3357135#.

Dolan, James F., Henry T. Mullins, and David J. Wald. 1998. “Active Tectonics of the North-Central Caribbean: Oblique Collision, Strain Partitioning, and Opposing Subducted Slabs.” In Active Strike-Slip and Collisional Tectonics in the Northern Caribbean Plate Collisional Zone, edited by J. F. Dolan and P. Mann, 1–61. Boulder: Geological Society of America.

Cinquino, Michael A., Michele H. Hayward, and Frank J. Schieppati. 2003. “Puerto Rican Rock Art Types: Their Distribution And Significance.” In Proceedings of the Congress of the International Association for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by Claudia Andujar and Glenis Tavarez, 667–74. Basse Terre: International Association for Caribbean Archaeology.

Dubelaar, Cornelis N. 1986a. The Petroglyphs in the Guianas and the Adjacent Areas of Brazil and Venezuela: An Inventory with a Comprehensive Bibliography of South American and Antillean Petroglyphs. Vol. 12. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology.

Cobb, Charles. n.d. “Taíno Culture History.” Florida Museum of National History. Accessed December 5, 2020. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/histarch/ research/haiti/en-bas-saline/taino-culture/.

Dubelaar, Cornelis Nicolaas. 1986b. South American and Caribbean Petroglyphs. Leiden: Brill.

Columbus, Christopher. Christopher Columbus to Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II and Queen Isabella, 1492–1465. In Christopher Columbus: Four Voyages

Dubelaar, Cornelis Nicolaas. 1995. The Petroglyphs of the Lesser Antilles, the Virgin Islands and Trinidad. No. 135. 102

Bibliography Amsterdam: Natuurwetenschappelijke voor het Caraïbisch Gebied.

Studiekring

Puerto Rico. Accessed February 15, 2019. https:// enciclopediapr.org/encyclopedia/pre-columbianhistory-of-puerto-rico/

Dubelaar, Cornelis N., Michele H. Merkling, and Michael A. Argana. 1999. Puerto Rican Rock Art: A Resource Guide. San Juan: Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office.

García Goyco, Osvaldo. n.d.b. “The Saladoids and Huecoids/The Ostionoids or Pre-Tainos.” Enciclopedia de Puerto Rico. Accessed February 15, 2019. https:enciclopediapr.org.

Dumont, Enrique. 1876. Investigaciones acerca de las antigüedades de la isla de Puerto Rico (Boriquen): piedras encontradas en las excavaciones: y costumbres de los antiguos Indios, primeros habitantes de dicha isla. Habana: Imprenta “La Antilla” de N. CachoNegrete.

Glover, Lynn, III, and Peter H. Mattson. 1960. “Successive Thrust and Transcurrent Faulting During the Early Tertiary in South-Central Puerto Rico.” In Geological Survey Research 1960, edited by Thomas B. Nolan, 363–65. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Dybas, Cheryl L. 2013. “The Road Not Taken: Paths to Nonacademic Careers in the Biological Sciences.” BioScience 63 (12): 915–21.

Grindlay, Nancy R., Paul Mann and James Dolan. 1997. “Researchers Investigate Submarine Faults North of Puerto Rico.” EOS 78 (38): 404–06.

Erikson, Johan P., James L. Pindell, and David K. Larue. 1991. “Fault Zone Deformational Constraints on Paleogene Tectonic Evolution in Southern Puerto Rico.” Geophysical Research Letters 18 (3): 569–72.

Gumerman, George J., and David A. Phillips Jr. 1978. “Archaeology Beyond Anthropology.” American Antiquity 43 (2): 184–91.

