hi im Chichi im learning about taino community, language, heritage, history, today's culture, &
politics regarding Taino community and political activism and i will share what i come to learn and understand and welcome all who wish to contribute to this shared learning🩷🏝️🌶️🥜🌽🍠🫘🍅🫑🍍
Talking about Taíno identity today requires care, because it intersects with Indigenous rights.
This is not a simple historical question of what it is or was, but rather it is a living one—shaped by colonial disruption, incomplete records, and ongoing processes of cultural continuity and revitalization across the Caribbean and diaspora.
In contemporary Indigenous rights discourse, especially in international frameworks like the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (which recognized a large degree of today's Taíno yukayekes and communities as authentic), identity is not defined solely by colonial documentation or uninterrupted institutional recognition. Instead, Indigenous identity is generally understood through a combination of:
self-identification
community recognition
historical continuity
cultural connection
Importantly, these frameworks also recognize that colonial systems often disrupted the very records used to measure continuity. Notice that they indicate "community recognition" instead of "National", "Federal" or even "International", because it is the community that self-identifies.
Taíno identity today exists in a range of expressions across different communities and individuals. Some people trace ancestry through family knowledge, oral history, or regional memory (which fulfills, self-identification, cultural connection, and historical continuity). Others engage in cultural revitalization through language, history, or spiritual reconstruction (ie. cultural connection and community recognition. Should be noted that revitalization is often treated as making up or taking from other cultures instead of what it is which is the intentional recovery of knowledge disrupted over time. Every culture participates in revitalization, as it is central to growth while maintaining culture and history). Some participate in communities that actively identify as Taíno in the present day (self-identification and community recognition).
These expressions are not all identical, and they should not be treated as interchangeable—but they are all part of how Taíno presence, the Nation, in individual communities and individually as a whole, is understood in the modern world.
A necessary distinction
It is important to separate three things that are often blended together when people discuss Taíno identity and culture:
- historical Taíno societies, documented through archaeology and early colonial records. Can referred to as Classical Taíno/Arawak Culture.
- cultural continuity, which may appear in fragmented, adapted, or indirect forms. Often in reference to as surviving families/communities.
- contemporary Indigenous identity, which can include revitalization of historical Taíno societies and self-identification today through cultural continuity even if it in the barest of forms.
Confusing these categories leads to oversimplified conclusions—either erasure (“it ended”) or overstatement (“it remained unchanged”). Both extremes miss the reality, and are unrealistic expectations of any Indigenous peoples. Taíno survival should not be reduced to a single model.
Indigenous survival is not always visible through continuous institutional records, in fact is nearly never the case, because colonial systems were not designed to preserve Indigenous continuity or recognition.
But survival is also not something that exists only in abstract reconstruction. Instead, it is best understood as:
disrupted continuity
ongoing cultural recovery
and present-day identity formation
All existing at once, in different ways, across different communities, and at various stages. This is the process nearly all indigenous communities experience (even the notable exceptions, like The Māori of Aotearoa, still aren’t exceptions to colonial disruption and recognition legal battles), but is often more harshly criticized in smaller communities and those indigenous cultures directly impacted by Spain’s Empire.
We can’t leave of the affect of language, the way we talk about Indigenous peoples affects how own existence is understood.
Phrases like “disappeared,” “extinct,” or “vanished” are not neutral—they come from historical narratives that often erase complexity in order to simplify colonial histories and make them more palatable and agreeable to its audience.
At the same time, it is also important not to flatten all contemporary expressions of identity into a single uninterrupted line of tradition. Doing so assumes that if a culture has survived, it must have done so in a perfectly continuous, unchanged form—like a straight line that can be traced cleanly from past to present. In reality, very few cultures exist that way, and Indigenous histories are especially shaped by disruption, adaptation, and uneven transmission due to colonial systems.
For Taíno identity specifically, this matters because colonial violence did not only affect people—it also disrupted the conditions under which cultural knowledge has been recorded, passed down, and made visible to outsiders.
Both erasure and oversimplification distort the reality. Indigenous identity in general is not something that can be measured only through historical visibility. It is also shaped by how people understand themselves, connect to heritage, and continue cultural memory in the present. Holding space for that complexity is part of respecting Indigenous peoples.
