Split (1)

train · 19.4M rows

text stringlengths 9 94.9k
The speed and weight combination of the frame and head did not cause any issues in defence. The racket remained light in my hands and delivered good, quick defensive shots with a fair amount of punch in the drives. It is highly manoeuvrable and I felt quite at home defending my half in a two versus one situation. There is just enough weight in the head to feel that you have the beef behind the shot which is supplemented with the extra hand speed. I loved it!
The net area was made very easy with HX800 Control. A light touch is easy to dial in with the added benefit that the racket immediately obeys your instructions to work faster for knock offs. Pushes needed a shade more to find the sweet spot mid-court and as expected, there was enough punch to hit to the rear court with very little hand movement.
I wasn’t expecting Hypernano X800 Control to shine as it did. The original 800 was a marmite racket. The 800 Power appeared to have solved the “hollow” issue with the original, and I suspected the Control version was too similar to the original in feel, hence the reason why I couldn’t find out any information on it.
A yellow racket isn’t always a popular colour until I remember MP99 which was a massive favourite. Maybe the similarity to AT900T made this racket the underdog in the 800 series. Whatever the reason(s), it’s unjustified. For the record, Victor Hypernano X800 Control is a very good racket and will certainly appeal to a player who doesn’t need a head heavy balance to hit hard.
RRP is £190 which is expected for a top of the range model. Online stores have discounted to around £140. Bearing in mind this is a limited edition, I suspect further deals can be done as once stock has been sold, retailers cannot obtain the racket again. It’s a shame this is a limited edition racket although in some respects, this is no different than other rackets that make a brief appearance before being withdrawn from a catalogue. At least this racket was named as a limited edition.
HX800 Control, delivers a lot and it’s fair to say that it is a jack of all trades rather than a master of one or many. That’s a positive comment and confirms it’s a good all-rounder. Previous owners of AT900T may find this more to their tastes, retaining weight in the head but in a lower position near the throat. The racket was quickly growing on me and I felt a little sad to return it.
Rating HX800 Control has been tricky. I really enjoyed it, respect it has delivered well and yet still can’t help wondering why it’s not been given more credit. However, I am giving it a rating of 4.5 stars.
The sixth annual gathering of Mustang LX 5.0 Convertibles is being planned for the 2012 Carlisle All-Ford Nationals held from June 1-3 2012 in Carlisle, PA. This article contains all the information you need.
Read the Carlisle 2012 section of my blog for updates as well as the thread in the forums. For some history from prior years, see below.
Registration is open for Carlisle All-Ford Nationals 2012. Go to store.carlisleevents.com to register. When you register, you will need to communicate to them that you are part of triplewhitefox.com. This will help them to group us together. This year, the registration form has a prefilled list of clubs and triplewhitefox.com is listed. Please let me know once you have registered so I can keep track of how many people are going.
Get Involved With H.O.M.E.S. Inc.
What Is Happening With H.O.M.E.S. Inc.
Get ready to tumble down the Rabbit Hole, (champagne in hand) for H.O.M.E.S. Spring Luncheon Through the Looking Glass, celebrating 20 years of H.O.M.E.S. and all of the extraordinary work the organization has done in Broward County. Travel through Wonderland to the Intracoastal Ballroom atop Shooters Waterfront. From 11:30 am to 2 pm you will be transported into Wonderland with libation, food, silent auctions, raffles and live entertainment!
A more considered version of the experiment initially run in the previous post.This time, there's a new bit of code that mixes Photoshop Actions. In turn, these run other modular bits of code for the Spot and Stripe Patterandom scripts. The code stopped every 20 new Layers (10 stripes, 10 spots) and I altered the boundaries within which the patterns could be randomly scaled. This was done sequentially at first and then in response to how the design looked in order to try and get a balance between large and small scale pattern. As with the previous post, this means a result that is not truly generative. I'd like to look at how decisions about when to stop or alter things are made in more detail as this project unfolds. I have a vague idea for a manifesto of some sort that says the final designs have to look good. However interesting the code is that creates them, it's not interesting enough if the results aren't beautiful.
