New Guinea & Oceanic Tribal Art for sale | Museum quality Oceanic art

Shields of the Upper Sepik

By Barry Craig

Figure 1. Languages of the Upper Sepik (after Laycock 1975). Back in 1964, I began research on the material culture of central New Guinea and made a collection for the Australian Museum, Sydney. This expanded over the next few years to a comprehensive survey of house boards and shields in the region. In 1968 and 1969, I made two excursions into the upper Sepik to explore the relationships between the material cultures of the two regions, making collections for the state museums of Berlin and Leiden, for the Australian Museum, and for the PNG museum in Port Moresby.¹ I returned to the upper Sepik for a year 1972-73. Some results have been published in Craig 1975, 2009, 2018a, b. This essay benefits from those periods of research.² The men of the Border Mountains did not make wood shields but wore woven rattan cuirasses for attack and defence (Tiesler 1984). The men of the upper Sepik basin east of the Border Mountains made and used wood shields for attack and defence. Like the central New Guinea shields, they were flat thin boards generally rectangular in shape, with some western Abau shields tending to ovoid. Whereas central New Guinea shields were cut from the centre of large logs, those of the upper Sepik were cut from the flat buttress roots of ficus trees. The carrying device was a rattan or fibre band fastened horizontally from a hole at each edge of the shield and a short vertical band from a hole at the top centre to the centre of the horizontal band. They were carried on the left shoulder to allow the use of the bow and arrows by the right hand, if right-handed (Fig. 4 c). At Tipas, at the mouth of the Yellow River, I was informed that the Bunyap (Ama or Sawiyano) of the West Range used pig skin and cassowary hide shields; Guddemi (1992:144) confirms that for an attack, the Sawiyano would use a shield ‘of pig skin (futono), large enough for two men to hide behind’. So far as I know, such a shield has not been seen, photographed, or collected but would have been similar to those of the Kwoma near Ambunti (Beran & Craig 2005, Figs 4.22, 23).

Figure 2. Abau shield (iben), Basis (Ambreimaki), with ‘Weialu’ (West Range) design, photo: 1972 BK8:01; Abau shields (iben), Wagu, with West Range designs, photos: 1972 BK8:07, BK8:08 (POM 79.1.522); Shield collected at ‘Mahanee, Yellow River’ by Ed Boylan, photo: Olaf Wipperfürth. Although no wood shields have been recorded from the Left May communities of the West Range, in 1972 I photographed three shields for sale in the Abau villages of Basis and Wagu, carved around 1970 with ‘the mountain peoples designs’ (Fig. 2 a-c). Another wood shield (Fig. 2 d), possibly also from a West Range community, was collected from ‘Mahanee, Yellow River’ (Beran & Craig 2005:77, Fig. 4.7). It does not look anything like a Yellow River shield and ‘Mahanee’ (Mahanei) is an Abau village on the Sepik several kilometres downstream from the mouth of the Simaiya River, on the middle reaches of which the Amto are settled. It also looks nothing like an Abau shield and therefore may have been brought to Mahanei from a settlement, possibly Musian-speaking, in the mountains to the south.

Figure 3. Amto shields (bli): POM 79.1.110; POM 79.1.111; POM 79.1.587. I am not aware of any old Amto shields although I collected three recently carved ones in 1973. One has a design related to Abau designs but there are also representations of lizards, which is not a feature of traditional Abau shields. Amto designs I obtained as paintings on paper also featured images of reptiles, birds and anthropomorphic spirits. On the north side of the Sepik River are the Busa and Nagatman-speaking communities. I am not aware of any shields of the Busa though it is likely they had them. Immediately east of the Busa are the Nagatman villages of Dila and Tila. In 1969 I collected one damaged shield at Dila and an intact shield at Tila (Fig. 4). Both were carved with designs similar to Abau shield designs.

Figure 4. Nagatman shields (zibu): Dila, Berlin VI 50392; Tila, Leiden 4477-244. Demonstration of use of shield at Tila; photo 1969 C4:6. Further north is the village of Nagitman where I found four old and damaged shields which I purchased and arranged to be repainted. Two of the shields (Fig. 5 a, b) are relatively narrow with designs markedly different from those on the other two, wider shields (Fig. 5 c, d). Five shields in the PNG National Museum (Fig. 6), purchased from the Catholic Mission, Wewak in 1970, were registered as ‘Green River’. They may well have been obtained at Green River but are certainly from a Nagatman community, most likely Nagitman. The very old and extremely damaged shield (Fig. 6 a) appears to have been a wider version of the shields Figs 6 b, c. The designs on the other two shields (Figs 6 d, e) are variations of the designs on Figs 5 a, b.

Figure 5. Shields (zibu), Nagitman: AM 64926; POM E4702; Leiden 4477-240; Berlin VI 50389.

Figure 6. Shields (zibu) attributed to Nagitman: POM E5405; POM E5408; POM E5409; POM E5407; POM 5406. Registered ‘Green River’ and purchased from the Catholic Mission, Wewak in 1970.

Figure 7. Kwomtari shields (imakuam), Guriaso: Berlin VI 50597, -8; Ak shields (yaukreki), Kwieftim: Berlin VI 50592, -3. The two Kwomtari shields (imakuam) Figs 7 a, b from Guriaso, 24 km NNE of Nagitman, have essentially the same design as three of the Nagitman shields (Fig. 6 a-c). I was told at Nagitman that they marry with Kwomtari people so it is likely that they were allies and shared their shield designs. The two shields of the Kwieftim (Ak speakers) are significantly different to those of the Kwomtari. The Kwieftim shield Fig. 7 d is more like those of the Namie in that the spirals on the Kwieftim shield turns outwards, like those of the Namie, and unlike those of the Nagatman that turn inwards. The blackened Kwieftim shield Fig. 7 c is divided into two sets of double spirals turning inwards, like the Basis (Abau) shield illustrated in Kelm 1966, Plate 205. The Awun were in conflict with the Namie and with the Bulowa in the Torricellis to the north (Kelm & Kelm 1980: 305). Of the two Abrau/Dabrau shields of the Awun, Fig. 8 a appears to be a recently carved shield (as at 1970) and with a design unlike any other shield I have seen. Fig. 8 b, however, is of the same design as a number of Namie shields, eg. Kelm 1966, Plates 199, 200 (‘Below Meander Mtn’ probably Panewai).³

Figure 8. Awun shields (yelei), Abrau/Dabrau: Berlin VI 50594, -5. See Kelm & Kelm 1980, Plates 28, 29. The Namie (named Lujere by Mitchell) fought with all neighbouring groups who were not Namie speakers (Mitchell 2024:204, Table 5) including the relatively distant May River Iwam. What is probably a Namie shield (Schuster 1968, Plate 30 – Basel Vb15933) was collected at Maui, an Iwam village on the Sepik River a few kilometres downstream from the mouth of the May River. It was probably captured in a fight between the Namie and the Iwam. Mitchell records a number of fights between the Lujere (Namie) and their neighbours (2024, Chapter 9).

Figure 9. Namie shields (wali/woli), Heathcote Collection, Ambunti, photo: 1969 M23:32. left to right: #68 ‘Yellow River’, #69 Tipas, #70 ‘Yellow River’. The older Namie shields (Figs 9; 10 a; 11; 12 a, c, d; 13 a, b, d; Kelm 1966, Plates 197-200) are mostly, but not all, carved with pairs of outward turning spirals at top and bottom and a horizontal dividing motif in the middle. Heathcote’s #69 from Tipas is similar in design to the shield from Schultze-Jena’s ‘Dorf 30’ (Kelm 1966, Plate 203) where the Abau village Wagu is located; #70 is unusual in departing from the general design rule of vertical symmetry; it is basically the left half of the design of the ‘Yellow River’ shield #68. Often the black raised lines enclose a figure-ground spiral (eg. Figs 10 a, 11 a, b, 12 d, 13 d). Otherwise, the black raised line is itself the spiral. Among the shields carved for sale (Figs 10 b-d, 12 b, 13 c), with the exception of Fig. 10 d, the adherence to the figure-ground convention is equivocal and more like the designs of the shields of central New Guinea. Figure 12 b is a traditional design except for the fish and crocodile figures. The names of the Namie design motifs are remarkably similar to those of the Mountain Ok. There is a variety of designs among the Namie shields reflecting the fact that there are more settlements than for most of their neighbours and therefore more extant shields; variety applies even more to the shields carved for sale. This can be observed also for the Abau living along the Sepik River and its tributaries upstream from Yellow River.

Figure 10. Namie shields (wali/woli), all Bapi: Basel Vb22969; Leiden, 4477-245; photo 1969 C6:20; POM E4701.

Figure 11. Namie shields (wali/woli): Yiwani, Basel Vb22970; Yiwani, Basel Vb22964; Wakau, AM E64932.

Figure 12. Namie shields (wali/woli): Naum, Leiden 4477-243; Nami, Berlin VI 50000; Nami, photo 1969 C6:14, POM E4704; probably Panewai, Museum of Victoria X32140, photo Jon Augier.

Figure 13. Namie shields (wali/woli): Yegerapi, Basel Vb22966; Yegerapi, Basel Vb22968; Yegerapi, photo 1969 C5:25; Yaru, Berlin VI 50596. The most downstream of the Sepik Abau villages is Wagu; Heathcote’s #67 (Fig. 14, left) is from there and the shield from ‘Uapuku’ (Schuster 1968, Plate 36) is almost certainly from there. The designs on two Nagitman shields (Fig. 5 c, d) are surprisingly similar.

Figure 14. Abau shields (iben), Heathcote Collection, Ambunti. Left: No Nr, ‘Green River’; #67 Wagu; photo 1969 M23:32. Right: all probably Idam Valley: #73; #74, POM 79.29.25; #75; photo 1969 M23:31. The shield from ‘The village on the lagoon below the mouth of the North River’, ie. Ambreimaki (Basis) (Kelm 1966, Plate 202) is similar to the Namie shield made for sale (Fig. 10 d) and Kelm 1966, Plate 204 from the same location is the same design as the distant Kwieftim shield Fig. 7 c. Kelm illustrates two shields (Plates 206, 207) from the mouth of the North River where Beimap is located; Plate 206 is of the same design as the Namie shields from Wakau (Fig. 11 c) and Yegerapi (Fig. 13 a), and Plate 207 is a minimalist version of several Namie shield designs. An even simpler version is the Bamblediam/Idam shield in the possession of CMML⁴ in 1969 (Fig. 15 c). Kelm illustrates two shields from above Grenzjager Biwaks (1966 Plates 209-2100, about where Bifrou is now located. Plate 209 is similar to the Yiwani/Namie shield Fig. 11 a; the design of the shield in Plate 210 (see Fig. 15 a) is echoed in the design of the Bifrou shield made for sale (Fig. 17 a) and of the old ‘Green River’ shield in Fig. 15 d.

Figure 15. Abau shields (iben): above Grenzjager Biwak, probably Bifrou, Berlin VI 41516 – Kelm 1966, Plate 210; Green River, CMML, probably Idam Valley, photo 1968 BM1:13; Bamblediam, Idam, CMML, photo 1969 C2:14; ‘Green River’, ex-Elizabeth Price, photo Cameron Bloom. The four shields from ‘Dorf III above Grenzjager-Biwaks’ (Kelm 1966, Plates 211-214), probably near present-day Mahanei, are each of different designs to one another. Plate 211 is a bolder version of the design of the Nagitman shield Fig. 6 c and the Kwomtari shields Fig. 7 a, b. The designs of the shields in Plates 212 and 213 are unique. Plates 214-220 from locations near Mahanei, Buna, Isu and Biaka show bold simple designs that adhere to the figure-ground convention. This is true also of the shield of Bamblediam/Idam Valley (Fig. 15 c). The three in the Heathcote collection that I attribute to the Idam Valley (Fig.14, right), share motifs with the Idam shields in Fig. 16 a, b; there is a great deal of variation in the designs on Idam shields. In 1973, I encouraged Idam men to paint shield designs on paper. There are 233 and it seems that I was unable to exhaust their repertoire.

Figure 16. Abau shields (iben): Antibi, Idam, photo 1973 BK16:30; Bamblediam, Idam, photo BK16:15, POM 79.1.588; Bamblediam, Idam, photo BK15:06, POM 79.1.123.

