The Melaka Palace
-
Upload
donald-church -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
0
Transcript of The Melaka Palace
-
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
1/8
The Palace of Sultan Mansur Shah at MalaccaAuthor(s): Michael D. SherwinSource: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 40, No. 2 (May, 1981), pp.101-107Published by: University of California Presson behalf of the Society of Architectural HistoriansStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/989723.
Accessed: 27/01/2014 08:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
University of California Pressand Society of Architectural Historiansare collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access toJournal of the Society of Architectural Historians.
http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/989723?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/989723?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sahhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
2/8
The Palaceof
Sultan
Mansur
Shah at
Malacca
MICHAEL D. S
H
ERWIN Universiti Sains
Malaysia, Penang
This article
proposes
a
reconstruction,
shown
in scale
drawings,
of
a
palace
built
for
a
Malay
Sultan,
probably
in the
1460s.
The
main aims
of
the discussion are
to
clarify
the
reconstruction,
the
problems surrounding
it,
and the reasons
for
arriving
at
this
form;
to
place
it in
the context
of
region
and
epoch;
and
to
elaborate
on its
salient
aspects.
The article
begins
with
a
brief
account
of
Malacca in
the
i5th
century,
considers some
of
the cultural
influences
on
it,
and com-
ments
on the
Malay
Annals,
a
traditional
history
of
the Malacca
Sultanateand the sources for the account of the palace on which
the reconstruction is based.
The
description of
the
building,
re-
markably
lucid
considering
its
age
and
circumstances,
is
trans-
lated. Various
possibilities concerning
the overall
form of
the
palace
are
discussed,
particularly
wo
alternatives
rom
the
South
East Asian
area,
and one is
posited
as
being
the basic
forerunner
and
formgiver.
The
different parts
of
the
building, particularly
those mentioned
specifically
in the translated
passage,
are con-
sidered relative to
the
proposed
reconstruction.
MALACCA
is a small
port
which lies on the west side of
the
Malay Peninsula (Fig. i), in what is now Malaysia, but in the
15th
century
it
was a sultanate and a
power
in
its own
right.
The
Straits
of
Malacca
between
the
peninsula
and the
neighboring
island
of
Sumatra are named after
it,
signs
of its
former
impor-
tance.
The
fixing
of
present
national
boundaries bears little
rela-
tion to
the situation
at that
time,
when a
variety
of
principalities
vied for
ascendancy
over one
another,
Malacca
being
one of
the
strongest
in
the
Malay
world
and the most
independent
of
those
on
the mainland.
The
Malay
world
was
by
no
means confined to
what came
to
be known
as
Malaya;
indeed the homeland
is
in
Sumatra,
and
the
diplomatic
and other
exploits
of
the
Malays
throughout
a wide area are the reason for
the
national
language
of
Indonesia
today
being Malay. Many
contacts occurred
among
different
groups
in
the
region,
with
ample
opportunity
for
many
influences to
pass
to
and fro.
Buddhism and
particularly
Hinduism
had a
major
impact
on
the entire
region,
overlaying
and
combining
with an
earlier an-
imism. In addition
to its new
religious
vocabulary-which
was
easily
able to
incorporate
the
spirits
and
charms
already
native
to
the area-Indian
influenceintroduced the
concept
of
rajahs
who
were of
divine
ancestry,
and
probably
the
collection of
appur-
tenances and customs
attendant
on
the
sacred
kingship.
Among
BUR
A
Ayutthaya
C
IM
Angkor
* .0
TAN
N T N
RK
N G
l c
O E g a p o r e
U ORNEO
H N G G
JAMB
Pale
bang
JAVA
Fig.
i.