Doxplore Digitizer is a software that helps you Scan your physical documents, perform OCR (Optical Character Recognition) on the scanned images to make them searchable by content.
If you lose or accidentally erase an important digital file, such as a proposal or a contract , but still have a hard copy, you can easily replace it in your system by using OCR to scan the original paper document or most recent draft.
OCR software converts scanned text into a format that can be read and searched by computers , enabling search for specific documents using a keyword or phrase. For example, you could effortlessly search hundreds of invoices and locate a specific name or account in moments, without manually browsing through a large set of files.
Once you’ve scanned your document using OCR, you have the option to edit the text by storing it within a word format (.doc). Expedite your editing process of Scanned files that may need constant to be to be updated in the future.
Free up physical storage space by scanning paper documents and disposing or warehousing the originals physical documents. These documents post scanning OCR can also serve as a backup in case of unforeseen damages to paper documents.
Ability to scan physical documents from TWAIN-compatible devices. You may scan single or multiple documents in a single session.
Multiple scanned files can be combined to a single Adobe PDF file or separate PDF files can be created for each individual scanned file.
Scan multiple image formats like BMP, JPEG, PNG, TIFF, GIF or a PDF document.
You can perform OCR on the fly with the Scan operation.
Users can define the number of pages, to conduct OCR.
The readable text post OCR can be displayed in a Word document.
Images in the paper document will be placed in the same location after OCR, thereby retaining original layout.
Ability to detect incorrectly oriented pages and fix it automatically.
Ability to scale image automatically for better recognition.
Robust technology supports images with poor brightness or low contrast.
Ability to detect and handle inverted text.
Unique character analysis technology delivering reliable recognition of any fonts.
Advanced algorithms for poor-quality text, distorted, connected and broken characters.
This section is used to perform different operations on PDF files. Some operations will be restricted to PDF files those are either password protected or corrupted.
Combine multiple pages of a file to a single PDF.
Extract pages from a source PDF file and create a new copy of PDF file from the specific pages only.
Insert content of a PDF file in another PDF file in the position specified by the user.
Password Protect or Unprotect PDF files.
. Brother Cnc Control . Dual Arm Tool Changer . Excellent Condition!
The Gamekid is an unlockable activated item.
Inflicts fear on all enemies.
Removes ability to shoot tears.
Allows Isaac to deal 40 contact damage to enemies, at the rate of one hit per second per enemy.
Replenishes half a red heart for every two enemies killed.
The invulnerability effect negates all forms of damage, including health loss from Blood Donation Machines and Devil Beggars.
This also negates damage from entering or exiting a Curse Room, but the effect is immediately removed upon walking through the door.
Does not prevent heart container loss from Health Down Pills or Devil Room deals.
This item is superior to My Little Unicorn, as it can heal Isaac whilst also providing similar effects.
Beating the game whilst under the effects of The Gamekid will cause the credits music to be sped up.
This item's name and appearance are references to the Nintendo Game Boy.
The pickup quote and Isaac's appearance while under the effects of The Gamekid are references to Pac-Man.
Tetris appears to be the game being played on The Gamekid. Tetris was also the launch title for the Nintendo Game Boy.
This page was last edited on 28 February 2019, at 16:02.
National Sandwich Day – Zero Equals Two!
As you may know, legend has it that the sandwich was invented by John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, because he didn’t want to take time away from the gambling table. Accordingly, when he was hungry, he would ask his servants to bring him slices of meat between two slices of bread. This habit became so well known to his gambling friends that they soon began to order “the same as Sandwich,” and from this, the sandwich was born.
How can you celebrate National Sandwich Day? Parade suggests 4 National Sandwich Day 2017 Freebie Deals. QSR Magazine notes that McAlister’s Deli is celebrating National Sandwich Day with a $4 Club sandwich.
If you want to make your own, Country Living provides 14 of America’s Most Essential Sandwich Recipes.