Figure 17. Abau shields (iben): Bifrou, photo 1969 C2:12, AM E64931; Bamblediam, Idam, photo 1968 C2:33, Leiden 4471-58; Isabu, Idam, photo 1968 2:17, Berlin VI 49795; Wauru, Yapsie (August) River, AM E64371.

Figure 18. Abau shields (iben): Kobararu, photo David Balmer 1968 D5:18; Baiwai, photo 1969 C2:6, Berlin VI 50395; Baiwai, Berlin VI 50396. Fig. 18 shows made-for sale shields with designs radically different to Abau traditional designs. The interlocking geometric meanders of the Kobararu shield and the animal (lizard? possum?) of the Baiwai shield have no precedents among Abau designs. Fig. 18 c is one of 21 shields with this design that I photographed in the Abau Sepik River villages of Baio, Baiwai and Bifrou (Craig 1976). Subsequently I was able to identify the source of these designs to be Yige’s father at Kambaramba on the lower Sepik, taught to Baio men by Yige and subsequently copied by men of Baiwai and Bifrou (Craig 1983). This survey of shields from the upper Sepik known to me has illustrated the relatively heterogenous nature of the designs on the shields, reflecting the heterogenous nature of the languages and cultures, the spread of particular designs among unrelated ethno-linguistic communities, and the talent for inventiveness and creativity unleashed by contact with the Western world. For a fuller context of war shields in the upper Sepik, see Beran & Craig 2005:75-77; Craig 1975, 2009, 2018a, b. References Beran, H. and Craig, B. eds. 2005. Shields of Melanesia. Adelaide: Crawford House Publishing. Craig, B. 1975. The Art Style of Yellow River, West Sepik District, New Guinea. Baessler-Archiv XXIII: 417-445. Craig, B. 1976. The Keram Style in the Abau Area of the Upper Sepik, New Guinea. Baessler-Archiv XXIV: 181-193. Craig, B. 1983. A Conversation with Yige. Postscript to ‘The Keram Style in the Abau Area of the Upper Sepik, New Guinea’. Baessler-Archiv XXXI: 351-355. Craig, B. 2009. Introduction to the Legends of the Abau of Idam Valley and of the Amto of Simaiya Valley. (www.uscngp.com/papers). Craig, B. 2018a. ‘Material Culture of the Upper Sepik’, Jnl de la Société des Océanistes 146: 189-201. Craig, B. 2018b. Addendum to ‘Material Culture of the Upper Sepik’ (www.uscngp.com/papers). Guddemi, P.V. 1992. We Came From This: Knowledge, Memory, Painting and “Play” in the Initiation Rituals of the Sawiyano of Papua New Guinea. PhD Thesis, University of Michigan. Kelm, H. 1966. Kunst vom Sepik II. Berlin: Museum für Völkerkunde. Kelm, A. and H. Kelm. 1980. Sago und Schwein. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. Laycock, D. 1973. Languages of the Sepik Region, Papua New Guinea. Pacific Linguistics, Series B, Nr 25; Map 1975, Series D, Nr 26. Canberra: Australian National University. Mitchell, W. E. 2024. A Witch’s Hand. Curing, Killing, Kinship, and Colonialism among the Lujere of New Guinea. Chicago: Hau Books (University of Chicago). Schuster, M. 1968. Farbe, Motiv, Funktion. Basel Museum für Völkerkunde. Tiesler, F. 1984. Die Kürasse Neuguineas. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Staatlichen Museums für Völkerkunde Dresden, Band 41:46-85, Abb.1-65, Map. 18 May 2024 Footnotes

¹. Museum registration numbers are identified by ‘Berlin’, ‘Leiden’, ‘AM’, ‘POM’, ‘Basel’ accordingly. All museum photographs by Andrew Fyfe. All other photographs by B. Craig (with index numbers) unless otherwise indicated.

². The Upper Sepik Central New Guinea Project (www.uscngp.com) provided access to data and shields collected by other researchers, also recorded by Andrew Fyfe.

³ The shields illustrated in Kelm 1966, Plates 197-220 were collected during the Grenzjager expedition of 1910 and the Kaiserin-Augusta Expedition of 1912-13.

⁴ Christian Missions in Many Lands at Green River.