"Is it really a Cockatoo?"

[Spunjer]

The absence of clear data is a persistent problem, but I think we need to be careful to avoid making assertions that are not based on solid documentation or reliable sources. Otherwise we add to the existing confusion.

Cheers,

Ian.

spot on, Ian! for this same reason why i take Cato's book with a grain of salt...
let's take the most commonly used term from his book: Kakatua. supposedly, the pommel on krises and barungs are representation of the cockatoo bird, or kakatua, as Cato called it. but is it, really?
there's one specie of cockatoo bird in the Philippines, and it's only found in certain parts of the Philippines. there were probably big population in Mindanao and Sulu a long time ago, but not anymore in this day and age. another thing is, why aren't cockatoos mentioned in any legends or sagas? or represented anywhere else in the Moros' ukkil art? for that matter, the term kakatua is not even a filipino word. i believe the term kakatua was a carryover from the 1920's and 1930's when weapon catalogs would refer to these as cockatoo (like) pommels.

[Ian]

spot on, Ian! for this same reason why i take Cato's book with a grain of salt...
let's take the most commonly used term from his book: Kakatua. supposedly, the pommel on krises and barungs are representation of the cockatoo bird, or kakatua, as Cato called it. but is it, really?
there's one specie of cockatoo bird in the Philippines, and it's only found in certain parts of the Philippines. there were probably big population in Mindanao and Sulu a long time ago, but not anymore in this day and age. another thing is, why aren't cockatoos mentioned in any legends or sagas? or represented anywhere else in the Moros' ukkil art? for that matter, the term kakatua is not even a filipino word. i believe the term kakatua was a carryover from the 1920's and 1930's when weapon catalogs would refer to these as cockatoo (like) pommels.I believe the word kakatua is of Malay origin and refers to the bird that we call a cockatoo. It is possible that the word has been passed down from its Malay origins and is applied correctly to barung and kris hilts. Even though cockatoos are no longer widespread in the Philippines, and there may be no history of cockatoos among their legends, the vestigial Malay term may well have persisted as these swords made their transition to the Philippines. Or it is possible that Cato or some other authority simply took a term used in other Malay cultures and applied it inappropriately to the Moro examples.

We can see many examples of both processes in ethnographic arms and armor. There are many examples of foreign words being incorporated into the Philippine dialects (bolo, daga, keris/kris, kelewang/klewang, parang, pisau, sumpit/sumpitan, etc.). There are also plenty of examples where outsiders have used completely alien terms to describe native weapons.

In regard to the latter, we talk about native weapons having fullers, clipped points, pommels, hilts, chisel grinds, bolsters, ferrules, ricassos, features "at forte", etc. None of these are terms used in the original cultures, but we all apply them and we readily understand what we are talking about because the Western European meaning of these terms is our common knowledge.

Once again, we can get caught up in the "name game." Alan Maisey is absolutely correct in warning us against engaging in this exercise, unless we are willing to delve deeply into the culture and history of the weapons and the people who use them. Even then, this may be a futile exercise because the meaning of some things has become lost or obscured by time.

Ian.

[Spunjer]

I believe the word kakatua is of Malay origin and refers to the bird that we call a cockatoo. It is possible that the word has been passed down from its Malay origins and is applied correctly to barung and kris hilts. Even though cockatoos are no longer widespread in the Philippines, and there may be no history of cockatoos among their legends, the vestigial Malay term may well have persisted as these swords made their transition to the Philippines. Or it is possible that Cato or some other authority simply took a term used in other Malay cultures and applied it inappropriately to the Moro examples.



Ian.
i'm still not sold on that, Ian. to blindly follow something that is totally irrelevant to the culture just doesn't make any sense. what would make more sense is if those pommels represent the fabled sarimanok, which has relevance to the culture. we see these on a lot of ukkils, or okirs. let me explain...
we always look at the pommel from this point of view

[Spunjer]

we could see how it resembles a bird's head. we could almost perceive the beak and the plume, but why is it that the middle part, the one we perceive as the eye, the shape stays the same, in that it has a somewhat triangular motif, regardless if it's a regular pommel, or the miniaturized version. the shape stays the same.
the Indonesians view their keris with the blade up. let's do that with the emphasis on the pommel...

[Spunjer]

...now it takes a whole new image. we can see the vestigial tail and head, and what we perceived as the eye becomes the wing. pretty neat, huh? i took the liberty in encircling the obvious parts

[Spunjer]

in the later part of the nineteenth century, when these pommels became even more spectacular, one could clearly see the sarimanok image; the head is more pronounced, and one could see the ruffled feathers on the tail.

[Spunjer]

Once again, we can get caught up in the "name game." Alan Maisey is absolutely correct in warning us against engaging in this exercise, unless we are willing to delve deeply into the culture and history of the weapons and the people who use them. Even then, this may be a futile exercise because the meaning of some things has become lost or obscured by time.

Ian.
that is true. but if the intention is way off, then it needs to be researched and corrected. as Moro weapons is concerned, a lot of collectors are pretty hang up on Cato's book. i understand that since his book is looked up as the final authority in this subject (moro weapons), a lot has been refuted since it came out, and ironically, it is with the advent of internet via e-books, emails and conversations with the people from the same region where these swords came from, museum who are more accommodating with their collections, etc... is it peer-reviewed? no. but then again, who are these so-called peers?