Malay
Peninsula nd
surroundingegion,
howing
Malacca
nd
some
places
of
importance uring
he
Sultanate.
these,
and one
that concerns us
in
this
discussion
of
a
palace,
was
the
right
to
seven tiers whether for
umbrella,
ceremonial
pavil-
ion,
or
residence.Lesserrankshad
lesser
numbers
of
such
tiers
to
proclaim
their
status.' The seven
levels,
apart
from
the
univer-
sality
of
seven
as a sacred
number,
derive
probably
from
the
Heaven of
Indra
on
the
top
of
the
seventh level of
Mount Ma-
hameru,
the
center
of
creation
in
Hindu
cosmogony:
the
rajahs
were
supposed
to be descended
from
Indra,
who
as a
divine
being
not
worshipped
as an
immortal
god,
was
acceptable
to the
Theravada
Buddhists as
well as to
Hindus.
Apart
from
such
mythic
Hindu
origin,
many
of the
royal
families
probably
were
i. R.
Winstedt,
The
Malays:
A
Cultural
History,
London,
1947,
I96I,
86.
IOI
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
3/8
102
JSAH,
XL:2,
MAY
1981
Fig.
z.
Pagaruyung,
Sumatra,
palace,
at
present
being
reconstructed.
Room
covered
by
the
top
roof
at
right angles
is
known as
the
mahaligai.
descendants of intermarriageswith themoreculturallyadvanced
immigrants
from
India.
Malacca is
traditionally
said
to
have been
founded
in
1394 by
a
Hindu,
Parameswara,
whose
ancestry
was
Sumatran. The
newly
established
port
soon
attracted
many foreign
merchants,
many
of
them
Muslims,
whether
of
Arabian, Indian,
or
Suma-
tran
origin.
Muslim
influence
increased as the
kingdom
grew
richer and
stronger;
apparently
during
the
first half of
the
I
5th
century,
Islam
became the
official and
prevailing religion
and
the
Rajah
became
Sultan. The
heyday
of the
Malacca Sultanate
was
brief,
since
in
15
11
the
Portuguesecaptured
the
town,
the
begin-
ning
of
the
long process
of
draining power
from the
traditional
rulers.
Before the
coming
of
Europeans,
little written
material from
the
region
exists,
and its
history
is but
sketchily
known.
One
well-known
account of
the
Malacca Sultanate
is
available,
the
Malay
Annals,
probably
recorded at the
end of the
i6th
century.
Although many
of
the
incidents are
mythic,
the outline of
the
account
regarding
the
succession
of
rulers and the
growth
of
power
of
the Sultanate
seems to be
accurate.
One
of
the
rulers
when
Malacca was at
its
height,
well
established,
and
already
converted to
Islam,
was Sultan Mansur
Shah,
who
reigned
from
1456
to
1477.
An
account
in
the
Malay
Annals
considers the
palace constructedby Mansur Shah to proclaimhis glory, fame,
and
power-the
building
of such a
palace
in
those
days
was
equivalent
to a
state
having
its
own
nuclear
weapons
in
these
times. The
account
runs:
...
And
the
size
of
that
palace
was seventeen
spaces,
for
each
space
the
breadth
was three
fathom,
the
columns were as
large
around
as could
be
embraced;
of
seven
levels were the
pinnacles.
In
between that were
provided
windows,
in
between those windows
were
placed
roofs at
right
angles
and like
suckling elephants,
all of
them with
wings
like those
of
a
kite and
carved and
projecting
from
under the
eaves,
in
between that
projection
was carried out
the
'rectangular
grasshopper',
all of
it with
peaks
and
fringes
all
over.
Moreover all those
windows
of
the
palace
were
altogether ainted
nd
gilded
with
iquid old,
ts
[their?]
innacles
werered
glass.
When t
caught
he
rays
of the sun ts formblazed
ike
a
jewel;
and the
walling
of that
palace
was
pannelled
ll
over,
moreover
insetwith Chinese
mirrors f
large
izes.Whent
caught
he
glare
of
the
sun
its formblazedn
flashes,
o that ts
image
was not clear
o
peoples'
sight.
Moreover
he crossbeams
f that
palace
were
a cubit
broad,
a
hand
and two fingers hick;as for the upstand t was two cubitsin
breadth,
cubit n
thickness,
he frames f those
doorswere
carved,
nd
forty
wasthenumber
f those
doors,
all
of them
painted
nd
gilded
with
liquid
gold.