Taíno identity today exists at the intersection of historical disruption, cultural memory, reconstruction, and contemporary self-identification.
It is not a claim that everything remained unchanged, that is simply unrealistic and unwarranted for anyone to ask of any given culture.
It is not a claim that nothing survived, because science and anthropologists keep confirming details on various oral stories and practices maintained and shared regionally and by various families/communities across the Caribbean.
It is an acknowledgment that Indigenous presence in the Caribbean was not cleanly erased, even if it was deeply disrupted and made less visible over time. One may not agree with how we exist, but existing is not the debate itself.
On Cemí and Taíno Spirituality: An Opening Orientation
I want to talk about spirituality, but to do so I recognize the need to talk about specific deities, and in order to do that we need to talk about and have an understanding of Cemínism/Zeminism (for continuity and understandability, I will be using the academic “Cemí” spelling with a “C”, but please keep in mind, Zemí is valid as well recognized academically and in the tribal nation, I just don’t want confusion).
There is no single term that fully captures this the Taíno spiritual system in its original context, and even the use of words like “religion” or “spirituality” can be limiting. What is being described is not a separate sphere of life, but an integrated way of understanding relationships—between people, land, ancestors, realms, and the forces that sustain existence.
Within the Cemínism framework, cemís are central.
Cemí are not easily defined in singular terms. They may be understood as ancestral presences, spiritual beings, forces of nature, or the material forms through which those presences are engaged. In short- objects imbued with a presences. Cemís may be represented through a carved object or natural form; they can also be encountered through place, memory, or practice- most notable examples are sacred places, some are sacred because they are imbued. These distinctions are fluid, and often depend on context (Pané, 1498/1999; Oliver, 2009). Because of this, cemís are not distant or abstract. They, the objects, exist within relationship— imbued with a presence that is carried through lineage, expressed through environment, and recognized through interaction rather than belief alone.
In the most basic of terms - a cemí is molded to one’s own perception of a deity or ancestral spirit, it is imbued by it and represents the relationship between a community/family/person and said deity or ancestral spirit. It is a physical vessel or embodiment of spiritual power.
The basic anatomy of what a cemí represents:
The Embodiment/Object: It is believed that the physical object actually contains the spirit or essence of a deity or ancestral spirit. NOT that it is the deity or spirit directly (no deity can be contained, nor should anyone seek to that’s viewed as malevolent and world harming behavior).
The Materials: They are crafted using a wide variety of materials, including wood, cotton, stone, shell, clay, and even bone, which were often carved or molded to reflect incarnations, visions or dreams to the deity and ancestral spirit. Sometimes clothing and accessories are crafted to adorn the cemí, as additions (see after sources for photos of some preserved documented cemís).
The Function: Acting as intermediaries, these objects are used to communicate with the spirit world, seek guidance, influence, and ensure the community's (or persons) prosperity, health, protection, etc. The concept is deeply relational, serving as a direct, tangible link between the physical world and the sacred unseen.
(Jiménez (2021), Doyle (2020))
To put this into context, the most common cemís that come to mind are of those of Yúcahu (there are other spellings, far too many to individually list on this post), Atabey, and Guan Ban Sech. For many these names invoke a Cemí to come to mind, but one of the most common ones in connection to Atabey is the Coquí. You can’t drive on the road anywhere in a major city with a Puerto Rican population without coming across a Taíno Coquí symbol, weather it’s on someone’s car, flag, or tattooed on their body. While there are different beliefs around the Coquí- some view it as the symbology for luck, being safe guarded, others as an extension of Atabey’s Fertility incarnation, the nurturing care of a mother. There are some that just view it a symbol of pride and origin. Regardless of the individuals view- they are have the core reasoning of a relationship with nature, safety, and Puerto Rico as an island, and it has been a cultural Cemí carried through lineage and recognized through interaction rather than belief alone for loner than any academic can pin point. See how cemís can be more than merely an object?
With all this say, let me disclaim - It is also important to acknowledge that not all aspects of this knowledge are meant for public or generalized discussion. Some teachings, ceremonial practices, and interpretations are held within specific communities, families, or initiated spaces. What is shared here reflects information that is more widely documented or openly discussed, and should be understood as partial, relative, and foundationally basic rather than comprehensive.