[Spunjer]

i would think this would be an interesting topic to discuss, but i guess it's too early in the year??? :D :D
just to reinterate, you said:
...Or it is possible that Cato or some other authority simply took a term used in other Malay cultures and applied it inappropriately to the Moro examples.
...
In regard to the latter, we talk about native weapons having fullers, clipped points, pommels, hilts, chisel grinds, bolsters, ferrules, ricassos, features "at forte", etc. None of these are terms used in the original cultures, but we all apply them and we readily understand what we are talking about because the Western European meaning of these terms is our common knowledge.


Ian.

in his book, cato wrote this (Moro Swords, p. 25):

All barung pommels, and many kris pommels, are modeled after the head of the cockatoo (known to the Malays as the "kakatua" or "kinadangag"). This magnificent crested parrot is native to the Southern Philippines and Indonesia. Its elaborately-feathered crest, curving beaks and stately regal bearing have captured the imagination of Moro artists for many centuries. The cockatoo motif became widely accepted throughout the South in a relatively short period of time.

Some Indonesian swords were fitted with pommels that are somewhat akin to the Moro kakatua. It is possible that early hilt makers in the Southern Philippines came into contact with the motif in the course of their trading and combative encounters with the Indonesians. Upon their return to the Morolands, artisans probably redesigned the motif, imbuing it with their own unique style and flavor.

To the Muslim Filipinos, the kakatua motif symbolizes lightness, and the ability to fly up into the heavens, leaving danger and death far behind.

as i've mentioned before, the cockatoo as a pommel motif has been used since the days of Bannerman et al. cato probably just went by this and elaborated with his own imagination.
granted, what i theorized is my imagination as well, reason i thought it would make an interesting topic for discussion...

[Rick]

Speaking for myself only .
I expect that this form of pommel is uniquely Philippine in origin .
I cannot recall encountering this form in Indonesian hilts I have seen; have others here ? :shrug:

[Ian]

Speaking for myself only .
I expect that this form of pommel is uniquely Philippine in origin .
I cannot recall encountering this form in Indonesian hilts I have seen; have others here ? :shrug:Rick:

I think this is a most difficult question to answer because the origins of the so-called kakatua hilt are probably lost in time and we may never know for sure. Certainly, the same form of hilt exists beyond the Philippines in other Malay cultures--it is often seen in N. Borneo, Sarawak, the Sultanate of Brunei, and even on some pieces from what is now mainland Malaysia. I don't believe we can say with any degree of confidence where this form of hilt originated.

It is conceivable that in the northward migration and transformation of the Indonesian keris to the Moro kris that it underwent changes along the way. It would not surprise me if, for example, the kakatua style hilt actually arose in the Sultanate of Brunei which held sway over the Muslims of the Philippines for a century or two, before and after the arrival of the Spanish.

Ian.

[Ian]

Ron:

Thanks for opening a new thread on this subject. I was thinking of doing the same, but I'm pleased you beat me to it.

The sarimanok story and the evidence you present is definitely thought provoking, and I can see where you are coming from in trying to identify a more Moro origin for this feature.

There seem to be a number of problems with this theory, however.

First, the bird you describe by inverting the hilt is anatomically incorrect with respect to the wing structure. And it is not just on this example, it is on every example I could find in my files and online. The rounded part of a bird's wing (represented by the small circle or spiral) is actually the "wrist" of the forelimb. When a bird's wing is folded up, it is extended backwards from the "shoulder," flexed at the "elbow," and flexed again at the "wrist," with the "fingers" pointing towards the rear of the bird. This can be seen in the X-ray picture attached below where the wing has been partly unfolded. I don't think Moro artists would have perpetuated such an inaccuracy for centuries without someone noticing the mistake and correcting it. I have attached an artist's depiction of the sarimanok and you can see the correct position of the spiral/circle.

Second, the sarimanok story is a legend mainly related to the Maranao people of Mindanao. It seems a stretch to think that this relatively minor group of sultanates in the 17th and 18th centuries would have such a profound effect on the style of weapons throughout Muslims in the Philippines, N. Borneo, Brunei and mainland Malaysia. The usual pattern of influence is from top down, not bottom up.

While it's a great idea and interesting story, I don't think it is the source of the hilt style that Cato called kakatua.

Ian.

[Ian]

While on the subject of kakatua hilts, it occurred to me to think about the word barong (or barung as it is pronounced in the Tausug dialect) and what it might derive from. I have found no discussion of this subject written in English.

Apart from the familiar leaf-shaped chopper favored by the peoples of the Sulu Archipelago, there is also the barong Tagalog (a man's shirt), and barong-barong, a Tagalog word meaning a temporary shelter or hut. The latter is interesting because it may be a transliteration of the Indonesian word burung-burung, which also means a shelter or hut.

So, we have an interesting similarity between the word barong (pronounced barung by the Tausug) and burung in Indonesian. One could posit a slight transformation of the word burung --> barung --> barong. And what does burung mean in Indonesian? It means "bird."

Is it possible that the whole sword is named "bird" because it resembles a bird, with the blade being the main part of the body, the handle being the neck, and the pommel the crest and beak?

In Indonesian the term for cockatoo is barung kakatua. Are we looking at a sword that depicts the cockatoo? Perhaps the pictures below help. Or maybe I'm just full of too much Christmas and New Year good cheer. ;)

Ian.

[Timo Nieminen]

While on the subject of kakatua hilts, it occurred to me to think about the word barong (or barung as it is pronounced in the Tausug dialect) and what it might derive from. I have found no discussion of this subject written in English.

I naively assumed it probably derives from "parang". I haven't seen an etymology, though.