Fewkes, Jesse W. 1907. “The Aborigines of Porto Rico and Neighboring Islands.” In Twenty-fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1903–1904, edited by Jesse W. Fewkes, 3–220. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Guttmann-Bond, Erika B., and Ssjoerd J. Kluiving. 2015. Landscape Archaeology Between Art and Science: From a Multi- to an Interdisciplinary Approach. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Florida Museum. n.d.-a Digital Ceramic Type Collection. Florida Museum. Accessed February 1, 2020. https:// www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/histarch/ceramic-types/

Hale, Charles. 2001. “What is Activist Research.” Items & Issues 2 (2): 13–15. https://issuu.com/ssrcitemsissues/ docs/i_i_vol_2_no_1–2_2001?e=24618429/35326062

Florida Museum. n.d.-b Historical Archaeology Collections. Florida Museum. Accessed February 1, 2020. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/histarch/ collections/

Hayward, Michele, Lesley-Gail Atkinson, and Michael A. Cinquino, eds. 2009. Rock Art of the Caribbean. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. Herrera Fritot, Réne, and Charles L. Youmans. 1946. La Caleta: joya arqueologica antillana: Exploracion y estudio de un rico yacimiento indigena dominicano y comparacion de los ejemplares con los Cuba y otros lugares. La Caleta: Dominican Republic, Smithsonian Libraries.

Florida Museum. “Taíno Cultural History.” Updated December 7, 2018. https://www.floridamuseum.ufl. edu/histarch/research/haiti/en-bas-saline/taino-culture/ Frassetto, Monica F. 1960. “A Preliminary Report on Petroglyphs in Puerto Rico.” American Antiquity 25 (3): 381–91.

Hill, Robert T. 1898. Cuba and Porto Rico, with Other Islands of the West Indies; Their Topography, Climate, Flora, Products, Industries, Cities, People, Political Conditions, etc. New York: Century Publishing.

Garcia, Angel, Steven C. Semken, and Eric Brandt. “Ethnogeological Cultural Model of Karst Derived from Traditional Knowledge in Puerto Rico and Dominican Republic.” Paper presented at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, New Orleans, LA, December 2017.

Hughes, K. Stephen., and Alesandra C. Morales Vélez. “Characterization of Landslide Sites in Puerto Rico after Hurricanes Irma and María.” Paper presented at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, New Orleans, LA, December 2017.

García Arévalo, Manuel A. 1997. “The Bat and the Owl: Nocturnal Images of Death.” In Taíno: Pre Columbian Art and Culture from the Caribbean, edited by Fatima Bercht, 112–123. New York: El Museo del Barrio, Monacelli Press.

Hy, Ling R. 1887. “The Aborigines of Hispaniola.” Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 16: 247–286.

García-Gaines, Rubén A., and Susan Frankenstein. 2015. “USCS and the USDA Soil Classification System.” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. https://apps.dtic.mil/ dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a614144.pdf.

Jennings, Lisa N., Jamieson Douglas, Emrys Treasure, and Grizelle González. 2014. “Climate Change Effects in El Yunque National Forest, Puerto Rico, and the Caribbean Region.” Gen. Technical Services Report SRS-193. Ashville: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

García Goyco, Osvaldo. n.a.-a “Pre-Columbian History of Puerto Rico/First Inhabitants.” Enciclopedia de 103

¡El Yunque se levanta! Joyce, Rosemary. 2000. Gender and Power in Prehispanic Mesoamerica. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Sheila F. Murphy and Robert F. Stallard. https://pubs. usgs.gov/pp/1789/pdfs/ChapterA.pdf.

Keegan, William F., and Lisabeth A. Carlson. 2008. Talking Taino: Caribbean Natural History from a Native Perspective. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Murray, John James. 1997. “Ethnogeology and Its Implications for the Aboriginal Geoscience Curriculum.” Journal of Geoscience Education 45 (2): 117–22.

Keeley, Lawrence H. 1980. Experimental Determinations of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

National Park Service. 2006. “Treatment of Cultural Resources.” National Park Service. https://www.nps. gov/policy/mp/policies.html#_Toc157232775.

Kelso, Gerald K. 1993. “Pollen-record Formation Processes, Interdisciplinary Archaeology, and Land Use by Mill Workers and Managers: The Boott Mills Corporation, Lowell, Massachusetts, 1836–1942.” Historical Archaeology 27 (1): 70–94.