Much of what is commonly known about Taíno spiritual life comes from two sources, early colonial records and cultural knowledge passed through family and communities across the Caribbean. Archeological and anthropological accounts, while valuable, were written through external perspectives and are often incomplete. As a result, contemporary understanding is shaped not only by these texts, but also by oral tradition, community knowledge, and ongoing cultural practice (Curet, 2014; Keegan & Carlson, 2008).
This is where variation becomes important.
Taíno-descendant communities exist across different regions of the Caribbean and its diaspora, and their approaches to cemís can reflect those environments. In some areas, there may be a stronger emphasis on agricultural relationships and land-based practices (ie. like personal gardens, keeping of ancestral trees, dances, etc), in others, a more pronounced connection to coastal or riverine environments (ie. Meditative swimming, Water/River Cultures, etc), and some even blend with other spiritual beliefs (ie. Afro-indigenous communities have a similar practice, cemís crossing into Orisha spaces happened naturally), one’s environment shapes how certain presences are understood and expressed- and under the practice of cemínism it is all valid.
Even within the same region, differences can emerge between families or communities. These variations may influence how cemí are named, how they are approached, or how relationships with them are maintained. Rather than indicating inconsistency, these differences reflect continuity—adaptation over time in response to place, history, and lived experience (Oliver, 2009).
As a cultural example, if you’ve ever read the memoir “My Broken Language”, by Quiara Alegria Hudes; she describes her mother’s spiritual garden dotted with stone lines, carved sculptures, 4 directional sections, and specific plants planted per section. An outsider reads it, takes in the environment described, it might be new to them and they continue. Someone with an even basic understand of Caribbean indigenous beliefs or living cultural experience in the Caribbean though, they read it and can recognize the stone dividing lines as cibas, the sculptures likely cemís of Taíno and Orisha presences, the divided section being the wheel, and even the specific plants reflecting the Taíno cardinal directions. When you have the lived experience of culture, you can fill the blanks, understand without a full course explanation which means authors like Ms. Hudes can share semi closed practices in this form, and it works. Those outside get a glimpse, those with context get validation and recognize the meaning.
In general there is no single, fixed system that can fully represent Taíno spirituality as it exists today, but cemínism is such a central part that it has undeniably been carried through lineage, expressed through history, and recognized thoroughly culturally, regardless of personally held beliefs.
For those beginning to learn, it may be helpful to approach this not as a system to be mastered, but as a set of relationships to be understood gradually. Definitions may shift with time, exposure, and while building community with others. Meanings may deepen over time. What is learned in one space may be expanded or reframed in another. It is all a process.
Selected References (for further reading)
Pané, R. (1498/1999). An Account of the Antiquities of the Indians. (J. J. Arrom, Ed. & Trans.). Duke University Press.
Oliver, J. R. (2009). Caciques and Cemí Idols: The Web Spun by Taíno Rulers Between Hispaniola and Puerto Rico. University of Alabama Press.
Dr. Jiménez, Maya (2021). Taíno zemís and duhos, Smarthistory, The Center for Public Art History.
Doyle, James A. (2020). Arte Del Mar: Art of the Early Caribbean. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Curet, L. A. (2014). Caribbean Paleodemography: Population, Culture History, and Sociopolitical Processes in Ancient Puerto Rico. University of Alabama Press.
Keegan, W. F., & Carlson, L. A. (2008). Talking Taíno: Caribbean Natural History from a Native Perspective. University of Alabama Press.
This essay contains citations to academic research for your understanding.
Photos of Documented Cemís
Taíno artist, Zemí (cacique side), c. 1510–1515 (Museo Nazionale Prehistorico ed Etnografico “Luigi Pigorini,” Rome, Italy; photo: Lorenzo Demasi)
Taíno, Deity Figure (Zemí), 13th–15th century, sandstone, Dominican Republic (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Spatula, c. 10th–15th century, manatee bone, from the Greater Antilles, Caribbean (Cleveland Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Zemí (mask side), c. 1510–1515 (Museo Nazionale Prehistorico ed Etnografico “Luigi Pigorini,” Rome, Italy; photo: Lorenzo Demasi) [This is my favorite, it has a whole out fit and movable mask]
Taíno artist, Three-Cornered Stone (Trigonolito), 13th–15th century C.E., limestone, from the Dominican Republic (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Cotton cemí; Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography Turin (A Taíno Idol's Origin Story)
Modern Taíno identity and heritage is not limited to Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and Cuba, even though those islands are often most centered in public discussion.