There has been some, but rather brief, discussion of this: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1817

(And while on the topic, "keris" -> "kalis"?)

[A. G. Maisey]

Ian, just a little clarification on language.

In Indonesian "burung-burung" means "birds". Doubling the noun gives a multiple, thus "burung" is "bird".

The word for "hut" in Indonesian is "gubuk". (can also be "pondok").

The word "barung-barung" (not burung-burung) refers specifically to the hut that is raised on stilts in the middle of a rice field to watch the crop; it can also be used to refer to a really, really degraded shelter, what we might call a hovel in English. I think it can also mean a stand, like a roadside stand, but I'm not sure of this, the more usual word for a stand or a stall or a booth would be "warung".

The word "barong" does occur in both Indonesian and Javanese where it has a number of meanings depending upon context.

The word for "cockatoo" in Indonesian is simply "kakatua", but the generic "burung" can be used with the specific noun "kakatua" in speech or in writing.

There is a children's traditional song:-

Burung kakatua hinggap di jendela
Burung kakatua hinggap di jendela
repeat
repeat

Nenek sudah tua, tinggal gigi dua
repeat

Burung kakatua -- etc, etc, etc

it goes on forever, with improvised verses.

[Spunjer]

thanks for everyone's participation so far...
Alan beat me to it. also, isn't it pronounced as "boo-roong" in Indonesian? OTOH, the weapon that we are all so familiar with is pronounced as "brr-oong" in Tausug.
anyway, back to the sarimanok

Ron:

First, the bird you describe by inverting the hilt is anatomically incorrect with respect to the wing structure. And it is not just on this example, it is on every example I could find in my files and online. The rounded part of a bird's wing (represented by the small circle or spiral) is actually the "wrist" of the forelimb. When a bird's wing is folded up, it is extended backwards from the "shoulder," flexed at the "elbow," and flexed again at the "wrist," with the "fingers" pointing towards the rear of the bird. This can be seen in the X-ray picture attached below where the wing has been partly unfolded. I don't think Moro artists would have perpetuated such an inaccuracy for centuries without someone noticing the mistake and correcting it. I have attached an artist's depiction of the sarimanok and you can see the correct position of the spiral/circle.

if we go by that, you're right, in that it's not anatomically correct. couple things i need to point out.
first: the pommel, as with anything else, is in okir/ukkil fashion, hence it wasn't meant to look like the actual thing, in reverence to the tenets of Islam.
second: the sarimanok you've pointed out as an example is a modern rendition. when i went to the National Museum in Manila last year, i noticed something curious. the sarimanok carvings (non-contemporary) that were in display are in one particular pose: in that the wings are spread out, like they're gliding. furthermore, looking at old pictures of sarimanok carvings, it was represented in this particular pose. this further strengthened my theory. you mentioned that the carvings wasn't anatomically correct. you're right; that's if the bird is at rest. but i believe that not unlike the carvings, the sarimanok represented on the pommel is in the same position, as in wing spread apart, like it's soaring. looking at the pictures i've attached, please note that on the triangular part of the pommel, more often than not, it's thinner towards the front than it is in the back. that would make more sense on how it's represented in ukkil.

[Spunjer]

here's something else. attached are images of a couple junggayan pommels. notice the open beak that is common on these types.
now the question would be, why would the craftsman go from (blade down) designed pommel, then turn it right side up to make it more spectacular.

[Spunjer]

on your second point, you said:

Ron:

Second, the sarimanok story is a legend mainly related to the Maranao people of Mindanao. It seems a stretch to think that this relatively minor group of sultanates in the 17th and 18th centuries would have such a profound effect on the style of weapons throughout Muslims in the Philippines, N. Borneo, Brunei and mainland Malaysia. The usual pattern of influence is from top down, not bottom up.

While it's a great idea and interesting story, I don't think it is the source of the hilt style that Cato called kakatua.

Ian.

yes, it is of Maranao origin, but why would that be a stretch? it would be safe to assume that the moro kris as we know it didn't evolve to its present size (or close to it) after tangling with the spaniards in the 17th century. Maranaos are next door neighbors to the Maguindanaos, Sultan Kudarat's realm. meanwhile, Ilanuns where in the service of the Tausugs. not to mention, we're not talking a style of weapon, rather just a part of a particular weapon.
looking at how different Indonesian cultures have somewhat a particular type of pommel on their keris, in a way giving them a cultural identity, why not the Moros?

[Spunjer]

here's a plus. picked this kris up a couple of years ago. this particular piece explains an old belief that predate Islam. as you may well know, we don't adhere strictly to the mother religion, catholics and muslims, hence ours is referred to as, Folk Catholicism, and to our brothers and sisters in the south Folk Islam. that was covered in the thread by migueldiaz:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=16375&highlight=design
i will explain the ukkil and what it represents, so i split it into three parts: A, B, and C
A represents the sarinaga, or naga
B represents the earth realm
C represents the sarimanok

another thing; i've never seen a representation of kakatua in ukkil, or okir, for that matter...

[Ian]

Ian, just a little clarification on language.

In Indonesian "burung-burung" means "birds". Doubling the noun gives a multiple, thus "burung" is "bird".

The word for "hut" in Indonesian is "gubuk". (can also be "pondok").

The word "barung-barung" (not burung-burung) refers specifically to the hut that is raised on stilts in the middle of a rice field to watch the crop; it can also be used to refer to a really, really degraded shelter, what we might call a hovel in English. I think it can also mean a stand, like a roadside stand, but I'm not sure of this, the more usual word for a stand or a stall or a booth would be "warung".

