Large, Malay-Style, Silver-Alloy Water Jar

This large silver-alloy water jar almost certainly is the product of local Chinese silversmiths working to Malay designs in Singapore around 1920. In the past, such silver has been ascribed either to Riau or Sumatra but such large pieces of finely hammered silver alloy sheet only started to appear in collections from the 1920s-30s onwards, some decades after it was widely reported that Malay silversmiths had largely ceased working, the consequence of changing tastes, colonisation and the decline of the power and thus wealth of the Malay sultans in Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula.

A local report at the time mention workshops in Singapore where local silversmiths were producing large items of light-weight silver in a Malay style to satisfy local European demand (Backman, 2024, p, 33). It is likely that this item is one such piece, and thus is an interesting example of one of the first types of handicrafts unique to Singapore.

The vessel has a rounded base, is of globular form, and narrows to a thin neck that widens to a flared opening. It is chased with scrolling leaf motifs within bands and lunettes. Included are six ‘heart’ motifs (possibly also betel leaf motifs), and four European-style shields or armorial cartouches with script.

The underside of the base is chased with a roundel with a kris crossed with a scabbard against a leafy scrollwork background.

The script in the four armorial cartouches are difficult to read and are in jawi, the Malay version of Arabic. They read (courtesy of Annabel Gallop):

(1)  Sumatera Was Kus (i.e. Sumatra Westkust, Sumatra’s West Coast)

(2) m.s.ng b.r.ny.w, masing burnyu (?)

(3) Melayu yulung (?)

(4) Sanat tahun 01231, i.e. could be 1231 (1815/6) or 1321 (1903/4)

The reference to West Sumatra is likely an attempt to suggest Sumatra and probably Minangkabau provenance for the piece. Many of the curio dealers in Singapore at the time were ethnically Minangkabau.

That the item is not of Malay manufacture and intended for the expatriate European market seeking curios from the ‘Other’ is suggested by the ineligibility of much of the script including the alleged date of manufacture, the very different type of silver work on this and related vessels compared with items of Malay silverware from the 19th century and earlier, and the presence of the kris on the base crossed with its scabbard. This is a repeated motif on this group of silverware. It never appears as a motif on genuine Malay silverware – Malay silversmiths never used man-made items as motifs in their silverware. Also, for the Malays, a kris was seen as a ritual items – almost magical. To use it as an emblem on the underside of a vessel – indeed to use it at all – would have been an anathema. (See Backman, 2024, pp. 31-36).

As mentioned, the vessel is an intriguing part of Singapore’s story, though not necessarily a part of the story of Malay silversmithing.

The vessel is sculptural and in fine condition.

This actual item is illustrated in Backman (2024, p. 32)