"Death Toll"
 
by William Keegan
 
in "Archaeology" (January/February 1992, p. 55)
 
     In the absence of reliable population estimated, two
opposing viewpoints have emerged concerning the demise of the
Taino.  There are those who believe that Columbus's brother
Bartolome made a census of Hispaniola in 1496 and counted
1,100,000 people.  Working from that number, the historical
demographers Sherburne Cook and Woodrow Borah of the University
of California, Berkeley, estimated a population of seven to eight
million Taino in 1492.  Those seeking to emphasize the
devastating impact of the Spaniards put the number closer to ten
million.  Others, like Mexican scholar Angel Rosenblatt and David
Henige, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, do not believe
that Bartolome Colon's census took place and estimate the native
population in 1492 to have been around 100,000.
     If the high population numbers are correct, some mechanism--
disease, starvation, or murder--must account for the demise of
the native peoples.  Those who accept these numbers look to
studies of epidemic diseases for support.  Native Americans
lacked all immunity to infectious diseases and offered "virgin
soil" conditions to infectious European viruses and bacteria. 
Documented modern cases of virgin-soil epidemics in New Guinea
and South America have claimed 30 to 100 percent of an infected
population.
     Further support for a high death toll is found in the famine
reported by the Spanish during most of 1495 and 1496.  This
famine may have resulted from the initial disruption of the
native society and the subsequent drain of available food.  Heavy
demand on the subsistence economy would have led to the
exhaustion of limited surplus food supplies and to the
consumption of immature manioc and sweet potato tubers.  Starting
with the year 1496-1497, Cook and Borah estimate annual rates of
decline in the Taino population exceeding 30 percent, up to 1504.
     Such high mortality rates, however, are not consistent with
other evidence.  According to Cook and Borah, all of Hispaniola
was undergoing a massive genocide that resulted in the death of
more than three million people.  Yet the cacicazgo of Xaragua,
the part of the island now known as Haiti, continued to function
and to pay tribute until after 1502, when its rulers were
massacred by Governor Ovando.  If the island was undergoing such
massive depopulation, how could the cacicazgo of Xaragua have
continued to exist?  In fact, Ovando's actions in killing the
rulers suggest that the Spaniards viewed the Xaraguan cacicazgo
as a threat.
     It is certain that a major decline in population did occur. 
However, prior to 1502 the major cause of death appears to have
been warfare and abusive treatment.  These activities were
localized in the central portion of the island, which was
conquered by force in 1496.  Still, in 1499, Columbus felt
confident in suggesting the sale of slaves as a means of
resurrecting the failing economy.  He apparently still believed
that the Taino population was limitless.
     Cook and Borah's population projections are based on the
assumption that there was high native mortality due to disease
and famine.  Yet descriptions of ongoing Taino and Spanish
interaction, such as with the cacicazgo of Xaragua, contradict
that assumption.  With no record of massive, island-wide
depopulation, the pre-1500 projections must be revised
substantially downward.  A more acceptable range for the Taino
population of 1492 is between 400,000 and two million.  That is
still an enormous number, especially when one considers that by
1518 only 16,000 of them survived.  That year a smallpox epidemic
swept through the Spanish colonies, a pandemic, according to the
historical demographer Henry Dobyns, that by 1525 had left no
American culture untouched.  By 1545 the 29 sugar mills on
Hispaniola were using nearly 6,000 non-Taino from the South
American mainland and the Lesser Antilles and 3,300 Africans as
laborers.
 
Reprint permission granted by publisher.