The word "barong" does occur in both Indonesian and Javanese where it has a number of meanings depending upon context.

The word for "cockatoo" in Indonesian is simply "kakatua", but the generic "burung" can be used with the specific noun "kakatua" in speech or in writing.

There is a children's traditional song:-

Burung kakatua hinggap di jendela
Burung kakatua hinggap di jendela
repeat
repeat

Nenek sudah tua, tinggal gigi dua
repeat

Burung kakatua -- etc, etc, etc

it goes on forever, with improvised verses.Alan, thank you so much for the clarification. I have little familiarity with Indonesian--perhaps enough for the marketplace. My Filipino is a little better. Relying on dictionaries and online sources is a poor substitute for fluency. :(

[A. G. Maisey]

The way Indonesian is used varies a bit from place to place, but if we need to use a dictionary to access standard meanings, there is really only one that's any good:- Echols & Shadily, English-Indonesian, Indonesian-English, in the old editions both were in a single volume, in the newer editions there are two separate volumes.

But for keris related things, Javanese is in most cases more relevant.

[Ian]

...you mentioned that the carvings wasn't anatomically correct. you're right; that's if the bird is at rest. but i believe that not unlike the carvings, the sarimanok represented on the pommel is in the same position, as in wing spread apart, like it's soaring. looking at the pictures i've attached, please note that on the triangular part of the pommel, more often than not, it's thinner towards the front than it is in the back. that would make more sense on how it's represented in ukkil.The carvings are not anatomically correct if the bird is in flight or at rest. I cannot see an anatomical equivalent to the well defined circle or spiral in the position shown, whether the bird is at rest or with the wings extended.

Furthermore, if you look at the soft tissues of the bird in the X-ray I showed, you will see that the shoulders and chest are the broadest part of the body and it tapers towards the tail. The folded wings are thinnest towards the tail end. I'm not sure what to make of your observation, which seems to suggest the opposite.

yes, it is of Maranao origin, but why would that be a stretch? it would be safe to assume that the moro kris as we know it didn't evolve to its present size (or close to it) after tangling with the spaniards in the 17th century. Maranaos are next door neighbors to the Maguindanaos, Sultan Kudarat's realm. meanwhile, Ilanuns where in the service of the Tausugs. not to mention, we're not talking a style of weapon, rather just a part of a particular weapon.
looking at how different Indonesian cultures have somewhat a particular type of pommel on their keris, in a way giving them a cultural identity, why not the Moros?The appearance of the so-called kakatua style has not been dated reliably to my knowledge, but I believe that it almost certainly predated the 19th century C.E. At this time the Maranao, Maguindanao and Ilanum were mostly poorly organized, in conflict among themselves, and subordinate to the more powerful Brunei and Sulu sultanates. Moreover, the weapon most associated with the so-called kakatua style hilt, the barong/barung, was not part of their culture. The wider use of this hilt style beyond the Moro homelands suggests to me that the source was likely to be more powerful and central to the Islamic peoples of SE Asia than a series of small and inferior sultanates on the periphery of the Asian Islamic world.

Ian.

[David]

The carvings are not anatomically correct if the bird is in flight or at rest. I cannot see an anatomical equivalent to the well defined circle or spiral in the position shown, whether the bird is at rest or with the wings extended.

Furthermore, if you look at the soft tissues of the bird in the X-ray I showed, you will see that the shoulders and chest are the broadest part of the body and it tapers towards the tail. The folded wings are thinnest towards the tail end. I'm not sure what to make of your observation, which seems to suggest the opposite.

Ian, i am not fully committed to any conclusion here, but you do seem to be continuing along this line without acknowledging Ron's point on this, that there is absolutely no reason why this depiction should be "anatomically correct" in the first place and that in fact it would be somewhat counter to Islamic law if it were. As a form of okir/ukkil any actual real-life forms would be highly stylized, wouldn't they? I don't think we can expect realism is such design and i can't see how we can use such false expectation as a debate point. What i believe Ron was attempting to point out about the thickness of the "wing" section being wider towards the tail is that it is a stylized form that implies the wings are outstretched in flight, not resting at the bird's sides, so in that scenario the wings must appear further out from the body of the bird nearer the tail.

[Ian]

David:

Thank you. Ron, is indeed absolutely correct in his comment about ukil and okir work and the necessary abstractness of Islamic art in representing living objects. And Ron, I am sorry to have not acknowledged that earlier.

My comments about accuracy in depiction come from 50+ years as an avid birdwatcher, and there were several things about Ron's description of this bird that were not necessarily abstractions but just seemed wrong. It was as though the body and wings were represented backwards. Then it occurred to me that perhaps he has the head and tail at the wrong ends. So I took Ron's pics and reworked then as below. Flipping the hilt upright, and changing the head and tail orientation yields a "stylized bird" that I could recognize as a fancy chicken (manok), with the body proportions approximately correct.

I have a great respect for the quality of carving found on many Maranao pieces, especially the high end work such as appears on Ron's junggayang hilt. Therefore, I was surprised by the apparent inaccuracies, even allowing for the abstraction that was necessarily introduced.

Ron's original interpretation may well be correct. The answer probably lies with those who create these works, although the original intent may be lost in time.

Ian.

