Let me give you an actual Dominican perspective on why many today see themselves as Native: I took a Bio-geographical DNA test, one that gives percentages of mixture. I tested positive for all three, except that my Indian American Markers were so high that it implied that my ancestors were “pure” up to 5 generations ago. Not bad for a supposedly extinct people! I actually took the test three times because at first I was not at all convinced that such a thing was possible. On my first test which was called the 2.0 DNA print test, my percentages were 29% Indian American, 39% African and 32% Caucasian. It was this first test that confirmed for me what my grandmother always said about our families’ descent. She claimed that her g randmother and all the people of the place I come from in the DR were pure Indians. So since I had 29% Indian that means my mother would have perhaps twice as much and so on. But then I took an updated version of the test, 2.5, which goes deeper into the genome and this one revealed that I was 42 percent Indian. One thing though, I think that as important as the tests are, they are also a bit misleading. I think that Identity is more a bout culture than genes. The reason why I have always identified with Indian is because of the campesino c ulture, which is very Indian in the DR. At the end of these tests I am still as Indian as I was at birth. The thing is does confirm however is that our history in th e Caribbean must be re-written. That the Taino became extinct 30 years after contact with the Spanish is just about the biggest myth ever created and we in the Caribbean bought that side of the story, hook line and sinker! Two of the biggest if not the biggest opponents of Taino survival are Anthony Stevens Arroyo who wrote “Cave of the Jaguar” and Carlos Andujar ex president of The Museo del hombre Dominicano have in the last two weeks made very supportive statements (actually changed their tunes) regarding Taino survival. In most of the forums where there are these “incredulous” people, most of them are either not informed, or non-academic. I do think that they have the right to voice out their Afro -centric sentiments after all that is also a reality in the DR and the Caribbean. They only fail when they become ultra afro-centric and then want everyone else to see what they believe. The fact is that there are three heritages in the DR and because of this we will always have four identities: (1) There will always be people who identify with the Spanish (2) There will always be people who identify with the African (3) There will always be people who identify with the Indian (4) And last but not least, there will always be people that identify with all three. My point is that they are all equally valid One thing, you would never find an indigenista de nying African heritage. It just makes no sense. This thing with “color indio” was actually enforced during Trujillo’s time, but people identified with this way before. In fact in comes from the colonial era. During Trujillo’s time there were independent studies done on the ABO blood groups by Jose de Jesus Alvarez. He demonstrated that there is an abundance of type O positive blood in the DR, something like 70 percent. Why is this number imp ortant? Because type O positive is found only at around 35 percent in Caucasian populations and 4 percent in African populations. So if you have an equal mix of African and Caucasian Type O positive can never exceed 40 percent. That said, Indian Americans, particularly the ones from South America are universally 100 percent Type O Positive. Demonstrating that in the DR there is a substantial other, which of course is Indian. Many scholars in the past have pointed out this study as being flawed and accused Mr. Alvarez of hidden agendas (Trujillo’s?) . In fact just a few years ago I was at a conference where one of the speakers accused him of being a racist (this study was done in 1948)! DNA has proven that Mr. Jesus Alvarez was right all along. I wonder what people will do with this information. Are we a people unable or unwilling to see the truth? Only time will tell. But for those of us who identify our Taino Indian ancestors, these studies only showed that we were right all along. We were not delusional, r acist, etc. We were simply stating obvious facts. Like one woman from Cuba said to me once ” Yeah they came to our village in Yateras and did all these tests on us, they measured our heads, looked at our teeth and at the end told us what we already knew, that we are Indian”. Now the use of the “Indio” color to describe Dominicans has nothing to do with Indian American identification. These terms were used by the Trujillo government to distinguish Dominicans from Haitians. Haitians were Negros, so the government focused on the other side and called themselves Indios to distinguish. One thing is certain; for those of us who have a tendency to identify with Indian over anything else. I argue that this is due to us having a very real biological, cultural and linguistic connection to our Indigenous ancestors. T he terms African, Spanish, Mulato disconnect us from our homelands, rendering us almost immigrants in our homelands.
