ETHNOHISTORICAL VS. ECOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE CASE OF DOMINICA'S AMERINDIANS Robert A. Myers Introduction Although Dominica has been associated with the Carib Indians through first­ hand observation since its discovery in 1493, 484 years ago, and both factual and legendary accounts of these Indians have been common (as evidenced by the attached bibliography), surprisingly little is known about the island's pre-1493 Amerindian population. In fact, little was known of the post-Columbian inhabitants until French priests lived among them during the seventeenth century, nearly 150 years after the island's discovery. Following Labat's visit in 1700, over 230 years elapsed until serious ethnographic study of the Caribs was begun by Douglas Taylor, whose work over the last 40 years remains the most extensive to date (1). In short, with few exceptions, much of the world's knowledge of Island Carib culture on Dominica over four and one-half centuries is the result of brief encounters or superficial visits and not extensive fieldwork. The state of our knowledge of the island's archeology is even more sparse. The only published article to date specifically concerned with archeologic- al aspects of the island is Clifford Evans' "The Lack of Archeology on Dominica", presented to this Congress in 1967. The purpose of my paper is to examine the views presented in that article and to add bits of information gleaned from vari­ ous sources on West Indian archeology and accounts of early European contact with the island's inhabitants. In his paper Dr. Evans offers reasons for the absence of promising archeo- logical sites on the island most steeped in lore of the Island Carib. In connec­ tion with the comprehensive Breden-Archbold Biological Survey of Dominica sponsored by the Smithsonian Institution, Dr. Evans enlisted the aid of 25 biologists who worked on the island at various times to be aware of any possible archeological materials. Unfortunately, he received "not one clue" from these scientists, many of whom were already familiar with the types of things which would interest an archeologist. Nor were the island's inhabitants of much help. They knew only of the present Carib Reserve and of "Indian artifacts" once on display in the Roseau Library. Comments Evans, Never had we been in any place in the world where local inhabitants making their basic living by agriculture and hence constantly observing the ground, had seen so little on or in the soil (1968:94) (2). Beginning in January 1966, Dr. Evans conducted an intensive month-long sur­ vey of the island finding so few sites that he concluded the aboriginal settlement on Dominica was indeed "sparse". Of 24 sites located, only 5 were exclusively In­ dian and 5 contained a mixture of Indian and European materials. All of the sites were along the rugged, windward coast, with 8 of the 10 on the northeastern shore. Three phases of occupation were identified: pre-Arawak (Saladoid-Barrancoid), Ara- wak, and Historical Carib. All of the sites were shallow, representing brief oc­ cupation, and the few potsherds found were in poor condition. Stone artifacts were not mentioned. Since European and Indian materials were mixed, it appears that both groups found the same location favorable. 326 ETHNOHISTORICAL VS. ECOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS To explain the lack of archeological evidence, Dr. Evans resorts to the ecological limitations of the island. Dominica lacks the sheltered bays and coastal shelfs often found on other islands thus making aboriginal fishing dif­ ficult. Without any mangroves, associated shellfish, particularly the mangrove oyster, are in short supply. The leeward coast is relatively dry and lacks ade­ quate fish resources to support a permanent Indian settlement. Considering these ecological conditions and the sparse material evidence, Dr. Evans concludes that Dominica was unattractive to the Indians when compared to the larger nearby is­ lands of Martinique and Guadeloupe. Thus the island served only as a "way- station" or temporary place of settlement. As soon as the unfavorable subsistence resources became evident, the Indians apparently moved on to the next island where prospects were better" (1968: 101). These conclusions contradict historical and popular impressions of the long-standing connection between Amerindians and Dominica by asserting that pre- Columbian occupation of the island was superficial and that post-Columbian oc­ cupation was limited and was forced by European hostility. Dr. Evans' paper raises interesting questions, foremost among them, the matter of such restricted early settlement of the island. Phrased another way, this problem can be stated, which groups, when, in how large numbers, and for how long settled Dominica, and, if in fact the island was settled over a long period as popular tradition main­ tains, why is there so