Exceedingly
eautiful as
the
execution
f that
palace;
here
was no other
palace
n the whole world
ikeit. And that
palace
t
was
whichwas
called
by
men,
Mahaligai.
tsroof
covering
was brassand
in
crested.2
However literal
one
may try
to make
a
translation,
as in this
case,
coloration
will result from the translator's
understanding, espe-
cially
when
the structure
of the
language
is different
from
our
own,
and terms are
employed
that
are no
longer
in
general
use.
Still,
this version seems
more
intelligible
than that in the
gen-
erally used English version of the Malay Annals,3 which was
translated from
a different
Malay original.4
This
is not the
place
to
go
into the
ages
of and
variations
among
the several
recensions
of the
manuscript.
The version
used here can
be seen to
make
sense from an architectural
point
of
view,
even if some details
are
ambiguous;
indeed
it is
remarkably
clear and concise
for
the
description
of a
building.
It
is all the more
important
as a
source
for architectural
history
when
we realizethat
all such
buildings
in this
region
were of
timber,
and that
not a
single
relic of
any
comparable
structure
survives.The
palace
described
here
burnt
down
not
long
after
being completed.
This
description
was
writ-
ten
to draw attention
to the
magnificence
and
special
features
of
the
palace;
it was for
an
audience
who would
know in what
form
a
Malay
Sultan's
dwelling
should
be,
and who could therefore
fill
z. W. G.
Shellabear,
Sejarah
Melayu,
Kuala
Lampur,
1975,
133.
Spellings
are altered to
bring
them in line with
the new rules.
This
translation
by
the author
is fromthe
most
generally
accepted
Malay
text.
Ada
pun
besarnya
istana
itu
tujuh
belas
ruang, pada
seruang tiga
depa
luasnya,
besar
tiangnya sepemeluk;
tujuh
pangkat
kemuncaknya.
Pada
antara itu
diberinya
bertingkap, pada
antara
tingkap
itu
diberinya
ber-
bumbungan
melintang
dan
bergajah
menyusu,
sekaliannya
bersayap
layang-layang
berukir dan
bersengkuap, pada
antara
sengkuap
itu
di-
perbuatnya belalang
besagi,
sekaliannya
bergunungan-gunungan
dan
berjurai-jurai
belaka. Ada
pun
segala
tingkap
istana
itu
sekaliannya
dicat
dan dibubuhi air
emas,
kemuncaknya
kaca
merah.
Apabila
kena
sinar matahari bernyala-nyalarupanya seperti manikam; dan
dinding
istana
itu
sekaliannya
berkambi,
maka
ditampali
dengan
cermin
Cina
yang
besar-besar.
Apabila
kena
panas
matahari
bernyala-nyala
rupanya
kilau-kilauan,
tiada
nyata
bahana
dipandang orang.
Ada
pun
rasuk
istana
itu sehasta
lebarnya,
sejengkal
tiga
jari
tebalnya;
akan
birai
istana
itu dua hasta
lebarnya,
sehasta
tebalnya,
diukirnya
jenang pintu
itu,
dan
empat puluh banyak
pintunya,
sekaliannya
dicat
dibubuh air
emas.
Terlalu indah-indah
perbuatannya
istana
itu;
sebuahpun
istana
raja-
raja
di
dalam dunia
ini
tiada
seperti
itu. Dan
istana itulah
yang
dinamai
orang
mahaligai.
Atapnya
tembaga
dan timah
disirip.
3.
C. C.
Brown,
Sejarah
Melayu
or
Malay
Annals,
Kuala
Lumpur,
1970,
77-78.
4.
R.
Winstedt,
transcriber,
RafflesMS of
Sejarah
Melayu,
Journal
of
the
Malayan
Branch
of
the
Royal
Asiatic
Society,
xvI,
part
III,
1938,
II4.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
4/8
SHERWIN: THE PALACE
OF
SULTAN
MANSUR
SHAH
AT
MALACCA
103
Fig.
3.