Oliver, José R., Colin McEwan, and Anna Casas Gilberga, eds. 2008. El Caribe precolombino: Fray Ramón Pané y el universo taíno, vol. 1. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Olsen, Fred. “Petroglyphs of the Caribbean Islands and Arawak Deities.” In Proceedings of the 4th International Congress for the Study of the Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, edited by Suzanne M. Lewenstein, 35–46. Saint Lucia Archaeological and Historical Society, Castries, Saint Lucia, W.I. 1971.

Krug, L. 1878. “Indianisch Alterthumer in Porto Rico.” Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 8: 428–36. Krushensky, Richard D., and Johannes H. Schellekens. 1998. “Geologic Map of Puerto Rico with Correlation Chart and Map Unit Descriptions.” In Geology, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Mineral Occurrences and Mineral Resource Assessment for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 98–038, edited by W. Bawiec, 25–46.

Pagán Perdomo, Dato. 1978. Nuevas pictografias en la isla de Santo Domingo, Las Cuevas de Borbon. Santo Domingo: Museo del Hombre Dominicano. Pané, Fray R. Fray R. Pané to Christopher Columbus and to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, 1493–1494. In An Account of the Antiquities of the Indians: Chronicles of the New World Encounter, edited by José Juan Arrom and translated by Susan Griswold. Durham: Duke University Press, 1999.

Martinez Torres, Roberto. 1981. “Pinturas Indígenas de Borinquen.” Ediciones El Mapa. Morovis: The State Historic Preservation Office of Puerto Rico. Meeth, L. Richard. 1978. “Interdisciplinary Studies: A Matter of Definition.” Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 10 (7): 10.

Pasch, Richard J., Andrew B. Penny, and Robbie Berg. (2019). National Hurricane Center Tropical Cyclone Report: Hurricane Maria (AL 152017), 16–30 September 2017. NOAA and National Weather Service. https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/AL152017_Maria. pdf

Méndez-Bonilla, Iván F. n.d. Taíno Art. Lehman College. Accessed December 5, 2020. http://www.lehman.edu/ vpadvance/artgallery/gallery/images/taino_treasures/ mendez_essay_a.htm Miller, Gary L., and Ariel E. Lugo. 2009. “Guide to the Ecological Systems of Puerto Rico.” General Technical Report, IITF-GTR-35. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service. https://www.fs.fed.us/global/iitf/ pubs/IITF_gtr35.pdf.

Pico, Rafael. 1974. The Geography of Puerto Rico. New York: Aldine Publishing/ Pinart, Alphonse L. (1890) 1979. “Notas sobre los petroglifos y antiguedades de las Antillas Mayores y Menores.” Revista del Museo de Antropología, Historia y Arte de la Universidad de Puerto Rico 1: 71–88.

Morales, Reinaldo, Jr. and Melisa A. Quesenberry. 2005. “A Niche in Time: JD-5, Caribbean Cave Art, and the Fourth Dimension.” American Indian Rock Art 31: 34–56.

Prentice, Carol S., and Paul Mann. 2005. “Paleoseismic Study of the South Lajas Fault: First Documentation of an Onshore Holocene Fault in Puerto Rico.” Special paper. Geological Scoiety of America. https://pubs. er.usgs.gov/publication/70035337.

Moya, Juan C., and Aurelio Mercado. 2006. “Geomorphologic and Stratigraphic Investigations on Historic and Pre-historic Tsunami in Northwestern Puerto Rico: Implications for Long Term Coastal Evolution.” In Caribbean Tsunami Hazard, edited by Aurelio Mercado-Irizarry and Philip Liu, 149–77. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

Rainey, Froelich G. 1936. “A new prehistoric culture in Haiti.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 22 (1): 4–8. Ralph, Sarah, ed. 2013. The Archaeology of Violence: Interdisciplinary Approaches, Book 2. Albany: SUNY Press.

