Pre-Colombian Jamaica: Caribbean Archeology and Ethnohistory

Petroglyphs and Pictographs / 109
cance. If we accept that simple faces (the shared physiognomy of everybody)
signaled “relatively egalitarian social relations,” then accessories denote hierarchy,
since they “invidiously divide people via sumptuary codes.” Goggle eyes
appear clearly at the top of the figure to the right hand of the “principal” one at
Mountain River Cave, and they also feature largely in the Puerto Rican images
described by Roe (1991a:Figure 7A-4; 1991b:Figure 3b; 1999:Figure 28c).
But goggle eyes are not exclusively or even mainly associated with anthropomorphic
images. From the Cueva de La Mora, Roe illustrates an arresting pictograph
of a goggle- eyed owl (Roe 1999:Figure 26e). This is the Múcaro owl, a
bird of evil omen even today in Puerto Rico. It is believed that it announces, by
its eerie cry, that someone will die. The goggle eyes as used in general are therefore
linked with this herald of the dead.
There is an evident ambiguity in some of the images at Mountain River
Cave and at Potoo Hole in respect of their animal or human nature. This ambiguity
is abundantly reflected in the images discussed by Roe, particularly the
famous Frog Lady of Caguana (Roe 1991b:Figures 1 and 3a) who may also
have represented the Taíno earth goddess Atabeyra. His most striking images
however relate to what he calls the “wrapped ancestors.” Again, the most arresting
of these occur in the same panel as the goggle- eyed owl at the Cueva de La
Mora (Roe 1999:Figure 26a, b, c). The ancestors are shown as human figures,
with the usual kind of face, but also with lozenge- shaped bodies and no limbs.
The bundles formed by the bodies may carry markings of various kinds. They
represent the dead wrapped in hammocks, “ revered- but- feared” spirits. The
parallel with the “shrouded human bodies” detected by Duerden is absolutely
clear. His figures belong in that universe. As Roe explains, Taíno shamans used
caves as portals to the other world, and they communicated with the ancestors
as intermediaries. These figures obviously were crucial to that process.
Roe made the final point that petroglyphs have for too long been treated as
isolated “statements” in prehistoric art. In certain contexts they may be spatially
related, “verbal art made stone.” He argues that case at Caguana, where
he maintains that the Frog Lady and the Long Beaked Bird are elements in an
Amazonian tale of creation. At the Cueva de La Mora, there is a deliberate placing
of petroglyphs and pictographs at different points of the system, the petroglyphs
being the guardians of the outer portals and the pictographs being the
cult images at the center. In the light of this observation, it was clear that, in the
few cases in Jamaica where large panels were reported, it would be well worthwhile
looking out for similar nonrandom designs. An opportunity to do so was
provided by recent work carried out at Warminster cave (EC15).