Minangkabau,
traditional
house,
now
preserved
for
display.
Roof
arrangement
reflects the internal
layout,
with
the
long reception
room continuous
along
the front.
Fig.4.
Burma,
iered
emple
ower
built
n
wood.
in
the
missing parts
of the
description
for
themselves.
We on
the
contrary
have no
direct
evidence about the
basic form of
such
palaces.
What
existing buildings
or
depictions
of
buildings
in old
sources could be
related
to the
description given?
The
Malays
do
not seem to
have
used
funerary
ornaments,
no
drawings
survive,
and the wood carvingshave disappearedwith the buildings
they
once adorned.
In
any
case,
Islam
discouraged
all but abstract
ornament. As far as extant architecture s
concerned,
two
prom-
ising examples
can be
consulted
without
having
to
go
as
far afield
as
the stone
temples
of India or
the multi-tiered
buildings
of
Nepal.5
Fig.
5.
Malacca
district,
mosque
with three
iered
pyramidal
oof.This
building, erhaps
ess han
40 years
old,
showsHindu
nfluence,
s
well
as
Islamic,
British
Colonial,
Malay,
andevenChinese
lements.
Abstract
dragon ndpearl motifcanbe seen ncorner inial.
One of these
is the curved
roof
buildings
of
the
Minangkabau.
The
Minangkabau
people
(the
name means
winning
bull )
have
their
present
homeland in the hills of
Sumatra,
inland
from
the
coast
opposite
Malacca,
and an area
was also
settled
by
them on
the
peninsula,
inland
and to
the northeast
of
Malacca. Their
style
of
building
is distinctive
(Fig.
z).
Most
likely
developed
mainly
within
Sumatra,6
he
particular
orm of
the
upcurving
roofs
lends
itself
well
to a
layering
which
incorporates
the
concept
of tiers of
building.
No
evidence
suggests
that
these
people
had
any greater
influence on
the culture
than the
many
other
peoples
who
settled
in
the Malacca area or
with whom
the
Malacca
Malays
had
dealings, except
that
the
simplified
type
of
Minangkabau
house
(Fig.
3)
built
in
the
peninsula
seems
to be
strongly
reflected n the
type
of
house common in the
Malacca
area to this
day.
The
other
example
is
a
Burmese
temple
tower,
such
as the
one
shown in
Figure 4,
constructed
in
timber,
and in
a sense
the
simplest
possible
structure that could fit the
description
given.
The roof
consists
of
seven
tiers,
excluding
the
Buddhist
termina-
tion
at the
top.
Each
tier could be
said
to
have
pinnacles
in
the
form of the
corner
finials,
and
windows
are located
betweeneach
tier.
However,
such
a tower
presupposes
a
building
below
it
which is
square
in
plan,
or
very
nearly
so. We are told in the
description
that the
palace
was
i7
bays
in
size,
which is
always
taken to mean that it was
17
bays
long.
It would be
possible,
of
course,
to
arrange
17
bays
in three
rows,
two
of
5 bays
to
either
side of
one row with
7
bays,
resulting
n
a more
rectangularplan.
This
is
unlike
anything
else
to be found in the
region
today,
and
5.
As
mentioned
above,
Hindu influence was
probably
at
work,
par-
ticularly
as
indicated
by
the
phrase
of seven levels were the
pinnacles,
but such
influence was
spread widely
throughout
Asia and
manifested
itself
in
a
variety
of local
forms.
Indeed if
we recall that the
many
storied
pagodas
of
Japan
originated
from
the Buddhist
stupa
which
was
orig-
inally
a
burial
mound,
we can see
to what
an
extent
an
abstract form can
be
totally
modified
by
its
architectural
mbodiment
ccording
o local
style.
6.
M.
D.
Sherwin,
From
Batak o
Minangkabau, ajallah
Akitek,
I:79,
March
1979,
38-42.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
5/8
I04
JSAH,
XL:2,
MAY
1981
ISTANA
MAHALIGAI
PANDANGAN EPAN
,
15
Ofeet
10
2n
30 40
50
untuk
SultanMansurhah
Fig.