Murphy, Sheila F., Robert F. Stallard, Matthew C. Larsen, and William M. Gould. 2012. Physiography, Geology, and Land Cover of Four Watersheds in Eastern Puerto Rico. In Water Quality and Landscape Processes of Four Watersheds in Eastern Puerto Rico, edited by

Ramos, Reniel R. 2010. Rethinking Puerto Rican Precolonial History. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. 104

Bibliography Ramos-Ginés, Orlando. 1999. “Estimation of Magnitude and Frequency of Floods for Streams in Puerto Rico: New Empirical Models.” Water-Resources Investigations Report 99–4142. U.S. Geological Survey. https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/wri994142.

Archaeology, edited by Mission Archéologique, 20–59. St. George: the International Association for Caribbean Archeology. Roe, Peter G., and Jose Rivera. 1995. “Recent advances in recording, dating and interpreting Puerto Rican petroglyphs.” In 16 Proceedings of the Congress of the International Association for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by Lucette Michaux Chevry, 444–61. Basse Terre: Conseil Régonal de la Guadeloupe et Auditorium de la Ville de Basse Terre.

Rivera, Danielle Z. 2020. Disaster Colonialism: A Commentary on Disasters Beyond Singular Events to Structural Violence. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. https://onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/full/10.1111/1468–2427.12950.

Rogers, Rhianna C. The Spider Woman Rules No More?: The Transformation and Resilience of Aztec Female Roles. Masters thesis, Florida Atlantic University, 2004.

Rodríguez Alvarez, A. “A Preliminary Petroglyph Survey Along the Rio Blanco River: Puerto Rico.” Paper presented at Actas del XIV Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Arqueología del Caribe, Barbados, July, 1988.

Rogers, Rhianna C., and Menoukha R. Case. 2017. “Tribal versus Academic Archaeology: Power Dynamics and Cultural Sensitivity.” AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology 6: 117–24.

Rodríguez Alvarez, A. “A Classification Scheme for the Puerto Rico Petroglyphs.” Paper presented at Actas del XIV Congreso de la Asociación Internacional de Arqueología del Caribe, Barbados, July, 1991.

Rogers, Rhianna C., James Schuetz, and Rex Cauldwell. “Interpreting Ancient Puerto Rican Rock Art: Geological and Archaeological Thoughts on the La Mina Site Petroglyphs.” Talk at the New York State Archaeological Association – Houghton Chapter Speaker Series, Buffalo Museum of Science, Buffalo, NY, February 2017.

Roe, Peter G. 1980. “Art and Residence Among the Shipibo Indians of Peru: A Study in Microacculturation.” American Anthropologist 82 (1): 42–71. Roe, Peter G. 1985. “A Preliminary Report on the 1980 and 1982 Field Seasons at Hacienda Grande (12 PSJ-7): Overview of Site History, Mapping and Excavations.” In Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress for the Study of the Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, edited by Louise Allaire and Francine M. Mayer, 151–80. Montreal: Centre de Recherches Caraïbes.

Rogers, Rhianna C., James Schuetz, and Rex Cauldwell. 2018. “Overcoming Issues in Ancient Puerto Rican Boulder Art Research: Reflections from the La Mina Petroglyph Project.” AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology 7: 61–84. Rouse, Irving. (1952) 1982. Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Vol. 18, Pt. 3–4. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. Reprint, New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

Roe, Peter G. 2005. “Rivers of Stone, Rivers Within Stone: Rock Art in Ancient Puerto Rico.” In Ancient Boriquen: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Native Puerto Rico, edited by Peter E. Siegel, 285–336. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.

Rouse, Irving. (1954) 1992. The Tainos: Rise and Decline of the People Who Greeted Columbus. New York: Double Day and William Howells. Reprint, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Roe, Peter G., and Michele H. Hayward. 2009. “Rocks of Ages: Petroglyphs, Pictographs, and Identity in Puerto Rico.” In Archaeologies of Art: Time, Place, Identity, edited by Inás D. Sanz, Dánae Fiore, and Sally K. May, 51–78. London: Routledge.

Rouse, Irving, and Ricardo E. Alegría. 1990. Excavations at Maria de la Cruz Cave and Hacienda Grande Village Site, Loiza, Puerto Rico. New Haven: Department of Anthropology and the Peabody Museum, Yale University.