Contemporary Taíno identity includes people across the Greater Antilles and the wider Caribbean, including:
Puerto Rico (Borikén)
the Dominican Republic (Quisqueya / Ayiti)
Cuba (Cubanacán / Cubao)
Haiti (Ayiti / Quisqueya)
Jamaica (Xaymaca)
the Bahamas (Bimini / Contemporarily, they are the Lucayan people)
diaspora communities across the Americas and beyond
Photo source
Across this region, there are also yukayekes and Taíno-affiliated community groups with members and participation in multiple islands, including Haiti and Jamaica. These communities vary in size, structure, and visibility, but they reflect the broader reality that Taíno identity and heritage today is trans-Caribbean rather than confined to a few locations.
It is important to understand Taínos are something that is not strictly defined by modern political borders or nation-state boundaries. Instead, it is shaped through:
family oral histories
cultural memory and continuity
community affiliation
participation in contemporary Taíno revival spaces
A wider Caribbean framework
While public conversations often focus on a few islands, the historical Taíno world was interconnected across the Greater and Lesser Antilles. Contemporary identity reflects that broader geography, even when modern community structures look different from place to place.
In this sense, Taínos today are best understood as both:
regionally grounded in specific island communities
and trans-Caribbean in its contemporary expressions and reconnections
Why this matters
Recognizing Taíno presence across Haiti, Jamaica, and other Caribbean spaces helps avoid narrowing Indigenous Caribbean identity into a limited geographic frame. It reflects the reality that contemporary Taíno communities are not confined to a single island or political boundary, but exists across a wider network of communities and relationships. Also, unfortunately- it has to be said out loud because many purposely exclude these islands and people due to their skin color. In order to decolonize and restore our communities, we cannot indulge anti-blackness nor colorism. Similarly, we cannot indulge in genderism and homophobia. It contributes to aspects of our culture being erased, minimized, and dismissed. It's simply wrong.
This blog treats Taíno identity, heritage and peoples as a trans-Caribbean Indigenous continuity that includes both historical breadth and contemporary reconnection across multiple islands and diaspora communities.
Taíno Cosmology: How the Realm (World) is Generally Understood, Not Just What Was Believed
When we talk about Taíno cosmology, it is important to be precise about what that actually means.
This is not a fully preserved system we can reconstruct in complete detail. Instead, this article is discussing the core of it, a partial understanding built from archaeology, early colonial accounts, modern scholarly interpretation and individual family oral histories.
Cosmology, in this sense, refers to how a society understands:
the structure of the world
the relationship between humans and non-human forces
and the ways meaning is organized through land, objects, and experience
For Taíno societies, these ideas are not preserved as a single written system. They are inferred through material culture, recorded descriptions, and patterns that appear across the different sources listed.
For the purpose of this article, I am referring to it as a worldview instead of a belief system. It can be limiting to frame Taíno cosmology only as a “religion” or fixed set of beliefs, so I am not going to. Many Indigenous Caribbean systems are better understood as relational worldviews, where:
spiritual and physical worlds are not fully separated
objects, land, and beings can carry relational meaning
and knowledge is expressed through practice, place, and material engagement
Once again - this does not mean we can fully reconstruct those systems. It means we have to be careful not to force them into categories that may not fit and to keep in mind that every community may not fully commit or agree on all aspects.
One of the most consistent themes across interpretations and practices is that Taíno cosmology is often described in relational terms rather than abstract doctrine. Meaning theres priority to the relationship over abstraction.
Instead of a strict “system of beliefs,” what appears is:
connection between people and ancestral forces
interaction between material objects and meaning
and a landscape that holds significance beyond utility
Because cosmology is often popularized in simplified ways, it is important not to:
flatten Taíno worldview into a single unified doctrine
assume all symbolic meanings are fully known or decoded
or project modern spiritual categories onto fragmented historical evidence
What survives is partial, and different sources may not always align.