6.
Malacca,
Palace f
Sultan
Mansur
Shah,
cale
drawings
f
reconstruction
roposed
by
author:
a. front
elevation,
b.
side
elevation,
.
enlarged
detailof
projectingdormer'
roof.
the
scale becomes small
for the
most
magnificent
of
palaces.
The
question
of
the
40
doors cannot be
gone
into
fully
here,
as
it
would involve a discussion of the usage of the relevant Malay
words and of the traditional
construction
of
houses.
In
any
case,
this
number of
doors can
be
fitted
in
whether the
squarish
or
long
plan
is
adopted,
so little can be deduced from the
matter of
doors.
A
building
tradition exists
in
the district and
throughout
the
peninsula,
again following
Sumatra,
of
layered
pyramidal
roofs
on
a
square
base;
to
this
day
in Malacca
itself
one
finds
mosques
with three
layers
of roof
and small
gaps
between them
(Fig.
5).
This
arrangement,
however,
can
hardly
be
said to
provide
levels
of
pinnacles,
and a
severe
problem
of
scale would
be
created in
any reconstruction based on such a type, since either the hall
would be
too
small
for a
regal palace-a square
enclosure is
suitable
for
a
mosque,
indeed
is
often
preferred,
but
hardly
for a
palace-or
else
the roof
height
would be
beyond
the
probable
limits
of timber
construction,
quite
apart
from the
matter of
17
bays.
In
attempting
a
reconstruction,
ioo
feet would
be about
the maximum
height possible,
even
though
in
the
Malayan
forest
straight
trunks
of
up
to
150
feet can be
found.
In
the
largest
timber
building
in
Malaysia today,
the
palace
of
Sri
Menanti,
the
main
pillars
rise
60
feet,
and
the
palace
at
Pagaruyung
s
about
the
same
height.
No evidence
suggests
taller
buildings
in
the
region.7
The reconstruction
proposed
here
is
25
meters
(82 feet)
to the
ridge
and
the
topmost pinnacle
is
just
short
of
ioo
feet
from
the
ground,
so it is within conservative imits.
Considering
all
aspects
of the
matter and
trying
to arrive at a
plausible building proposal,
it seems
necessary
to
reject
the
square
based
pagoda
tower and follow the
example
of
Minang-
kabau
structures
with
predominantly
horizontal
emphasis
and
upflung
pinnacles.
Thus
we arriveat the
reconstruction
shown in
Figure
6,
which
brings
together
several themes and
appears
to
correspond
to
the
intentions
of
the
description.
Not
only
do
sound historical reasons for this design provide solid
support,
but internal evidence from the
terms used and the
way
in
which
it
fits
the
description, point
to
its
probability.
As
is
nearly
universal
among
the
Malays,
the
building
is
raised
off the
ground
on its timber
posts.
This is
proved by
a
passage
just
after the one
translated
above,
where the
followers
of the
Sultan walk under
the
palace
while
he
ascends
to
inspect
it. As
can
be
seen,
the
arrangement
of
17 bays
along
the front has been
adopted,
with columns at
4.5
meters
(15
feet)
spacing
and
each
column
0.5
(zo
inches)
in
diameter.
Allowing
for
only
a
slight
exaggeration
in
the
account,
this would
suit
the
probable
height
of a Malay of those days. The palaceof Pagaruyunghas
15
bays
(Fig.
z),
so
this is
quite
in
character.That
palace
has the end
bays
set back on the central
longitudinal
axis,
whereas
the
reconstruc-
tion
proposed
here has
a
straight
run all
along
the front both in
order to have a
simple arrangement
of
seven
tiers
and to
follow
the
surviving
examples
of
Minangkabau
houses
in
Malaysia
it-
self
(Fig. 3).
Each
tier has its
pair
of
pinnacles
at the
swept-up
ends.
The word
translated as window in
the
text,
and indeed
in
general
use
today, tingkap,
has
a
one
letter difference rom
the
word now used to
mean
storey,
tingkat,
so
that
an
etymologi-
cal
connection
is
probable;
tingkap originally may
have meant
window in a
storey,
or
clerestory.