Previous Article← America’s First Female Bishop…And KKK Fan!
Mix oregano, pepper, salt, mashed garlic well.
Separately, add the lemon juice to the prepared mix of spices.
Add the chopped onion and parsley.
Season fish with pepper and more salt to taste and then fill with the mixture .
Put the lemon slices if desired.
Bake in a preheated 180C oven.
Serve with a garnish as desired.
short time I had set out for India with the ambassador, attended only by a small suite on account of the length of the journey, and the badness of the roads. However, as was my duty, I took writh me ten camels, laden with rich presents for the Sultan.
We had been travelling for about a month, when one day we saw a cloud of dust moving swiftly towards us; and as soon as it came near, we found that the dust concealed a band of fifty robbers. Our men barely numbered half, and as we were also hampered by the camels, there was no use in fighting, so we tried to overawe them by informing them who we were, and whither we were going. The robbers, however, only laughed, and declared that was none of their business, and, without more words, attacked us brutally. I defended myself to the last, wounded though I was, but at length, seeing that resistance was hopeless, and that the ambassador and all our followers were made prisoners, I put spurs to my horse and rode away as fast as I could, till the poor beast fell dead from a wound in his side. I managed to jump off without any injury, and looked about to see if I was pursued. But for the moment I was safe, for, as I imagined, the robbers were all engaged in quarrelling over their booty.
I found myself in a country that was quite new to me, and dared not return to the main road lest I should as:ain fall into the hands of the robbers. Luckily my wound was only a slight one, and after binding it up as well as I could, I walked on for the rest of the day, till I reached a cave at the foot of a mountain, where I passed the night in peace, making my supper off some fruits I had gathered on the way.
N.B. If any minutes were taken of the meeting in 1985 then they have long since been lost. These two articles, authored by Katherine, cover all of the content of her talk, and more.
As anthropologists, most of us would agree with Bruner that "our first responsibility is to respect people's accounts of their experiences as they choose to present them" (1983:9). However, those of us interested in historical anthropology face a special challenge since we are rarely able to draw upon indigenous accounts of everyday life. Even when we are able to use such texts, the problem of ethnographic authority remains (Clifford 1988:8; Clifford and Marcus 1986). Considerable work is being done in historical anthropology in reconstructing indigenous histories by using the early narratives of Western observers. However, such efforts have obvious problems of observer bias (see Cohn 1987:136-171; Said 1978; Savage 1984). Furthermore, as in the descriptions discussed in this article, the outside observers have sometimes recorded opposing opinions. How are we, as anthropologists writing today, to assess such conflicting appraisals? Using the case of textiles in 19th-century northern Thailand, I should like to suggest that by reconstructing the political economy of a society, we can evaluate contradictory historical descriptions.
From Veblen (1912) and Simmel (1957) to Weiner and Schneider (1989), an appreciation of the varied manner in which textiles symbolize social distinctions has been longstanding. As Bourdieu has written of symbolic goods in general, textiles can be an integral part of the "infinitely varied art of marking distances" (1984:66; see also Barthes 1984; Sahlins 1976). Often the distinctions are extremely subtle. Writing of the use of fashion, Barthes notes the importance of details as "concentrated meaning" (1984:185). For Barthes, just a detail can change an object's meaning: "a little nothing that changes everything; those little nothings that can do everything" (1984:243). However, more than just symbolizing distinctions, textiles have also been shown to constitute and consolidate social differences through their often vital role in a society's political economy. In his pioneering article on tributary textiles in the Inca kingdom, Murra notes not only that "no political, military, social, or religious event was complete without textiles being volunteered or bestowed, burned, exchanged, or sacrificed," but also that cloth served as "a primary source of state revenues" (1962:722).
insights into the semiotics of consumption and an important methodology for historical anthropology.
Others have made a similar point (see Schneider 1987 for an excellent review of the cultural, economic, and political significance of cloth). As Weiner and Schneider summarize, architects of centralizing polities have awed spectators with sartorial splendor, strategically distributed beautiful fabrics amongst clients, and exported the textile output of royal and peasant workshops to earn foreign exchange" (1989:2).
