A digital archive showcasing the extensive collection of jewellery and adornment images shared on the former Ethnic Jewels Ning site over the years. These images have significantly enriched discussions on cultural adornment and its global dispersion.
You need to be a member of Adorned Histories to add comments!
Request your copy of our newsletter.
If you would like to receive our newsletter
Comments
The way this looks it does look more like a belt then most I have had which were all in old collections. Mine were smaller and not so stretched out. The brass rings also were always at the the front. I will have to find the ones I sold at some point. in disks or not posted because no one usually cares about shell jewelry ..
The history of these pieces may well have been that originally they were all belts, and that all had the brass rings as counterweights at the back. Possibly even *before* selling to westerners started, a number of them may have been worn as necklaces, with the brass rings shifted to the front, as though they were part of a necklace, not a belt. That would have been a very easy thing to do - you did not even have to replace the textile belt for that purpose (though you could, if that was long). Once the idea that such an object can be worn as a necklace takes hold, it then also becomes attractive to treat all of them like that at a time when the women who originally wore them as belts discard them as such, so that in the end they all end up as necklaces. The fact that the brass rings were weights would very easily have been forgotten or not even thought of. It would have been an easy matter, if the original textile bands were too large, to shorten them as part of the whole conversion process. And this change from "belt" to "necklace" may not have taken long at all!
We - Truus and I - do greatly care about jewellery not made of precious western materials but using in essence "stone age" ones. Until metals were introduced comparatively recently, all jewellery in the Pacific and Australia was of course non-metallic. We love what the indigenous populations in this part of the world did with their materials, including those who used shells in Indonesia, for example.
Fun!!! I love the way the old shells look like they have had years of wear.
In cultures like those of the Bontoc shells were considered objects of great value. To hard-line collectors of essentially "stone age" objects in the Indo-Pacific area, as Truus and I are, the appeal of a piece like this is that many of the shells are obviously VERY old, and carefully looked after the way westerners would look after e.g. silver. Once we grasp that people who had no precious metals did value the materials which they did have, and used them with great respect and skill, we can enter into a way of thinking on their part which is in essence not different from our own, and quite accessible. This is why I am always distressed when I see people not taking any interest in objects made "just" of shells, teeth, etc. That is, after all, where we probably all started! So, to us, a belt like this is just as important to have as many objects in silver or gold. And, incidentally, there ARE other collectors like us. Some Oceanic pieces of jewellery get sold for six-figure sums (in US dollars). This, I hasten to add, is not in that league - but a good example like this would probably still be surprisingly expensive, to many people. Admittedly, this is far superior to what would now normally be available. Not least in age.
I realize the value since I sell these things but I was referring to the interest level primarily on jewelry sights like this one. Normally tribal shows consider this as only tribal jewelry and most "serious" tribal dealers (which I was considered at one time but not as much now since I don't deal in that material as much meaning statuary etc) is considered by most the only type of real tribal jewelry. The metal work except gold in Indonesian material is considered court arts and not really of the same ilk. It is all shown in one venue usually but it's not taken in fact as serious as pieces made of shell , wood bone and rattan. etc. I find it just as beautiful and valuable as the rest of it and the fact is that these materials were considered either overtly valuable (consider the currency gau necklace I own from Yap Island were usually only owned by chief's or land owners. In 1900 a ethnographer said non could be purchased at any price. That person found an inferior string and it was worth the price of a murder for hire.
Quite so, Linda. Thanks for that post!
just love these shells! They all have their own individual look!
You are right, Eva! Thanks for your comment.
I love this belt with the ikat and conus shells. I sometimes buy strings of beads from Nepal/Malaysia and they have one or two conus shells on the string. I find it difficult to make up a necklace with a shell, people don't seem to like them much in Australia, but they appeal to me and especially yours!
What a great necklace this would make.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next