This is
what
it
signifies
in
this
reconstruction,
meaning
the bands of
windows
separating
the tiers of
roof.
There were roofs at
right angles
at each
level,
and
this must
mean some sort of
dormer
system
as shown
here. The
suckling
elephant type
of roof
may
refer to this
small
piece
running
into
the main
flank,
but
more
likely
it refers to a
gable
running
into
another
gable
end wall under a
higher
roof
on
the
same
axis;
thus
it
presumably applies
to the
successive tiers where
they
overlap
each other. It is
not clear
how
many
small dormer roofs
at
right
angles
thereshould
be,
whether
merely
one line down
the center
or
more.
The former
arrangement
would render each
one a bit
7.
TheDaibutsuden t
Todaiji,
Nara,
s
157
feet
high
and he
Fokuang
Temple
Pagoda
n
China,
rom
Io56,
is
z16
feet
high,
so
these
heights
couldbe
obtained n
timber.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
6/8
SHERWIN:
THE PALACE OF SULTAN
MANSUR SHAH AT
MALACCA
IO5
inconspicuous,
but is
in
keeping
with
the derivationof the
sym-
bolism of the
building
from Mount
Mahameru,
which faces
four
directions-compare Angkor
Wat and others.
The
provision
of
several such roofs at each level would
be more
impressive
and
in
keeping
with the Hindu
proclivity
toward
multiplicity
and
pro-
fusion, but the number must be limited by the curve of the build-
ing
lines which makes the
construction
of
such
dormers at the
end
bays
all but
impossible.
The
meanings
of the
wings
of
the
kite,
and of the
phrase
translated
here,
literally,
as
rectangulargrasshopper,
are
un-
certain.
In the
typical
Malay
house
today
the
gables
under the
ends of the roof are
filled
in
with
a
triangular
construction
which
slants inward
at the
top
and is known as
sail ;
the
Malay
kite is
diamond-shaped,
hence
one
wing
of this
is a
triangle.
Thus the
reference
may
be to this
gable-end
board or sail
(this
type
of
kite is
layang-layang,
whereas
sail is
layar:
the
slanting gable-
end is known as tibar
layar;
Fig.
7).
This
makes sense
of
the
word
translated here as
projecting
from under the
eaves,
a term
usually
used for a small
ancillary
roof on a lower level than
the
main
eaves
and
partially
overhung by
them:
if
the
slant of the
triangular
sail is
fairly
extreme,
it is covered
by
the
pitched
roof
of the dormer at the
top
and
exposed
where
it
leans out at the
bottom. Such
a feature s not found
on traditional
Minangkabau
buildings
in
Sumatra,
but is almost
universal
on all
styles
of
house
in
Malaya.
On
the
main
gable
ends
of a
large
Minangkabau
palace
such as the one at
Pagaruyung
t would
be
virtually
im-
possible
due to the
large expanse
of the area
involved,
but
on the
smaller
projecting
dormers it becomes
possible.
Presently
one
of
the hallmarksof the
Malay
house,
at that date it
may
have been a
new
feature,
which would
explain
why
special
attention is
paid
to it in the description. The rectangulargrasshopper would
appear
to
be
some
particularshape
of
bracket
or
infill
associated
with the
projecting
sail and
perhaps helping
to hold
it
in
place.
A
shaped pendant
bracket
is
shown,
copied
from houses in
Su-
matra;
it
has
something
of the
image
of
a
grasshopperpoised
to
leap.
Other features
mentioned
pose
little
problem
and fall into
place
naturally.
The
Chinese mirrors are round or
octagonal
ones
as
commonly
used
by
that race as talismans above
door-
ways,
set
into
panelling
in
the
screen wall
below the eaves
at
the
ends of the
buildings;
this can be
seen to this
day (Fig.
8).