I’m explicitly stating all this before getting into it because the more you learn, the more you engage with different sectors of the Taíno community online- you are going to see disagreements on this and MANY authority-esque peoples stating things that are true for their yukayekes but not for others.
You also have to bear in mind the heavy influence of Christianity in the Caribbean. As a result, there are many communities trying to adopt the Taíno Cosmology through a Christian lens, or trying to practice it as a Christian, which often results in them referring to Cemí’nos as “helpers” or other demeaning and minimizing references instead of it being a scared object one should respect because its an extension of a deity or one’s own ancestral spirit. Many contemporary practitioners understand cemís as more than symbolic objects and may describe them as embodiments, manifestations, imbuements, or extensions of spiritual and ancestral relationships. Many struggle to respect Taíno cosmology/spirituality with the same respect they provide to modern religions. Its best to always listen and consider all of these factors when discussing the cosmology and spirituality.
Taíno Cosmology Basics
The most basic place to start is that the world isn’t singular. One of the most widely taught contemporary Taíno cosmological models organizes existence into multiple realms. In the Caney tradition (should note, they didn’t “invent” this model. It is widely believed and has been widely passed down in oral tradition. They are simply the best online resource and most open about discussing it,) these are often described as :
Turey (the Sky Realm)
Ku (the Earth or Middle Realm)
Koa Bay (the ancestral or spirit realm, as referred to as “Coa”)
Different yukayekes and spiritual lineages may describe these realms differently or recognize additional realms, but the three-realm framework is one of the most commonly encountered introductions to Taíno cosmology within contemporary practice.
Image is from the Caney Circle community, depicting the medicine wheel within the realm cosmology (https://www.caneycircle.org/legends/). This particular community is VERY open with their beliefs and you can interact with the Chief Behike online. He’s VERY active and open to discussion and including reconnecting peoples.
This is the most basic accepted cosmology. We acknowledge that there are refences and oral histories that include MORE realms than these, that are more complex. That’s valid. As seen above there's more to the cosmology, but we're just discussing the general core of it. Should you join a yukayeke, you can talk with your Behike directly and discuss. I am not a Behike, and thus will not have this conversation beyond the basic accepted shared cosmology.
Taíno discourse
A specific explanation I have heard for the variance in realm discussions is that some yukayekes connect to different energies and thus have access to specific realms others don’t or cannot. This is also the how and why many in the Caribbean practicing Yoruba spiritualities cross into Taíno cosmology and practice both.
This is just a general conversation I’ve seen passed around, but I feel it helps others to understand why I keep saying calling it just a belief system isn’t fully encompassing the realities of what Taíno spirituality is, can be, and is accepted as.
Back to cosmology discussion
The most basic cosmology worldview is widely accepted because it is a) paired down to the very core, and b) it can mirror Christian ideology enough making it very easy to pass down in oral histories and making it most likely to be accurate in regards to preservation.
Contemporary Taíno communities are not limited to archaeology and colonial texts. Many communities maintain oral teachings, ceremonial practices, and cosmological interpretations that function as living traditions in the present. These should not automatically be treated as interchangeable with sixteenth-century historical evidence, but neither should they be dismissed simply because they are contemporary Indigenous knowledge.
If you wish to learn more- seek open Taíno spiritual communities, yukayekes, and ceremonial communities.
Citations Below
Selected References (for further reading, sources for the information discussed in this post)
Ramón Pané — An Account of the Antiquities of the Indians
José R. Oliver — Caciques and Cemí Idols
Antonio Stevens-Arroyo — Cave of the Jagua
Mercedes López-Baralt — El mito taíno: Léxico de cosmología antillana
Irving Rouse — The Taínos: Rise and Decline of the People Who Greeted Columbus
William F. Keegan — various works on Taíno archaeology and social organization
The Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Archaeology for archaeological context.
NOT Taíno Specific References (But applicable for your own knowledge and understanding of indigenous spiritualities as worldviews rather than as belief systems)
Gregory Cajete — Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence
Yet another new study debunked the basis for the anti-trans sports bans. It was never about sports but for creating legal avenues for exclusion and abjection. This is one of the largest analyses ever conducted, involving 52 studies and 6,485 trans people. Read the study here.