Roe, Peter G., Michele H. Hayward, and M. A. Cinquino. 2018. “Rock Art and Horticulture in the Caribbean.” In The Archaeology of Caribbean and Circum-Caribbean Farmers (6000 BC-AD 1500), edited by B. Reid, 172– 203. London: Routledge.

Samson, Alice V., Lucy J. Wrapson, Caroline R. Cartwright, Diana Sahy, Rebecca J. Stacey, and Jago Cooper. 2017. “Artists before Columbus: A MultiMethod Characterization of the Materials and Practices of Caribbean Cave Art.” Journal of Archaeological Science 88: 24–36.

Roe, Peter G., John G. Jones, Joshua M. Torres, Lee A. Newsom, Deborah M. Pearsall, Jeffrey B. Walker, Karen F. Anderson-Córdova, Susan D. deFrance, Anne V. Stokes, and Daniel P. Wagner. 2005. Ancient Borinquen: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Native Puerto Rico. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Sanz, Inés D., Dánae Fiore, and Sally K. May. 2016. “Rocks of Ages: Petroglyphs, Pictographs, and Identity in Puerto Rico.” In Archaeologies of Art: Time, Place, and Identity, edited by Inés D. Sanz, Dánae Fiore, and Sally K. May, 51–78. New York: Routledge.

Roe, Peter G., José R. Meléndez, and Peter DeScioli. 1999. “The Cueva de Mora (Comerío, PR) Petroglyphs and Pictographs: A Documentary Project.” In Proceedings of the XVIII International Congress for Caribbean

Semken, Steven, Angel Garcia, Carolina Londoño, and Elizabeth Brandt. “Ethnogeology, to Inform Place105

¡El Yunque se levanta! Based and Culturally Inclusive Geoscience Teaching.” Paper presented at the Earth Educators Rendevous, Tempe, AX, July, 2016.

United States Geological Survey – Minerals Team. 1998. Geology, geochemistry, geophysics, mineral occurrences and mineral resource assessment for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, edited by Walter J. Bawiec. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 98– 038. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/of98–038/.

Siegel, Peter E., ed. 2005. Ancient Borinquen: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Native Puerto Rico. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Waldron, Lawrence. 2011. “Geographic Distributions of Zoomorphic Motifs in Saladoid Ceramics.” In Proceedings of the 24th Congress of the International Association for Caribbean Archaeology, edited by Bérard Benoit, 450–466. Martinique: International Association for Caribbean Archaeology.

Siegel, Peter E., ed. “Rivers of Stone, Rivers Within Stone: Rock Art in Ancient Puerto Rico.” Ancient Boriquen: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of Native Puerto Rico, 285–336. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 2005. Sinopoli, Carla M. 1991. Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics. Boston: Springer.

Williams, Damon A. (2010). “Campus Climate and Culture Study – Taking Strides Towards a Better Future.” Florida Gulf Coast University. https://www2.fgcu.edu/ president/files/FGCU_Climate_Culture_Report_2010. pdf.

Stahl, Agustín. 1889. Los indios borinqueños: estudios etnográficos. Seville: Imprenta y Librería de Acosta. Stember, Marilyn. 1991. “Advancing the Social Sciences Through the Interdisciplinary Enterprise.” The Social Science Journal 28 (1): 1–14.

Zeppelzauer, Matthias, Georg Poier, Markus Seidl, Christian Reinbacher, Samuel Schulter, Christian Breiteneder, and Horst Bischof. 2016. “Interactive 3D Segmentation of Rock-Art by Enhanced Depth Maps and Gradient Preserving Regularization. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage 9 (4): 1–30.