It is
probable that this is the wall referredto, since all the lower
part
of
the
building proper
would
be
occupied
by
the
40
doors ;
these are not
in
fact doors that can
be walked
through,
but
are
large
window
openings
closed
by
wooden shutters. The
part
described
as
upstand
is the
piece
of
walling
or
parapet
that
runs from
column
to column
all
along
the
building,
just
above
the
floor,
and
the
window
openings
are
directly
on
this,
so
that
the
top
of it becomes
the window sill.
The
top,
furthermore,
may
be
curved
along
the
length
to follow the
general
ines
of the
building
while
keeping
the floorlevel.The end
bays
of a
palace
or
chief's
house were
usually
raised
up
in
steps,
thus
forming
an
elevated
platform
where the
rajah
or
chief could
sit to
give
audi-
ence,
with
an
intermediate
level
for his
nobles
and the
general
floor
level
for
commoners.
Another
sign
of
royalty
to be found
directly
under
this
raised
floor
at
the
projecting
ends
of
the build-
ing
is the
hanging
column, s
a
column
which
stops
short below
8. W. G.
Shellabear,
ejarahMelayu,74.
Certainarchitectural
ea-
turesarereserved
xclusively
or the
rulers,
uchas
the
hanging
olumn
which does
not rest
on the
ground,
and columns
all the
way
from
the
groundup
to the underside
f
the
roof
covering
normally
f
course
columns
stop
at the underside
f the
truss).
Dan
larangan
berbuat
rumah
permanjungan
ertianggantung
iada
terletak
ke
tanah,
dan
bertiang
erus
dari
atap,
dan
peranginan.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
7/8
106
JSAH,
XL:2,
MAY
1981
Fig.
7.
Malacca
district,house,
view
of
gable
end.
Slanting
sail'
can be
clearly
een
in
double
arrangement.
mall
upper
room s indicated
y
horizontalwindow
opening.
the crossbeam and does
not reach the
ground.
In
particular
at the
ends where the roof is lower
and
the
building
narrower,
the
individual columns have less
load
to
support
and so the extra
weight
from
this
unsupported
column can be borne
by
the cross-
beam-particularly
when these beams are
18
inches
by
8 inches
as in this account. The originof this curious feature of the hang-
ing
column is not known.
The
beams
are
socketed
into the col-
umns and the tenoned ends
may
very
likely
project beyond
them.
The floor is built
up
in
the
normal
way
above
them
with
joists
and
planks.
Apart
from the
shaped
and carved door
jambs
and
wings
specifically
mentioned,
probably
most of
the surfaces were
carved in
relief and then
painted.
The
doors
and windows are
described as
being painted
and also
gilded
with
liquid gold,
although
this
is
more
likely
to have been
gold
leaf,
and this is
reminiscent
of Thai
temples
where the doors and window shut-
ters are
bright
red
picked
out in
gold.
The
predominant
colors
over
most
of
the
building
are
likely
to
have been red and black
together
with white or
orange-yellow.
These are the colors of
the
cloths attached to the
newly
erected
principal pillars
of
houses
under construction to
this
day,
and of
course are colors
easily
obtained
from
natural sources.
The
covering
of
the roof
poses
a
problem.
The text has
gen-
erally
been translated to mean that
shingles
of
copper
(or brass)
and tin
were
used,
which
is
possible although
no
examples
sur-
vive. The Thais
today
use
bright
glazed
tiles
with
something
of
the same effect.
However,
the
passage
can
equally
be
translated
to mean that there
were
only strips
or
cappings
of
metal,
and
in
Fig.
8.
Malolo,
Sumatra,
illage
house,
projecting
ncillary
oof and
gable
end.Mirrors et nto
panelling leam
n
shadow.Surface
arving
s
paintedmainly
n
earth
olors.
this case the
main
roof
covering might
have been of
a
type
of
black
thatch;
this
combination can
be seen on the
palace
at
Pagaruyung
Fig.
z).
This
system
easily
accommodates the curves
of
the roof and
can
be
integrated
with the
pinnacles
which
would
most
likely
have been of
metal,
crowned as noted with red
glass.