It is the Indian that connects us to our lands and we continue to be Indigenous to Quisqueya. You have to understand that the African and the Spanish are considered the norm. It is the Indian genetic component that is always in question. If you begin to ask a hypothetical question: Are there substantial Indian American genes in the DR? The Answer is Yes. To look for Spanish or African is absurd because we ALL know that its there. Do you realize that up to a short time ago many academics erroneously claimed that the reason why some Dominicans looked Indian was because if you mix black and white in time you get something that looks somewhat Indian! This was an actual train of thought among many academics in the Caribbean. As for the statistics: In the last 30 years there has been a push to Africanize Dominican Identity. So it’s not suspiring that many more identify wi th negritude. Most of those involved in what I call ultra afro-centric ideals were adamant in making sure that it was African or nothing at all. The indigenistas in our country have never said there were no Africans or African Influence, only that there is Taino as well. The Afrocentrics take rather unusual stance and claim that if one says INDIAN he is automatically denying Africans. I can’t see the reasoning in this. I can show you pictures of DR’s that look like they stepped out of the Amazon! It’s about culture. W hen one studies the Classic Taino Mate rial culture of the islands, everything from Hamacas, to Casabe, weaving baskets to slash and burn farming down to how, when and where Indian crops are to be planted, bohios, etc and you compare tha t with the campesino culture of the ciabo for example, its easy to see why Dominicans have strong connection to an Indian past. My problem lies with certain individuals who say the following: (1) There are no Indian genes only Indian cultures left (and very little of it) (2) When the genetics proves the above statement to be untrue, then the counter argument is- Yes there are genes but no Indian culture. As if you can have a strong genetic contribution to population and somehow not pass on ideas, culture, beliefs, etc. The fact that we have at least 800 Taino words that persist in our Spanish today is remarkable, where else in the history of the world have an “extinct people” influenced a culture as much as the Taino? Since I was very, very young I have identified with Indian. Somehow for me it boils down to this: If you mixed Africans and Spanish anywhere else in the world and giving rise to Mulato people, would these people be Quisqueyans and Boricuas or Cubans? Of course not. What makes us a unique people is that we have customs (the above mentioned), beliefs (ciguapas, misterios, opias, etc) linguistic traits that are indigenous only to the Caribbean, rendering us a unique people. If as if by magic we can subtract everything that is Taino from Caribbean culture, would we still be the same Dominicans? One can argue that if you subtract any portion of our multi-ancestries we would not be the same, but one thing is certain, as long as the Taino is there, we will always be indigenous to the Caribbean and not Dominicans by chance. As for claims of self-hate in the Dominican Republic, I found the line of reasoning to be rather laughable that Dominican women straighten their hair to deny their negritude. Hair straightening with chemicals began in the 50’s and officially in the 70’s by Revlon. Before that hair straightening was done with hot comes, and this began in the late 1880’s. Now check out these excerpts: “So much so that the national complexion of skin and general physiognomic traits may well be described as being alight brown, approaching the copper color of the No rth American aborigines, straight black hair in the case of the females, glossy and in luxurious profusion and a combination of features resulting from about an equal blending of the African, Caucasian and -Indian physiognomies. The very visible traits of the latter would seem to indicate, although we are not aware of the existence of any other evidence of it, that the aboriginal race instead of having been entirely exterminated, had been particularly amalgamated.” In “The Dominican Republic in the Island of St. Domigue” by S. A. Kendall, page 243, 1849 “The “pure” race wholly died in (Hispaniola) at the latter end of the “last” century; but their characteristic features and l uxuriant hair, are still to be traced among their descendants, from intercourse with Europeans, Africans and colored people. These are still called Indios.” In Harper’s statistical gazetteer of the world / by J. Calvin Smith; Illustrated by seven maps. Publication date: 1855.Collectio n: Making of America Books In other words, Dominican women were known for their hair long before there were any hair straightening techniques. That said, why do so many women in the DR straighten their hair? First off, not ALL DR women do. Some do, some don’t. Second its not about denial of race is about aesthetics. More women straighten their hair in Africa than in the DR, are they too trying to deny being black? Also white women dye their hair blond, and I assure you that more of them are using peroxide to dye their hair than DR women using lye to straighten theirs. So what are these white women denying? NOTHING! It’s all about people trying to look better in their own eyes. When a Japanese m an perms his hair curly or makes an dreadlock, he is simply making a fashion statement, not a racial one. All these articles are an attempt by Ultra-Afrocentric intellectuals to force people into their own points of view.