Contradictory assessments of dress also occur in 19th-century descriptions of northern Thai dress. The anonymous author of one of the earliest surviving accounts remarked on the lack of class distinction in women's clothing: "It is curious to notice the uniformity and universality of the female dress. The higher classes vary the style a little by inserting a very showy strip of wrought silk next above the bottom piece" (Bangkok Recorder 1866). Twenty years later, an American missionary working in northern Thailand wrote in almost identical wording: "Rich and poor all dress alike, except that the higher classes vary the universal style a little by inserting a very showy strip of wrought silk into the skirt near the bottom" (Cort 1886:348).
Thus, depending upon the archival source, contemporary scholars can reach opposing assessments of the character of these earlier societies. Research on textiles in mainland Southeast Asia is just beginning (see Brown 1980; Cheesman 1988; Fraser-Lu 1988; Lefferts 1988, 1990; Prangwatthanakun and Cheesman 1987). Prangwatthanakun and Cheesman's Lanna Textiles: Yuan, Lue, Lao (1987) is the only full-length work on textiles in northern Thailand; as such it is an important preliminary study, especially useful for describing some of the items woven and the techniques used. In this article, I examine the broader social context of textile consumption and production, drawing upon two major kinds of sources, archival and oral. The archival sources include consular reports (primarily British), 19th century newspaper accounts, travelogues, and works by American missionaries. In addition I have interviewed hundreds of villagers over the age of 80 living throughout the Chiang Mai Valley of northern Thailand.5 I use archival sources primarily for insight into the consumption, production, and acquisition of textiles by the elite; I rely more heavily on oral histories for insights into the everyday life of villagers. Based upon an understanding of the social processes of textile production and consumption, I argue that the controversy generated by the contradictory opinions of certain 19th century observers of northern Thai society can be resolved in favor of those who asserted that there were dramatic differences of dress and class in the northern Thai semiotics of consumption.
The Chiang Mai Valley was the site of the largest and most important of the northern Thai kingdoms. These kingdoms were located in the region today called northern Thailand but called "Western Laos" by 19th century missionaries and other foreign observers. The courts of the various principalities were located in the mountain valleys of Chiang Mai, Lamphun, Lampang, Phrae, Nan, and Chiang Rai, each today serving as a provincial capital. Although these kingdoms were independent, they had been tributary to the neighboring kingdom of Burma for several hundred years. During the 19th century, they were tributary to the central Thai court at Bangkok; thereafter they were incorporated into Thailand.
This article is divided into two parts. In the first, I examine the cultural significance of textile consumption in 19th century northern Thailand. I present some of the surviving descriptions of dress, ranging from the daily wear of commoners to the state robes of the ruling lords, and subsequently expand the discussion from dress to other applications of textiles, arguing that there were dramatic differences between peasants and lords in this broader sphere as well. In the second part of the article, I describe how this differentiation between elites and commoners was revealed in the social process of textile production. Focusing on the two most important textiles used; cotton and silk, I consider the overall importance of textiles in the political economy of these northern Thai kingdoms, noting the role of tribute and slave labor in the acquisition of textiles by the elite.
Previous studies have shown that 19th-century northern Thai society was divided into three major social statuses: the aristocrats (jao), the freeholders (phrai), and the slaves (khiikhaa). The aristocracy was internally differentiated by economic and political power. The greatest power and prestige were concentrated in those lords who occupied the five top positions in each of the kingdoms, while lesser members of the aristocracy whose inheritances had dwindled were barely separable from the peasantry at large. Free villagers were all liable to perform corvée labor and pay tribute to the ruling lords, but they were internally differentiated according to economic class. The wealthiest villagers rivaled many members of the aristocracy; in fact, many had royal titles and intermarried with the lower levels of the aristocracy. Villagers spanned the economic continuum, from those with land and numerous animals down to those who were destitute or landless beggars. The difference between slaves and free villagers was also often a gray area. Elite slaves sometimes worked very closely with their lords and received more benefits than ordinary commoners. On the other hand, the conditions for ordinary slaves were generally worse than those for commoners since the former were at the mercy of the lords. (For more on 19th century northern Thai social structure, see Bowie 1988; Calavan 1974; Ganjanapan 1984.) Nonetheless, although portions of this social spectrum overlapped, there were significant differences in lifestyle from one end of the spectrum to the other.