[VANDOO]

IN EARLY TIMES PRE- ISLAM THERE WERE MANY ANIMIST BELIEFS AMONG MANY TRIBES WIDE SPREAD THRU-OUT THE REGION. MANY OF THE DESIGNS MAY HAVE STILL HELD POWER IN THE BELIEFS OF THE PEOPLE EVEN AFTER THEY HAD TO CHANGE THEIR OLD WAYS AND BELIEFS DUE TO THE NEW BELIEFS AND LAWS BROUGHT BY NEW RULERS AND RELIGIONS. OFTEN THESE OLD BELIEFS FIND A WAY TO LINGER ON AND ADAPT. HEADHUNTING ENDED BUT OFTEN CEREMONIES AND STORIES STILL PERSISTED AND OTHER HEADS SUBSTITUTED FOR THE REAL THING MONKEYS, WOODEN LIKENESS, ECT.
I KNOW OF NO STORIES OF THE COCKATOO BEING SACRED, GOOD LUCK OR POWERFUL IN ANY OF THE OLD TRIBAL BELIEFS IN MALAYSIA, BORNEO OR THE PHILIPPINES. THE HORNBILL BIRDS HAD POWER IN ALL OF THESE PLACES AND FIGURED IN LEGENDS, FOLKLORE, CEREMONIES, HEADHUNTING AND COSTUMES EVEN UP TO THE PRESENT. SO I WOULD THINK THE HORNBILL WOULD BE A MORE LIKELY CANDIDATE IF THE DESIGN REPRESENTS A BIRD AT ALL. THE FEATHERS AND SKULLS OF VARIOUS HORNBILL ARE IMPORTANT PARTS OF DAYAK WAR CLOAKS AND HATS AND CARVED EARRINGS. THE FEATHERS AND SKULLS ARE USED IN MALAYSIA AS WELL AS THE PHILIPPINES TOO. HERE ARE 4 PICTURES OF DAYAK CARVINGS REPRESENTING THE HORNBILL. AND 4 PICTURES FROM THE PHILIPPINES ILONGOT WEARING A PANGLAO HEADRESS. 2 PICTURES OF HEADRESS AND A PIRA SWORD I ALWAYS THOUGHT LOOKED LIKE A HORNBILL IN FLIGHT.

[A. G. Maisey]

This comment is not intended to contribute to any understanding of what the pommel form under discussion may represent, I am making only a general comment that may assist a little in understanding the position of birds in S.E. Asian cultures.

In all of maritime S.E. Asia birds play a very important role in societal structure, belief systems, burial rites, and virtually all other aspects of culture and society. Probably a similar situation exists in mainland S.E.Asia, but I have not looked at these cultures and societies in any depth.

The bird in general, and sometimes in particular, such as is the case with the cockatoo and the hornbill, are seen as occupying a position between the material world and the spirit world.

However, birds in general are seen as only one half of a cultural pair, the other half is the serpent.

Understood as a pair the bird and the serpent can then be seen as symbolic of all the hierarchies upon which S.E. Asian cultures and societies are based. The dualism represented by the serpent and the bird penetrates all aspects of S.E. Asian belief systems and life. A moment's thought and a minimal knowledge of the S.E. Asian cultures ad societies will provide more than sufficient examples of this.

Consider:- seen world : unseen world; the underground : the heavens; senior status (in all its forms) : junior status ( in all its forms); masculinity : femininity; dry season : wet season; dark : light; ruler : servant.

All these things are mutually dependent, one upon the other:- dark cannot exist without light, man cannot exist without woman, thus the existence of each maintains cosmic balance.

The serpent and the bird are the foundation symbols of this dualism upon which the systems that hold S.E. Asian cultures and societies together are based. These symbols penetrate all thought, perhaps not as conscious thought, but most certainly as a constant part of the sub-conscious.

When we discuss keris, or weapons, or any other part of the physical culture of any S.E. Asian society, we cannot really come to terms with the things that may interest us unless we first come to terms with the basic fabric of the culture and of the society that has produced that thing.

Something to think about:-

have you ever wondered why the dominant hilt forms associated with the keris are either ancestor related or bird related?

the true keris is a cosmic symbol, thus just as the blade represents one part of a duality, the hilt represents the other part of the duality.

[Spunjer]

This comment is not intended to contribute to any understanding of what the pommel form under discussion may represent, I am making only a general comment that may assist a little in understanding the position of birds in S.E. Asian cultures.

In all of maritime S.E. Asia birds play a very important role in societal structure, belief systems, burial rites, and virtually all other aspects of culture and society. Probably a similar situation exists in mainland S.E.Asia, but I have not looked at these cultures and societies in any depth.

The bird in general, and sometimes in particular, such as is the case with the cockatoo and the hornbill, are seen as occupying a position between the material world and the spirit world.

However, birds in general are seen as only one half of a cultural pair, the other half is the serpent.

Understood as a pair the bird and the serpent can then be seen as symbolic of all the hierarchies upon which S.E. Asian cultures and societies are based. The dualism represented by the serpent and the bird penetrates all aspects of S.E. Asian belief systems and life. A moment's thought and a minimal knowledge of the S.E. Asian cultures ad societies will provide more than sufficient examples of this.

Consider:- seen world : unseen world; the underground : the heavens; senior status (in all its forms) : junior status ( in all its forms); masculinity : femininity; dry season : wet season; dark : light; ruler : servant.

All these things are mutually dependent, one upon the other:- dark cannot exist without light, man cannot exist without woman, thus the existence of each maintains cosmic balance.