I would never suggest that all Dominicans with straight hair are Indian. Indian, Black or white are matters of culture. WE as a tripartite people will always either identify with one or all of our heritages. This argument is weak. If Dominicans don’t identify with their African roots as we should its because we have very few Africa n Icons that survived during slavery. Other than Music and religiosity (two strong vehicles for “escaping” the reality of slavery) There is less material culture. Once Dominicans can pinpoint where are African descendants came from, perhaps we can then investigate that part of o urselves. To say that Dominican women are denying their negritude because of the hair thing, begs for another question, if the women straighten their hair to deny their negritude, what do the men do? Or is it just the women! Sincerely, Jorge Estebez
And then you have the perspective of many Garinagu. People with substantial African Ancestry. In Honduras, Garinagu are average 76% African, 20% Indigenous and 4% European. On St Vincent they are 40% African, 38% Indigenous and 16% European. Yet while many African Americans see them just as African, many of the m do not see themselves in that light. Quote: Our ancestors are Africans, Carib and Arawak and yes the African influence is present in our culture and our physical appearance, but we are not Africans we are Garifuna. My race is Garifuna, the Garifuna race is from St. Vincent not Africa. Yes I have African heritage. I am not denying my African heritage, but I am not an African nor does anybody in my family consider themselves an African, we are Garinagu. We speak Garifuna not African and Garifuna is basically an Amerindian language. In Belize we are considered an Indigenous group. We are known also as the Black Caribs, who are the Caribs?? They are Indians. The Black comes from the African factor that our skin comes out Black. Now I don't really care if someone doesn't acknowledge what they are mixed with. If Malaika considers herself African that is her deal. I am a Garifuna, I have African in me and have African heritage, but I am not an African. There may be Garinagu out there that consider themselves African, but I haven't encountered that person yet. And if that is the case hey, we Garinagu should forget our language and start speaking in Swahili, stop dancing Punta, and throw our culture away, forget our name, and call ourselves African just to make everyone else happy. I will not now or ever do that, and for those wondering if I consider myself Black, yes I do. Where the Garinagu where before 1635? They were in St. Vincent as the Red Caribs. The Africans came and mixed with the original Garifuna making us. The Carib and Arawak element can be seen in the musical styles of the Abeimahani and Arumahani that are sung acapella, another Amerindian factor is our language, and our language is basically Arawak. Of course the African is present in the way we look, (even though the Indigenous is present in many Garinagu), our music and our dance, the Uraga which are stories as well as the Ananci stories with Call-and-response songs, for the ninth-night wake(beluria) and our religion is a mix of both, but with a heavy African influence. But the Garifuna was in St. Vincent before the Africans came. I recommend the book Sojourners of the Caribbean by Nancy Gonzales this explains this matter in great depth. I asked my uncle if we were Africans and he said we are Arawaks and Caribs that mixed with Africans, but that we don't come from Africa. We come from America and Africans mixed with us. I know and acknowledge the African in me and the African influence in my culture, but I also acknowledge the Carib and Arawak , like James Lovell ( a famous Garifuna singer) said, " When someone says I am a Garifuna they know and recognize that they have Carib, Arawak, and West African blood running through their veins. Our flag has the colors Yellow, White and Black, which mea ns the following: Yellow= the color of our ancestors; White= the peace that in which our people live; Black= the color of our people in other words the African factor. Many Garinagu like me know we have African heritage and that we are black, but we are Caribs, nibuganyan. The problem is that many of us are very much into our own community because we are not understood, and because isolation is how we survived. Now times have changed but much hasn't, but I do feel we need to recognize the African factor, while kno wing we are Caribs. The truth is that some our ancestors deny having roots in Africa, but we the younger generation know that this is impossible, this was also done because the older Garifuna in St. Vincent (And some still do)looked down on other Blacks for being slaves and didn't want to be associated with them. Traces of this can still be found in Central America, where Creoles may call a Garifuna a derogatory na me, and a Garifuna will say that at least he has a culture of his own and wasn't a slave. Now things are changing and many of us now we have African, but we can't forget we are Caribs. Calling ourselves just Africans in my view is just forgetting something my ancestors gave their life for, which is us having the right to know we are Caribs too. Garifuna is a separate from all other races, being black doesn't magically make you a Garifuna, you have to have the African factor and be a Carib too. Seremein
Umalali Niyunagu