On Cemí and Taíno Spirituality: An Opening Orientation
I want to talk about spirituality, but to do so I recognize the need to talk about specific deities, and in order to do that we need to talk about and have an understanding of Cemínism/Zeminism (for continuity and understandability, I will be using the academic “Cemí” spelling with a “C”, but please keep in mind, Zemí is valid as well recognized academically and in the tribal nation, I just don’t want confusion).
There is no single term that fully captures this the Taíno spiritual system in its original context, and even the use of words like “religion” or “spirituality” can be limiting. What is being described is not a separate sphere of life, but an integrated way of understanding relationships—between people, land, ancestors, realms, and the forces that sustain existence.
Within the Cemínism framework, cemís are central.
Cemí are not easily defined in singular terms. They may be understood as ancestral presences, spiritual beings, forces of nature, or the material forms through which those presences are engaged. In short- objects imbued with a presences. Cemís may be represented through a carved object or natural form; they can also be encountered through place, memory, or practice- most notable examples are sacred places, some are sacred because they are imbued. These distinctions are fluid, and often depend on context (Pané, 1498/1999; Oliver, 2009). Because of this, cemís are not distant or abstract. They, the objects, exist within relationship— imbued with a presence that is carried through lineage, expressed through environment, and recognized through interaction rather than belief alone.
In the most basic of terms - a cemí is molded to one’s own perception of a deity or ancestral spirit, it is imbued by it and represents the relationship between a community/family/person and said deity or ancestral spirit. It is a physical vessel or embodiment of spiritual power.
The basic anatomy of what a cemí represents:
The Embodiment/Object: It is believed that the physical object actually contains the spirit or essence of a deity or ancestral spirit. NOT that it is the deity or spirit directly (no deity can be contained, nor should anyone seek to that’s viewed as malevolent and world harming behavior).
The Materials: They are crafted using a wide variety of materials, including wood, cotton, stone, shell, clay, and even bone, which were often carved or molded to reflect incarnations, visions or dreams to the deity and ancestral spirit. Sometimes clothing and accessories are crafted to adorn the cemí, as additions (see after sources for photos of some preserved documented cemís).
The Function: Acting as intermediaries, these objects are used to communicate with the spirit world, seek guidance, influence, and ensure the community's (or persons) prosperity, health, protection, etc. The concept is deeply relational, serving as a direct, tangible link between the physical world and the sacred unseen.
(Jiménez (2021), Doyle (2020))
To put this into context, the most common cemís that come to mind are of those of Yúcahu (there are other spellings, far too many to individually list on this post), Atabey, and Guan Ban Sech. For many these names invoke a Cemí to come to mind, but one of the most common ones in connection to Atabey is the Coquí. You can’t drive on the road anywhere in a major city with a Puerto Rican population without coming across a Taíno Coquí symbol, weather it’s on someone’s car, flag, or tattooed on their body. While there are different beliefs around the Coquí- some view it as the symbology for luck, being safe guarded, others as an extension of Atabey’s Fertility incarnation, the nurturing care of a mother. There are some that just view it a symbol of pride and origin. Regardless of the individuals view- they are have the core reasoning of a relationship with nature, safety, and Puerto Rico as an island, and it has been a cultural Cemí carried through lineage and recognized through interaction rather than belief alone for loner than any academic can pin point. See how cemís can be more than merely an object?
With all this say, let me disclaim - It is also important to acknowledge that not all aspects of this knowledge are meant for public or generalized discussion. Some teachings, ceremonial practices, and interpretations are held within specific communities, families, or initiated spaces. What is shared here reflects information that is more widely documented or openly discussed, and should be understood as partial, relative, and foundationally basic rather than comprehensive.
Much of what is commonly known about Taíno spiritual life comes from two sources, early colonial records and cultural knowledge passed through family and communities across the Caribbean. Archeological and anthropological accounts, while valuable, were written through external perspectives and are often incomplete. As a result, contemporary understanding is shaped not only by these texts, but also by oral tradition, community knowledge, and ongoing cultural practice (Curet, 2014; Keegan & Carlson, 2008).