The serpent and the bird are the foundation symbols of this dualism upon which the systems that hold S.E. Asian cultures and societies together are based. These symbols penetrate all thought, perhaps not as conscious thought, but most certainly as a constant part of the sub-conscious.

When we discuss keris, or weapons, or any other part of the physical culture of any S.E. Asian society, we cannot really come to terms with the things that may interest us unless we first come to terms with the basic fabric of the culture and of the society that has produced that thing.

Something to think about:-

have you ever wondered why the dominant hilt forms associated with the keris are either ancestor related or bird related?

the true keris is a cosmic symbol, thus just as the blade represents one part of a duality, the hilt represents the other part of the duality.

^^^this
thanks for a very clear explanation, Alan. which would make even more sense on why the sarimanok (pommel) would be paired up with the sarinaga (blade).
the ukkil is very abstract, to the point where there's no logical similarity with what it is being represented. Ian, on your last post, i've never thought of it like that. thanks! if you think about it though, going by Alan's explanation on the belief on duality, the pommel could be something like an ambigram...
vandoo, regarding hornbills (called Kalaw), i do believe that they are sacred among the Mountain Province tribes, but not among the Moro tribes. i'm not sure about specific Lumad tribes.

[Battara]

As far as my research shows, the Lumad tribes do not give very special prominence to birds.

[Ian]

This moro kris just finished online and it presents another hilt version that might represent a cockatoo in a different manner. The silhouette of the hilt certainly looks like the outline of a cockatoo head and crest.

Ian

[Spunjer]

possibility, although the curves upfront resembling a silhouette of a cockatoo could be coincidental as well... i had a similar kris a couple years ago that has the same type of pommel. notice how the curve on mine is totally different. looks like the design is random. any other example of this style of pommel for comparison? :shrug:

[Spunjer]

so 3 years later and i guess no one else has a similar type of pommel...

moving along, i bid on this kris last night just because i don't have this type of pommel in my collection. what's interesting is, instead of going about in making it as an abstract sarimanok, this one is realistic. i just hope whoever won that piece would post some close up pictures once it's all cleaned up

[Tim Simmons]

Really interesting thread. Subtle and abstract bird forms and motives are also found in what is known as Island Melanesia, Solomons ect . It is possible that in some places the origin for this may be lost but the forms are perpetuated just out of tradition.

ps, could there be any relation to Garuda? even slightly?

any thoughts
https://roguegaruda.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/islamic-conversion-theories-in-indonesia-a-li/

[Ian]

Hi Ron.

That's an interesting hilt. The sword appears to be Sulu in origin but the sarimanok tradition is Maranao--something that would need reconciling.

Of course, the bird depicted could be something else, such as the Palawan peacock pheasant, a beautiful bird that I had the pleasure of seeing on a visit to northern Palawan to visit the caves.

Ian.

Palawan peacock pheasant
.

[Spunjer]

Tim,
In Sulu folktale or narrative or katakata, there's a creature called Sumayang Galura (the Soaring Garuda), a "giant bird whose lair lies atop a towering tree one meter away from the sky" (per Gerard Rixhon, Sulu Studies). the imaginary Galura is a mythical symbol of the brute or beastly power (Amilbangsa, Ukkil, Visual Arts of the Sulu Archipelago). it doesn't really describe this fantastic beast other than it's half giant and half eagle with the body and limbs of a man..

Ian,
ok, just for the sake of argument, i'll go with this for now:
The sword appears to be Sulu in origin but the sarimanok tradition is Maranao--something that would need reconciling.
you do realize that although the sarimanok is prevalent in the Maranao culture, they don't have a monopoly of this particular legendary creature? again in the book Ukkil, Visual Arts of the Sulu Archipelago, there are pictures of this creature, in ukkil form, on Sunduks, or grave markers, brasswares, blanket, etc. so why not on a kalis?
as far as the kris itself: the problem i'm having with this line of thinking, as in "the sword appears to be Sulu in origin" is this; you're insinuating the origin of this particular blade as Sulu, which is based on Cato's theory. i understand that that's the only reference we can go by in regards to classification, but the bottom line is, it's just a theory. if you use that as a guideline, it becomes stagnant. let's look at the material that's being used on that. it appears to be made out of carabao horn. below are pictures of a kris that have a similar pommel motif: again, a sarimanok. i've handled this in person, and yes, the pommel is carved out of a carabao horn. now there's one tribe that's known for using this material: the Yakans. you can see that on their piras.
a peacock? okay...
so what happened to the cockatoo?

[Ian]

... you're insinuating the origin of this particular blade as Sulu, which is based on Cato's theory. i understand that that's the only reference we can go by in regards to classification, but the bottom line is, it's just a theory ...Ron,

Being the only published theory, that is indeed all we really have to go on. Some people may have knowledge that is different, but until it is put out there for discussion and the basis of it checked out, then there is nothing else to discuss. Cato described his methodology and, while not perfect, it is not unlike many other ethnographic studies--collect and catalog examples, interview people from the culture, try to identify key informants, research the historical records, etc.

The fact that Cato was from a completely different culture does not negate his contribution. After all, a great deal of excellent ethnographic research and anthropology was reported by people who were not from the culture under study. I have discussed Cato's work with a number of Filipino collectors who hold it in low regard. I have even been told that a 'cano could never understand the complexities of Moro culture. However, neither those individuals nor others have published an alternative narrative, and Cato's ideas stand unchallenged until they do.