Sutton, Mark Q., and Brooke S. Arkush. 2001. Archaeological Laboratory Methods: An Introduction. Third Edition. Dubuque: Kendall Hunt. Tilley, Christopher. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford: Berg. Torres, Joshua M., L. Antonio Curet, Scott Rice-Snow, Melissa J. Castor, and Andrew K. Castor. 2014. “Of Flesh and Stone: Labor Investment and Regional Sociopolitical Implications of Plaza/Batey Construction at the Ceremonial Center of Tibes (AD 600-AD 1200), Puerto Rico.” Latin American Antiquity 25 (2): 125–51. Troncoso, Andrés, Felipe Armstrong, and George Nash. 2018. Archaeologies of Rock Art: South American Perspectives. London: Routledge. Tuttle, Martitia P., Kathleen Dyer-Williams, Eugene S. Schweig, Carol S. Prentice, Juan C. Moya, and Kathleen B. Tucker. 2005. “Liquefaction Induced by Historic and Prehistoric Earthquakes in Western Puerto Rico.” In Active Tectonics and Seismic Hazards of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Offshore Areas, edited by P. Mann, P., 263–76. McLean: GeoScienceWorld. United States Department of Agriculture. n.d. “Aviso.” Accessed December 5, 2020. https://www.fs.usda.gov/ elyunque. United States Geological Survey. n.d. “National Geospatial Program.” Accessed December 5, 2020. https://www. usgs.gov/core-science-systems/national-geospatialprogram/national-map. United State Geological Survey – Geographical Information System Database (shapefiles: citiesx010g_ shp, geol01m075.e00, gsmsoil_PR, PONET.e00, RDLINE.e00, TRAN_72; accessed July 29, 2015). https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/tnmdelivery/gis-data-download.

106

BAR INT E R NAT IONA L SERIES 3019 ‘This report represents a significant contribution to Caribbean rock art research and its data set will provide the basis for further research in the La Mina region and can be applied for understanding trends in the greater Caribbean arena. … The “activist” approach and application of data/ findings is socially valuable and extends the scope and value of rock art research beyond academia.’ Dr Gordon Ambrosino, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama ‘La Mina is clearly an important site … and it is also clearly important to the prehistory of the Caribbean. The authors have done a very good job detailing the art in its environmental, cultural, and interpretative contexts. … There are good descriptions, photographs, etc. of the rock art as well as the geological context. The methods employed … provide key information that will be of great interest to Caribbean archaeologists generally, and rock-art researchers specifically.’ Dr David W. Robinson, University of Central Lancashire Archaeologists consider Puerto Rico a key geographical location for categorizing native occupations in the Caribbean. However, lack of funding, minimal focus on petroglyph research, and limited historical records has reduced Puerto Rico’s contributions to the broader archaeological conversation. This book hopes to alleviate this issue through its interdisciplinary analysis of the La Mina site, a previously unrecorded petroglyph site near the El Yunque National Forest in Municipio de Naguabo, Puerto Rico. The authors’ 2015 fi eldwork consisted of a Phase I geological and archaeological survey and the cataloguing of Rex Cauldwell’s longitudinal photographic study of the site (2006–2018), both of which included the documentation of dozens of previously unrecorded preTaíno/Taíno glyphs. In 2017–2018, they supplemented the initial fieldwork with additional ethnographic data, focusing on the aftermath of recent natural disasters and cultural unrest in the region. Rhianna C. Rogers, PhD is an Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Global Indigenous Knowledge program at SUNY Empire State College. She is a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) with over a decade of experience in academic and tribal archaeology as well as historical preservation and museum studies. Her research focuses on Indigenous peoples in the continental US, Mexico, Ecuador, and Puerto Rico. She is the author of From Ichcanzihoo to Mérida: Documenting Cultural Transition Through Contact Archaeology in Tíhoo Mérida Yucatán (BAR 2011). James W. Schuetz, P.G. is a geologist who specializes in remediation of complex industrial waste sites, geological mathematics, and fundamental geology. His twenty years of experience includes environmental consulting, water resources, and exploration. Jim’s quest in life is to improve the world through geology, mentoring, and removing barriers between cultural institutions. Rex Cauldwell is an amateur archaeologist and member of the Asociación Internacional de Arqueología del Caribe (A.I.A.C.) with over 15 years of experience photographing and analysing artifacts of Puerto Rico and the Caribbean. His photographic study of the La Mina site (2006–2018) is the basis of this book and has been published in Ancient America Magazine. Printed in England

2