31st July 2007, 12:47 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 520
|
Siwaih/ Sewar question
In "Hands of Time - The crafts of Aceh", Barbara Liegh says these daggers are "the prerogative of the sultan and men of substantial wealth." However in "THE HISTORY OF SUMATRA, CONTAINING AN ACCOUNT OF THE GOVERNMENT, LAWS, CUSTOMS, AND MANNERS OF THE NATIVE INHABITANTS, WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE NATURAL PRODUCTIONS, AND A RELATION OF THE ANCIENT POLITICAL STATE OF THAT ISLAND." by William Marsden, F.R.S. published 1811, he says of the siwaih that it "is a small instrument of the nature of a stiletto, chiefly used for assassination"
Does anyone know which of these is correct or maybe both ? Thanks |
31st July 2007, 01:04 AM | #2 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,217
|
I would not be surprised if both were true....I have seen gold sewars and rencongs for royalty before. And they were small enough for concealment....
|
31st July 2007, 01:55 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
|
In "Hands of Time - The crafts of Aceh", that statement is true
In "THE HISTORY OF SUMATRA..." ...chiefly used for assassination"... Perhaps the statement should be "... used by a chieftain, many had been used for assassination." Battara, I had seen gold, silver sewars and rencong too. |
31st July 2007, 02:42 AM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 520
|
thanks for the input so far
|
31st July 2007, 01:03 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,254
|
Hello John,
Well, I'd suggest that Marsden's account got heavily tinted by the colonial perspective of those times: Get your soldiers killed outside the battlefield (surprise, surprise for any occupying army!) and it's regarded as an assassination; have your soldiers killing some non-collaborating locals and it becomes a heroic deed... However, I still find myself wondering about Leigh's assertion that sewar were reserved for nobility. It seems well established that rencong basically took the place of keris in Acehnese culture. This is supported by their huge diversity (decoration, pamor, size, fittings, etc.) suggesting that just about every member of the culture was wearing at least one. I observe the same (or an even higher) diversity among sewar though. Moreover, the use of sewar seems to be much more widespread on Sumatra than that of rencong... Quite a few sewar originate from the Minang Kabau and I've never heard that they were a sign of nobility/rule there (also their often moderate decoration and the high status of keris seem to speak against such a notion). If correct at all, were sewar possibly restricted to nobility/judges only within the Aceh court (and other sultanates under its rule)? OTOH, any well-provenanced examples from the Aceh sultanate with plain original fittings which would point towards use by commoners? Regards, Kai |
31st July 2007, 02:19 PM | #6 | ||
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 520
|
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks for the input |
||
2nd August 2007, 10:40 PM | #7 | ||
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,254
|
Hello John,
Quote:
Quote:
Better email her directly - I'm going to PM you contact adresses. Regards, Kai |
||
2nd August 2007, 11:16 PM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 520
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|