little physical evidence of the settlement? In this paper I will draw fragmentary evidence from relevant historical sources and suggest a different view from the one expressed in "The Lack of Archeology on Dominica". Historical References to Amerindians on Dominica Accounts of the Amerindian population of Dominica during the first century after discovery are sketchy at best, and, until French priests actually lived on the island in the mid-seventeenth century, refer in general only to brief stops at the island to replenish supplies of wood and water and to "trafficking" with the Indians. I will cite several references which document this early contact be­ tween Caribs and Europeans and attempt to build a case suggesting that, at least since 1493, Amerindian occupation of Dominica has been continuous. On his second voyage about five a.m. on November 3, 1493, Columbus reached Dominica with 17 ships and at least 1200 men, but, finding no suitable harbor on the windward coast, proceeded to Marie Galante which appeared to offer a more hospitable landing site (3). He sent one ship to explore the island's leeward side, however, which located a fine sheltered bay and found signs of the Indians (4). Dr. Chanca, the expedition's physician, reported the event in this way: One of the vessels, however, still remained at the first island all that day seeking a harbor, in case it should be necessary to return hither. At last, having found a good one where they saw both people and dwellings, they returned that night to the fleet, that had already put into harbor at the other island (1907:434). Unfortunately we have no idea of the number of Indians or dwellings sight­ ed, but the account does suggest that a permanent settlement existed on the west coast on or near Prince Ruperts Bay. To date we have no archeological evidence of this and the site may lie beneath Portsmouth, the island's second major town. From 1493 on, belief in Dominica's occupation by Amerindians has been strong. The Spanish Cédula of 1511, clearly includes Dominica as one of several islands inhabited by the Indians, but gives no estimate of their numbers (Jesse 1963: 27). Despite repeated contacts with Europeans, there does not seem to be ROBERT A. MYERS 327 adequate historical information to make an accurate count, or even a ballpark es­ timate, of the number of Indians on Dominica for most of the island's history, par­ ticularly during the first 150 years. Rouse remains correct in stating that "no estimates of the original population of the Carib islands have been discovered" (1948: 549) and a synthetic estimate such as Cook and Borah derived for the aborig­ inal population of Hispaniola (1971) does not seem possible for Dominica at this time. Nevertheless, it is helpful to list the available references to European contact to support the idea of continuous Indian settlement and the several crude "guestimates" which appear in the literature on the island. These will at least give some idea of impressions Europeans had of the magnitude of the island's post- 1493 settlers. 1514. The fleet of 15 ships and 1200 men of Pedro Arias from San Lucar ar­ rived at Dominica on June 3, 1514, stayed four days, and, according to Bayley, "did not see any inhabitants" (1832: 648). Citing early Spanish sources, Joseph Borome presents a different picture. Some of the troops "went into the forest where the Indians promptly showered them with poisoned arrows" (1966: 32). Throughout the century, Caribs raided Spanish settlements on islands to the north, but little information helps us to ascertain how many actually came from Dominica. For the year 1547, Southey writes, The Caribs continued to molest Española, Jamaica, the Coast of Tierre Firma, and particularly the island of San Juan, the inhabitants of which island complained, that from Trinidad, Guadalupe, Dominica, Santa Cruz, Martinico, and other islands, there sallied numbers of Caribs, who did them the great­ est injury (1827, 1: 187). Borome reports that the Archives of the Indies in Sevilla contain 130 folios concerned with these raids against Puerto Rico by Dominican Caribs from 1558 to 1580 (Borome 1966: 41). 1554. In this year six Spaniards escaped after spending a year in slavery to the Dominican Island Caribs (Borome 1966: 35). 1564. Captain Rene Laudonniere described meeting Indians in two canoes at Dominica in April. While his men took on water, they "contrary to the particular request of the Indians, went to their huts and gardens and carried away pine-ap­ ples" which caused the Indians to attack (Southey 1827, 1: 189). 1567. When a Spanish fleet was shipwrecked in a storm off the island in 1567, not a Spanish soul survived, for the Caribs killed every last one making it to shore. From the ships they took for their use the iron, nails, and slaves, and for their delight the immense treasure, which they deposited in a huge cave near the sea (Borome 1966: 33).