To give an idea of the purchasing power of a rupee at this time, some indications of wage rates are suggestive. Although very few statistics on northern Thai wage labor rates survive, I was able to find three references in the archival sources.16 According to the British trade report of 1894, porters were paid 12 to 15 rupees per month, assuming they carried an average load of 15 to 20 viss; about 54 to 73 pounds (Archer 1895). Some figures on the wages paid to laborers in the teak industry also survive. According to W. J. Archer, the British vice consul, Khamu workers who could once be hired for 40 to 60 rupees a year (and their food) could in 1894 no longer "be had under Rs. 70 to Rs. 90 a year" (1895). Writing five years later, Acting Consul J. Stewart Black gave somewhat lower wage figures, while also lamenting the increasing costs. He noted that Khamu workers were paid 30 to 50 rupees per annum, in addition to their food, which cost about 5 rupees per month, or an additional 60 rupees per year. Black wrote that in 1899 some teak laborers were being paid as much as 120 rupees (food included) and went on to castigate the native villagers for their indolence, commenting that "not even the attraction of what is to him [sic] a small fortune will induce them to undergo for any length of time the hard labour and isolation of forest work" (1 900).17 Thus, forest workers in the teak industry were earning anywhere from 90 to 120 rupees per year (including the value of their food), or about 7 to 10 rupees per month. Such wages paid to forest workers were considered a "small fortune." Although the wages paid to porters were higher, it should be noted that portering such heavy loads required tremendous stamina and could be done by only the strongest villagers. Furthermore, such employment was seasonal.
According to oral histories, the wages paid to agricultural workers were less. Many villagers cited rates of one win (approximately one-seventh of a rupee) per day for agricultural labor at the turn of the 20th century.18 Archival sources suggest that wages for teak workers averaged one-quarter to one-third of a rupee per day and those for porters averaged half a rupee per day. Villagers also recalled that in the early 20th century one rupee could buy a full set of clothing, including a homespun shirt and pair of pants or skirt.
Clearly, the aristocracy's most luxurious clothes were not likely to serve as daily casual wear. Nonetheless they marked a significant distinction in purchasing power and social status between the elite and ordinary villagers. A tin jok skirt border that cost 60 rupees represented at least four months' wages for the best-paid porter and over a year's wages for agricultural workers. Everyday peasant dress already represented anywhere from two to seven days' wages and thus constituted a considerable expense for the ordinary wage laborer.
The ruling lords of the northern Thai kingdom also had distinctive regalia, including umbrellas and spittoons. Whether a formal sumptuary code existed is, as I mentioned earlier, unclear. However, even without the evidence of sumptuary laws, I believe that there is considerable indication of significant class differentiation through dress.19 With the exception of state robes and regalia of rank, differences in dress may well have formed a continuum of wealth rather than a clear-cut differentiation based on status. Poorer members of the aristocracy, less able to afford the most elaborate of clothes, would have blended with those below them. Conversely, wealthier members of the rural elite, especially those who had intermarried with the lower ranks of the aristocracy, would have dressed more ornately. Nonetheless, overall, when one considers the cost of elite dress in light of the economic situation of poor villagers who were begging, stealing, or patching their simple clothing, a dramatic distinction emerges.
Textiles were used not only for dress but also for a variety of household items and on various ritual occasions. Such uses of textiles also revealed considerable differences according to wealth. Although the poorest villagers often did without, ordinary villagers used textiles for making mattress and pillow covers, blankets, bed sheets, and mosquito nets. In general the mattress and pillow covers were plain indigo or black with red stripes or trim. Bed sheets were plain white or white with a red stripe or checked pattern; fancier sheets had embroidery and in some cases more complex weaves. Mosquito nets were woven on special large looms, and many informants complained about how heavy homespun cotton mosquito nets were to wash.