The "just a theory" idea implies that "anything-can-be-anything," which reduces to "we-know-nothing." Theories are a way of proposing testable hypotheses, and Cato provides ideas that are testable if we can find old provenanced pieces that could confirm or refute his proposals.

On the subject of this thread, I'm very comfortable with the idea that more than one type of bird can be represented on Moro hilts. It doesn't have to be only a cockatoo, or a sarimanok, or whatever. What we started out discussing was whether the familiar kakatua hilt, in its various forms, was indeed meant to represent a cockatoo or something else.

I think it can be agreed that the so-called kakatua style, or at least a similar antecedent, has been present for several centuries on hilts from the Malay archipelago, northern Borneo, and the southern Philippines. This is not a peculiarly Moro trait. Cato, based on his Moro informants, argues for the cockatoo. One way to test this idea would be to go to other geographic areas where this form has been seen and ask what it is called there.

Looking at stylistic interpretations of birds carved on hilts is probably not going to take us any further in knowing what bird(s) are represented. We need data from people who know what these are actually meant to be, from all parts of the Malay world in which they are found. Until that is known we really cannot say with any confidence what they are supposed to be. Cato's proposal stands, or is an open question if you prefer, until it is comprehensively disproven.

Ian.

[Spunjer]

Being the only published theory, that is indeed all we really have to go on.

wrong. anything can be researched. specially nowadays :)

Some people may have knowledge that is different, but until it is put out there for discussion and the basis of it checked out, then there is nothing else to discuss.

in my defense, that's what i thought i was doing when i started this thread...

The fact that Cato was from a completely different culture does not negate his contribution. After all, a great deal of excellent ethnographic research and anthropology was reported by people who were not from the culture under study. I have discussed Cato's work with a number of Filipino collectors who hold it in low regard. I have even been told that a 'cano could never understand the complexities of Moro culture.

i'm not really sure where that came from, but him being an American (or 'cano as you call it) has nothing to do with it. kinda myopic, don't you think? i'm not convinced with some of what he wrote, so i did my own research. it wasn't that hard. incidentally, a lot of what i used during my research were books written by westerners:
Blair/Robertson, Scott, Rixhon, Kiefer, Cowie, etc.
of course, the internet (lots of e-books floating around offered by universities), and correspondence with Moro scholars

Theories are a way of proposing testable hypotheses, and Cato provides ideas that are testable if we can find old provenanced pieces that could confirm or refute his proposals.

i believe that was my intention when i started this thread.

[David]

Sorry Ian, but i'm with Ron on this one. Sure, Cato is pretty much all we have to work with and frankly i don't know what he's gotten right and what he's gotten wrong. All of it, some of it, none of it? I do think to is fair to use Cato as our guide, it being pretty much all we have published to go on, but you act as if being published adds automatic credibility and respectability to his ideas. Correct me if i am wrong, but Moro Sword isn't some academic treatise that has been tested by an academic peer group in some major university. What was Cato's background beyond his own collecting interest (honestly, i'm asking, i don't really know). Obviously this work was approved by his publisher, Graham Brash, but that doesn't mean they fact checked his work carefully, something that would be very difficult to do given the subject and the lack of other written works on the topic. I don't quite see why you place so much importance on the fact that this is the only published work on the subject and so little importance on the testimony of native Filipino collectors who dismiss Cato. How can you dismiss them solely on the fact that they have never published their own thoughts and theories. Really, anyone can publish a book these days. That doesn't make those books all worth reading.
Ron IS putting his theory out there for discussion right here in our forum. I find quite a bit of what he has to say sound. I don't think we should shut down the discussion simply because there re no published works to support his theories.

[Battara]

Although I may not completely agree with Ron's thesis, I will have to say that it is a possibility. I completely agree that the kakatua pommel for junggayan pommels is incorrect and that it is more likely a sarimanok.

I also agree with the Galura idea, especially since it was an old Hindu (12 century) import (Garuda) from India through Indonesia and Indian travelers. In fact, there is even a Moro version of the Indian Ramayana.

On the other hand, Cato probably had different sources for his information that what we have now. I have been informed that Cato might now regret not having the other sources of information and thus recognizes that some modifications to his book are in order. What we have here is not a repudiation of Cato, but modifications to his work, which happens to all scholarly and scientific endeavors with the passing of time.

[Rick]

Does the Cockatoo hold any notable place in the folklore of the Moro societies?

[Battara]

Of the cockatoo I am not sure. But I do know that the sarimanok (a type of mythical stylized rooster) is important to the Moro world.

Note also that the ferocity of cock/rooster fighting is not lost on Moro culture and is a great source for gambling.

[Oliver Pinchot]

I have a great fondness for the Moro aesthetic, however I am not a specialist.
Therefore, I can state objectively that Ron has taken a thoroughly valid academic approach; he made a straightforward thesis, and supported it well.

I met Bob Cato years ago. I believe he was an educator at that time; I think he would respect Ron's research here.

[Ian]

Ron,

I am not trying to disparage the ideas you propose or suggest that they are without merit. I apologize if I gave you that impression. Rather I'm trying to understand the basis for your thoughts and how they account for certain facts as we know them.

After 50+ years of reviewing theses, articles submitted for publication, and grant applications, I'm reading your ideas in a similar manner: What are you proposing? What are your sources of new and old information? What data do you have? How will you test your ideas? One does not have to be a trained academic to use the tools of research. Robert Elgood's works are a good model to follow.