This is where variation becomes important.
Taíno-descendant communities exist across different regions of the Caribbean and its diaspora, and their approaches to cemís can reflect those environments. In some areas, there may be a stronger emphasis on agricultural relationships and land-based practices (ie. like personal gardens, keeping of ancestral trees, dances, etc), in others, a more pronounced connection to coastal or riverine environments (ie. Meditative swimming, Water/River Cultures, etc), and some even blend with other spiritual beliefs (ie. Afro-indigenous communities have a similar practice, cemís crossing into Orisha spaces happened naturally), one’s environment shapes how certain presences are understood and expressed- and under the practice of cemínism it is all valid.
Even within the same region, differences can emerge between families or communities. These variations may influence how cemí are named, how they are approached, or how relationships with them are maintained. Rather than indicating inconsistency, these differences reflect continuity—adaptation over time in response to place, history, and lived experience (Oliver, 2009).
As a cultural example, if you’ve ever read the memoir “My Broken Language”, by Quiara Alegria Hudes; she describes her mother’s spiritual garden dotted with stone lines, carved sculptures, 4 directional sections, and specific plants planted per section. An outsider reads it, takes in the environment described, it might be new to them and they continue. Someone with an even basic understand of Caribbean indigenous beliefs or living cultural experience in the Caribbean though, they read it and can recognize the stone dividing lines as cibas, the sculptures likely cemís of Taíno and Orisha presences, the divided section being the wheel, and even the specific plants reflecting the Taíno cardinal directions. When you have the lived experience of culture, you can fill the blanks, understand without a full course explanation which means authors like Ms. Hudes can share semi closed practices in this form, and it works. Those outside get a glimpse, those with context get validation and recognize the meaning.
In general there is no single, fixed system that can fully represent Taíno spirituality as it exists today, but cemínism is such a central part that it has undeniably been carried through lineage, expressed through history, and recognized thoroughly culturally, regardless of personally held beliefs.
For those beginning to learn, it may be helpful to approach this not as a system to be mastered, but as a set of relationships to be understood gradually. Definitions may shift with time, exposure, and while building community with others. Meanings may deepen over time. What is learned in one space may be expanded or reframed in another. It is all a process.
Selected References (for further reading)
Pané, R. (1498/1999). An Account of the Antiquities of the Indians. (J. J. Arrom, Ed. & Trans.). Duke University Press.
Oliver, J. R. (2009). Caciques and Cemí Idols: The Web Spun by Taíno Rulers Between Hispaniola and Puerto Rico. University of Alabama Press.
Dr. Jiménez, Maya (2021). Taíno zemís and duhos, Smarthistory, The Center for Public Art History.
Doyle, James A. (2020). Arte Del Mar: Art of the Early Caribbean. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Curet, L. A. (2014). Caribbean Paleodemography: Population, Culture History, and Sociopolitical Processes in Ancient Puerto Rico. University of Alabama Press.
Keegan, W. F., & Carlson, L. A. (2008). Talking Taíno: Caribbean Natural History from a Native Perspective. University of Alabama Press.
This essay contains citations to academic research for your understanding.
Photos of Documented Cemís
Taíno artist, Zemí (cacique side), c. 1510–1515 (Museo Nazionale Prehistorico ed Etnografico “Luigi Pigorini,” Rome, Italy; photo: Lorenzo Demasi)
Taíno, Deity Figure (Zemí), 13th–15th century, sandstone, Dominican Republic (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Spatula, c. 10th–15th century, manatee bone, from the Greater Antilles, Caribbean (Cleveland Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Zemí (mask side), c. 1510–1515 (Museo Nazionale Prehistorico ed Etnografico “Luigi Pigorini,” Rome, Italy; photo: Lorenzo Demasi) [This is my favorite, it has a whole out fit and movable mask]
Taíno artist, Three-Cornered Stone (Trigonolito), 13th–15th century C.E., limestone, from the Dominican Republic (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Taíno artist, Cotton cemí; Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography Turin (A Taíno Idol's Origin Story)
annaxmalina
turnnoffyourmind
izzy806
2087
germansingergirl