Cloth also figured importantly in the lives and rites of the elite. In addition to owning more and fancier clothes, the elite had more and better household items. Instead of just having enough mattresses, pillows, and other bedding items for the family, wealthier families had additional bedding sets for guests. Furthermore, the guest bedding was considered an object of display and so was more likely to have embroidered ends and complex, time-consuming weaves. Even today wealthy village families usually have wood cabinets with glass doors along the wall of the main room of their home to showcase guest bedding sets.
The possession of ornate pillows was another particularly significant attribute of elite households. Although Thais had a variety of pillows, the prestige pillows were usually triangular and were used for daytime reclining. Their importance was highlighted in a British official's passing remark that such pillows were "to be seen in every house of any pretensions" (Lowndes 1871).25 Furnishing their palaces, the northern Thai princes displayed numerous luxury items such as foreign-made weapons, chandeliers, mirrors, lanterns, curtains, reclining pillows, and even imported carpets (Taylor 1888-1930:73; Younghusband 1888:63-64). In 1830 Richardson noted the presence of Indian and Chinese carpets (1829-36:63), and in 1885 Ernest Satow recorded that the ruling lord of Chiang Mai had European furniture and "a number of gaudy Brussels carpets" (1885-86:51).
The full extent of the differences between commoners and aristocracy was most visible when members of the ruling elite traveled in state or participated in public ceremonies. Royal barges had large cloth canopies: the royal barge of the central Thai king, according to one observer, featured "a canopy of cloth of gold where the King sits on a golden throne wearing a gold embroidered coat and golden shoes" (Dodd 1923:289). The royal entourage often consisted of scores of boats, the rowers all clad in matching uniforms. The elite also traveled by horse or elephant, the animals gaily festooned with decorative textiles. On state occasions, the highest ranks of the nobility used gold and silver decorative caparisons. Mary Cort noted that the gold elephant trappings were "worth thousands," whereas the silver trappings were "worth hundreds" of rupees (Cort 1886:349).
In addition to making public prestations such as those at the Kathin ceremonies, the elite would have given considerable amounts of textile goods away during any other life-cycle or calendrical ceremonies they might hold. Thai ceremonials usually included a merit-making component in which gifts, including monastic robes and embroidered pillows, were given as offerings to the monks (see Davis 1984). Archival sources also note the use of textiles as gifts to visiting dignitaries: the gifts given to Satow, a British official, by the ruling chief of Lampang included velvet mattresses, pillows adorned with Chinese brocade, and silk skirts (Satow 1885- 86:206). Thus, not only did the peasants and the lords differ considerably in terms of dress and household possessions, but they also differed in the extent to which they donated textiles on ritual occasions.
In this article thus far I have depicted significant differences between the elite's and the peasants' uses of textiles. I have described a range of dress: from the stolen and the hand-me-down, from the threadbare and the patched, from the simple cottons of commoners to the state robes of the ruling lords. I have also outlined some of the different uses of textiles in village households as opposed to the court. Here, I should like to show how the differentiation was manifested not simply in the consumption of textiles but also in their production.
As will become clear, both accounts are true; the differences lie in the type of fabric being woven.
Most clothing was made from cotton. However, contrary to what is commonly assumed, weaving was not a universal household industry; only certain villagers in certain villages wove (see Bowie 1988, 1992). The weaving of simple cotton cloth was spread quite widely throughout the Chiang Mai Valley, and certain districts were especially known for their concentrations of weavers. Those districts that had a reputation for cotton weaving in the past, especially the San Kamphaeng and Bo sang districts, have maintained their reputations down to the present. Furthermore, oral histories reveal weaving to have been a highly specialized activity, with different villagers involved in the different phases of production. By far the most commonly produced cloth was a plain white cotton, often later dyed with indigo. The villagers most likely to produce such cloth were the poorer ones, who wove both for their own household needs and for sale or hire. Such village weavers were more likely to find weaving an onerous obligation from which others were freed.
From the simplest and plainest of homespun white cloth to the most elaborate designs using imported fibers, the value of the fabric gradually increased. Striped or plaid cloth involved more work and skill, in both weaving and dyeing, than plain cloth and was consequently valued more highly. Cloth woven with imported threads, most often used for women's phaa sins, was more expensive than the domestic handspun cotton. The wealthier the village weaver, the more likely she was to weave the more time-consuming decorative items such as colored skirts or striped sheets. The more elaborate the design, the more likely the weaver was weaving for pleasure with a "cool heart."
The more complex the weave, the more likely that the weaver was affiliated in some manner with the aristocracy, as war captive, slave, or member of the court. Virtually each of the areas known for weaving is associated with an ethnic minority brought into the Chiang Mai Valley as war captives sometime during the 19th century. Baan Ton Hen is a Khyyn village; San Kamphaeng (particularly around the original district town of Baan Oon) is also known as a Khyyn area. The Khyyn are a population who originally lived in the Chiang Tung area: Chiang Mai led attacks on Chiang Tung in 1849, 1852-53, and 1854, and it seems people were brought back on these occasions (Wilson and Hanks 1985:29). Over half of the people living in the Lamphun region are said to have descended from war captives (Freeman 1910:100). Chom Thong town has a Lawa population, many of whom served as temple slaves. Unfortunately, I was unable to acquire any information about the ethnic background of villagers in Baan Aen since the entire village was forced to relocate when a hydroelectric dam was built.
Unlike villagers, who had to weave, trade for, or buy their clothing, the ruling lords were able to extract raw cotton, woven cloth, and dyestuffs as tribute. Their ability to levy tribute on broad sectors of the population provided the aristocracy with a quantity of cotton cloth no single producer could hope to match. Interestingly, the majority of villagers who sent cotton or cloth as tribute appear to have been hilltribe populations, such as the Karen and the Mussur (today more commonly called the Lahu). One of the Karen villages that Captain Thomas Lowndes visited in 1871 had just taken its year's taxes to Chiang Mai: "it consisted of Rupees 2, 2 blankets, and 40 viss of cotton" (1871). Richardson also noted tribute of cloth paid by the Karen during his travels in 1830 (1829-36:37, 45). Captain McLeod found that the KaKuis had to make presents of mats and cloths to the lords (1836:57). McGilvary commented that much of the raw cotton being purchased by the Yunnanese traders came from the Mussur; although he did not specifically mention tribute, it is likely that the Mussur too would have been expected to offer tribute to the ruling lords in the form of raw cotton or finished cloth. While the aristocracy were able to make apparently generous donations on ritual occasions, much of what they gave was in fact the contribution of others.
Thus, the aristocracy appear to have been able to extract raw cotton, simple cotton cloth, and complex cotton weaves through political means. Tribute afforded them both raw cotton and cotton cloth, and the labor of war captives seems to have provided them with complex weaves such as tin jok skirt borders. Although silk was considered a more valuable fabric, cotton cloth nonetheless had a variety of uses in royal households. The tin jok borders, even those made of cotton, would have marked their wearers as wealthier than ordinary villagers, who only wore plain skirt borders. Possession of textiles ranging from mattresses to elephant headpieces made from complex woven cotton would have similarly served to add to the prestige of their owners. Such cloth could be used as rewards for favored underlings or as gifts for visitors. In addition, cotton cloth made possible the public display of largess involved in merit-making ceremonies, since monks' robes were typically made from cotton.
It is also possible that royalty were involved in the cotton trade. There was considerable demand for raw cotton by Yunnanese traders and some demand for cotton cloth in Burma (Bowie 1992; Hill 1982; Reid 1988:91). British vice consul Archer mentioned in his trade report of 1894 that "women's cloths of coarse cotton, woven by the Laos [were] sought after in Burma as being very durable," although he added that the export was not very considerable (1895). Such cloth, together with silk goods, could also have been offered as tribute to other kingdoms. However they used it, lords - because they could exact tribute and slave labor - found it much easier to acquire cloth than did commoners, who had to weave fabric themselves or find some other means of acquiring it.
Archival sources also indicate that royal slaves were involved in silk weaving. The British official A. H. Hildebrand noted, "There is a good deal of trade capable of being done also in silk garments and silk fancy work, at which the slaves and others are great adepts" (1875). It is not clear whether these slaves lived solely at the court or also in slave settlements established to produce cloth for the court. Silk weaving is known to have been done in only two areas outside the court itself: the towns of San Kamphaeng and Hot (and their immediate environs). While silk weaving continues to this day in San Kamphaeng, in Hot only traces survive in archival sources and in the memories of the town's oldest residents. No information survives to explain why Hot, a town some 70 kilometers from Chiang Mai, would have been a center of silk production and weaving, or why the industry died out. (Villagers said it was because the cocoons scared easily and so had died.) However, in San Kamphaeng a senior member of one of the prestigious silk-weaving families recounted the local version of the history of silk weaving in his area. According to his account, lords victorious in war would capture various kinds of artisans and resettle them in their own kingdoms. Thus, silversmiths were settled near the south end of Chiang Mai town, lacquer ware artists in another location, and weavers in San Kamphaeng. This account indeed suggests that the silk weavers in San Kamphaeng may have been royal slaves weaving at the behest of the court.
Some idea of the potential scale of royal weaving was given by D. J. Edwardes, who wrote that the ruling lord of Chiang Mai had 300 slaves weaving cloth for him (1875). It appears that these Chiang Mai silks were marketed in Burma. In his summary of the Chiang Mai kingdom, Lowndes commented: "Weaving and embroidery are the principal handicrafts, the silk putsoes [phaa nung] are much sought after by the Burmans, as they wear three times as long as those of Burmese manufacture" (1871). He made a similar point about the silk woven in Hot, noting that it was "said to be very strong and durable" and adding, "A thitgoung [headman] showed me a putso that he had had in wear for 7 years, and it was by no means worn out" (1871).
In San Kamphaeng, where silk production has continued to the present day, raw silk was imported from Luang Prabang, Laos, and later from Mandalay, Burma. Raw silk was also routinely imported by the Haw traders coming from Yunnan, China (Hill 1982; see also Bowie 1992).
The geographical distribution of raw materials had social implications. Since sufficient quantities of cotton grew in upland regions of northern Thailand to be readily exported, cotton was more accessible to ordinary villagers and could, in turn, be extracted by the ruling lords through tribute. Since silkworms were not abundant in northern Thailand, raw silk had to be imported. Silk's scarcity heightened its price and its prestige value, serving to concentrate silk weaving in the hands of the court. Aristocratic control of silk production was further aided by the fact that the silk fiber is very fine and hence is far more difficult and time-consuming to weave than cotton.
A comparison of cotton and silk production, then, reveals important contrasts. While cotton was exported, silk was imported into northern Thailand. While cotton was generally woven by freeholding villagers, silk seems to have been woven by slaves and members of the aristocracy. While villagers, except those who begged or stole their clothing, had to obtain textiles through direct economic means, aristocrats were able to augment their own production through the political means of tribute and slave labor. Furthermore, because poverty was widespread and not all villagers grew or wove cotton themselves, many villagers faced hardships in acquiring clothing of any kind for their families.
Understanding the process of textile production helps contemporary readers gain insight into the cultural meaning of cloth to 19th century northern Thai. Once we understand the chronic poverty of most villagers and the difficulty with which villagers obtained even the simplest of cotton cloth, the significance of cloth in daily life and in village rituals becomes clearer. Simultaneously, we can begin to enter the cultural world of 19th century villagers to learn the social meaning of the difference between clothes made of cotton and those made of silk.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.