This is also more
probable
when we consider
the
account of
the
fire which broke out
suddenly
on
the
roof.9
We are left with the
impression
that,
apart
from
its size and
grandeur,
the
particular
significance
of
this
palace
that led to its
being
described-no
other
comparable passage
is contained
in
the
Malay
Annals
or
other
Malay
historical
writings-may
have
been its tiered roof
and
the
way
that it and the windows and
ancillary
roofs
fitted
together.
The overall
appearance
of
this
proposed
reconstruction
has
been
kept
as
simple
as
possible
congruent
with the information
9.
A
discussion f the
meaning
nd
significance
f
the
term
Mahaligai
as
applied
o the
palace
hadbestbe left to scholars f
Asian
anguages,
especially
anskrit;
t
may
be more han
coincidental
hat
oday
he term
means the
topmost
and
private
accommodationor
a
royal
wife
or
daughter
n
sucha
storied
palace.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/11/2019 The Melaka Palace
8/8
SHERWIN:
THE PALACE OF SULTAN MANSUR SHAH AT MALACCA
107
given
in the
text.
If
the
design
seems
lodged
somewhere between
Sumatran
and Thai
forms,
that too is
appropriate
geographically
and
culturally.
The
Thais,
like the
Malays,
were
originally
tribes
of the Asian mainland who
migrated
into their
present
home-
or
so
it is
supposed,
though
the
relationship
between the first
settlements
of
Malays
in
the
peninsula
and
in
Sumatra
s
far
from
clear-and both were
much affected
by
Indian
religion
and
cul-
ture. The Thais
of course are closer to the Chinese
racially
and
geographically
and
definitely
have some affinities with them
in
their culture
and architecture. Other than
through
artifacts of
trade,
particularly porcelain
but also other
goods
such as the
mirrors
mentioned,
the
Chinese
probably
had little contact
and
influence with the
Malays.
According
to the
Malay
Annals
(and
also Chinese
sources),
the Malacca sultanate had at one
period
diplomatic
relations with
China,
and
in
another
episode
a little
later than the
account of the
palace,
the same
sultan,
Mansur
Shah,
married the
daughter
of the
Emperor
of China and the
attendants
who
accompanied
her took
up
their abode
in
Ma-
lacca
in an
area that was named
for
them,
Chinese Hill.
This
initiates
a
Chinese
presence
in
Malacca,
and
it is
plain
that the
influence from that
quarter
was infinitesimal
if
compared
with
that
from India and
Sumatra.So the
slightly
Chinese characterof
this reconstruction should more
properly
be
compared
with Thai
architecture:
the
Thais were the
only
land
neighbors
of the
pen-
insular
Malays.
Indian work
had
long
been subsumed
in
local
building
forms,
as
a
symbolic
framework rather
han
in
architecturaldetails.
The
crescent effect
of the
upcurving
roofs
may
be more
than acciden-
tal since
the
Minangkabau
culture is
a
well-known
example
of
a
matriarchal
or at least matrilineal
system,
and the moon
and
its
crescent were
often
a
powerful symbol
of the Mother
Goddess;
the bull
and its crescent
of horns is also
part
of
this
symbolism
and is
specifically
referred to
in
the
name of the
tribe. Once
the
style
was introduced
into the
Malay
peninsula
where conditions
were somewhat
different it was bound to
change,
and this
pro-
posal
is
already straighter
n
its
general
lines than the Sumatran
examples. Today
the
upswung
pinnacles
and
curved
roof are a
mere
vestige;
not
only
do
patriarchal systems
dominate on the
mainland,
but the most
commonly
available
type
of
roofing
ma-
terial before the
introduction of
corrugated
galvanized
steel was
a
thatch made
from
palm
leaves,
which comes
in
straight engths
and can
hardly
be
applied
to
a
pronounced
curve.
A
full historical
investigation
of this
building
and the back-
ground
to it
would
require
an
extended
presentation.
This dis-
cussion is intended as
an introduction to
a
little-known
part
of
Asian architectural
history.
This content downloaded from 121.52.147.21 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:29:58 AM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp