Cheh Chot Putu was the son and would-be successor of the ulama Teungku Chot Putu, who for a time in the middle of the nineteenth century exercised an effective, though never formally conferred, authority over the III Mukims of Acheh. The younger Cheh Chot Putu figures in Snouck Hurgronje’s account as a cautionary example of the way in which the Achehnese tendency to honour the memory of a religious house could be transferred, with diminishing returns, to a son who lacked his father’s qualifications for the role he attempted to play.
His father’s authority in the III Mukims
The only known instance, within living memory at the time of writing, of the administration of the III Mukims by a single ruler was that of Teungku Chot Putu, who succeeded in attaining “some degree of authority there in the middle of the present century”. This expounder of the law derived from his piety, learning and severity “such an overwhelming influence over the three imeums and their subjects, that although not invested with any political power, he acted in fact as ruler of the Mukim Lhee”. Before his appearance, and after his death, the III Mukims returned to their normal self-governing condition, while still holding in due respect the tradition of their peculiar constitution. It is against this background that the career of his son must be read.
The son’s failure to inherit the role
Cheh Chot Putu, though “essentially a worldly man and no scholar”, inherited some of the respect paid to his father. He sought to convert that inherited respect into political authority — to play, in Snouck Hurgronje’s phrase, “the role of uleebalang of the III Mukims”. Such a transformation from religious to secular chief was not without parallel in Achehnese history: the Teungku Hamba ‘Alah of Silang had similarly passed on his authority over thirteen of the XXVI Mukims to his descendants, who in time exchanged the religious title of Teungku for the worldly one of Teuku Imeum Tungkob. But the experiment failed in the case of Cheh Chot Putu; his “efforts … have not been crowned with success”.
Significance in Achehnese political life
The case is illustrative of two recurring features of Achehnese public life as described by Snouck Hurgronje. First, religious authority, when it became hereditary, tended to lose its specifically religious character; and second, the translation of personal ascendancy into hereditary uleebalangship required not only the inherited reputation but also the personal qualities — piety, learning, severity, or worldly tact — on which the original reputation had rested. Where these qualities were absent, as in the case of Cheh Chot Putu, the hereditary claim could not be made good against the self-governing traditions of the mukims and the competing claims of neighbouring uleebalangs.
See Also
Source
The Achehnese, Vol. I, by Dr. C. Snouck Hurgronje, translated by A.W.S. O’Sullivan, indexed by R.J. Wilkinson. Leyden: E.J. Brill, 1906.
Cheh Chot Putu was the son and would-be successor of the ulama Teungku Chot Putu, who for a time in the middle of the nineteenth century exercised an effective, though never formally conferred, authority over the III Mukims of Acheh. The younger Cheh Chot Putu figures in Snouck Hurgronje’s account as a cautionary example of the way in which the Achehnese tendency to honour the memory of a religious house could be transferred, with diminishing returns, to a son who lacked his father’s qualifications for the role he attempted to play.
His father’s authority in the III Mukims
The only known instance, within living memory at the time of writing, of the administration of the III Mukims by a single ruler was that of Teungku Chot Putu, who succeeded in attaining “some degree of authority there in the middle of the present century”. This expounder of the law derived from his piety, learning and severity “such an overwhelming influence over the three imeums and their subjects, that although not invested with any political power, he acted in fact as ruler of the Mukim Lhee”. Before his appearance, and after his death, the III Mukims returned to their normal self-governing condition, while still holding in due respect the tradition of their peculiar constitution. It is against this background that the career of his son must be read.
The son’s failure to inherit the role
Cheh Chot Putu, though “essentially a worldly man and no scholar”, inherited some of the respect paid to his father. He sought to convert that inherited respect into political authority — to play, in Snouck Hurgronje’s phrase, “the role of uleebalang of the III Mukims”. Such a transformation from religious to secular chief was not without parallel in Achehnese history: the Teungku Hamba ‘Alah of Silang had similarly passed on his authority over thirteen of the XXVI Mukims to his descendants, who in time exchanged the religious title of Teungku for the worldly one of Teuku Imeum Tungkob. But the experiment failed in the case of Cheh Chot Putu; his “efforts … have not been crowned with success”.
Significance in Achehnese political life
The case is illustrative of two recurring features of Achehnese public life as described by Snouck Hurgronje. First, religious authority, when it became hereditary, tended to lose its specifically religious character; and second, the translation of personal ascendancy into hereditary uleebalangship required not only the inherited reputation but also the personal qualities — piety, learning, severity, or worldly tact — on which the original reputation had rested. Where these qualities were absent, as in the case of Cheh Chot Putu, the hereditary claim could not be made good against the self-governing traditions of the mukims and the competing claims of neighbouring uleebalangs.
See Also
Source
The Achehnese, Vol. I, by Dr. C. Snouck Hurgronje, translated by A.W.S. O’Sullivan, indexed by R.J. Wilkinson. Leyden: E.J. Brill, 1906.