Pre-Colombian Jamaica: Caribbean Archeology and Ethnohistory

12 / Chapter 2.
scription of the site, but fortunately Professor W. F. Harper (1961–1962) was
subsequently able to study 24 of the crania (Appendixes 32–35). In the light of
Lewis’s observations in the caves of Portland Ridge, Howard agreed that some
of them could have been used occasionally for occupation purposes, but in general
he agreed with Duerden that caves were used “almost exclusively for burial
purposes” (Howard 1956:48).
Howard expended much time on the study of the available artifacts, particularly
those in the Institute of Jamaica, although, as he pointed out, many
of them had lost all indications of provenance. He found that the pottery was
“remarkably homogeneous,” most of it belonging to one “major style” that he
equated with the Meillac group recognized elsewhere in the Greater Antilles
(Howard 1956:49). He later felt that the time had come to “give the style a
name of its own,” and he proposed the term White Marl, “since it is at this site
that the style appears in its most characteristic and complete form and it is here
that its development can be traced over a period of several centuries” (Howard
1965:252). His description of this style retains its validity today. He pointed
out that there are two basic shape categories: round bowls and boat- shaped vessels.
He listed the main decorative techniques as incision, punctation, application,
modeling, and perforation, the last intended to permit suspension of the
vessels. Incised designs were “invariably geometric,” a pattern of alternating
oblique parallel lines being especially common. “Lugs and handles show the
greatest variation and are the most frequently decorated features of Jamaican
pottery” (Howard 1950:148). The only convincing “variant substyle” that he
himself recognized was the one he identified at Fairfield (J3) and that he termed
“Montego Bay” (Howard 1950:57–58, 145–146; 1956:54; 1965:254). As he
pointed out, the sherds are thick and coarse, and they are decorated by means
of deep heavy incisions, often occurring on bands around the rim, usually referred
to in Jamaica as fillets (Howard 1965:Figure 1a). Otherwise, Howard
was very cautious, concluding that “as the archaeology of Jamaica becomes better
known, it will doubtless be possible to distinguish both areal and temporal
differences in the pottery of the island, but such analysis must await detailed
stratigraphic excavation of a large number of sites” (Howard 1950:158).
In general, Howard concluded that the “Jamaican Indians undoubtedly belonged
to the Sub- Taino branch of the Arawak stock” (Howard 1956:47). He
emphasized that the great majority of the sites known at that time were within
five miles of the coast, almost always on or near the tops of low lying hills, locations
chosen not for reasons of defense, but because they were “healthful and
pleasant.” His overall assessment of “Jamaican culture” in the prehistoric pe-