The contributions of Robert Cato to the literature on Moro swords are not limited to his book. He has four publications dating from 1991 to 1996, and these are listed in TD Rogers, An Annotated Bibliography of Indonesian, Filipino & Malay Edged Weapons, Zwartenkot Art Books: Lieden, 2015 (citation numbers 599–602).
Cato R. The Moros and their swords. Inside Kung-Fu 16(12): 52–55, 82 (1989).
Cato R. Islamic swords of the Southern Philippines. Arts of Asia 21(1): 104–123, 1991.
Cato R. Moro swords, battle blades of a people. Blade, December 1993: 86–87.
Cato R. Moro Swords. Graham Brash: Singapore, 1996.
I have copies of his book and of the Arts of Asia article, but have not read the other two. I believe at least one of these (Arts of Asia) is a peer reviewed publication, and I suspect that there were varying degrees of editorial review for his other writings on this subject--it would be unusual for an editor of a reputable publication not to perform some type of review. So Mr Cato's work has probably been subjected to review by people familiar with the topic and has met with their approval. David's comment that anyone can write a book is true if we are talking about small printings of self-published works funded by the author. Getting someone else to publish your work with large numbers of colored pictures, however, is not something everyone can do.

Because of the review and scrutiny frequently paid to published articles, they carry more weight than, say, blogs or other opinion pieces (such as EEWRS comments) that are posted online. Generally, blogs and opinions are not supported by references or objective data, whereas well reviewed articles will include these and other features that add credibility to the author's thinking.

As I see it, Mr Cato presently has the high ground in his descriptions of Moro weapons. To refute things he has said means being more thorough and accurate. For example, I don't think Cato cited all of his local sources of information. Some may have requested anonymity, but that is something that should have been stated because unattributed statements can be worth very little (as they cannot be verified). A better study would cite key informants and indicate their expertise.

Ron, I think you have the germ of a good idea. In offering comments about what you have said, I'm not trying to win a debate and I don't necessarily disagree with your idea. I am trying to help you convince me that you are right.

Ian

[Ian]

Does the Cockatoo hold any notable place in the folklore of the Moro societies?Rick,

Alan Maisey commented earlier that the cockatoo had a strong symbolic meaning in the Indonesian Archipelago and Malaysia, but he did not know about the significance in Moroland.

Ian.

[kai]

Peer review is a straw man - physics is doing fine with much of its academic publishing being done without traditional prior peer review for decades already. And in just about any academic discipline you'll be able to find deplorable "scholarship" having been published after "approval" via academic peer review. And that is before the ugly rise of predatory "academic" journals with peer review of very questionable quality during the last decade or so...

Review done by a commercial non-academic publisher is bound to be quite another kettle of fish, too.

I thank Bob Cato for his efforts and sacrifice in getting his book published. Apparently he was a very dedicated collector and, with publishing his ideas, did more for promoting Moro craftsmanship than most of us. However, I fail to see his book as an academic endeavour: Hardly any sources are given except a few examples shown in pictures (usually without any provenance, discussion, etc.) and limited literature citations; pretty much the data base is just missing. Obviously, the earlier journal articles were leading up to the book - apart from a few pics, there's hardly any additional data.

He put out his ideas and these hypotheses can be falsified/modified by additional data and ongoing discussions. I believe the contributions on this forum are certainly very valuable and can be considered being on par with Cato's early attempt. Fair game IMHO...

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Peer review is a straw man - physics is doing fine with much of its academic publishing being done without traditional prior peer review for decades already. And in just about any academic discipline you'll be able to find deplorable "scholarship" having been published after "approval" via academic peer review. And that is before the ugly rise of predatory "academic" journals with peer review of very questionable quality during the last decade or so...

Review done by a commercial non-academic publisher is bound to be quite another kettle of fish, too.

I thank Bob Cato for his efforts and sacrifice in getting his book published. Apparently he was a very dedicated collector and, with publishing his ideas, did more for promoting Moro craftsmanship than most of us. However, I fail to see his book as an academic endeavour: Hardly any sources are given except a few examples shown in pictures (usually without any provenance, discussion, etc.) and limited literature citations; pretty much the data base is just missing. Obviously, the earlier journal articles were leading up to the book - apart from a few pics, there's hardly any additional data.

He put out his ideas and these hypotheses can be falsified/modified by additional data and ongoing discussions. I believe the contributions on this forum are certainly very valuable and can be considered being on par with Cato's early attempt. Fair game IMHO...

Regards,
Kai
Thanks for confirming what i had expected. All my books are boxed already for an impending move so i cannot access my copy of Moro Sword at the moment.
Again, i have no particular bone to pick with Cato and do not feel fully qualified to confirm or deny any theory he might have presented in his book. However, i strongly disagree that Cato carries more weight simply because he is the only book reference that has been published on the matter, especially when, if we look closely, he fails to give us solid sources and references for his own work. This doesn't give him the "high ground", it merely affords him the only ground...so far.
Ian, i am glad to hear that is was not your intention to shut down this discussion, but when you write things like "Some people may have knowledge that is different, but until it is put out there for discussion and the basis of it checked out, then there is nothing else to discuss" i hope you can see how some might get that impression. What i have found over the many years i have been trying to understand these weapons (particularly Indonesian keris) is that a great deal of valuable and important research and breakthroughs in understanding happen right here on these forums. The vast majority of published references on the keris are misleading at best and utter wrong at worst. They hold no particular "high ground" simply by virtue of them finding a publisher. There has been less written on Moro weaponry and i am not able to say when and when not Cato may be correct or incorrect. But i can't assume he is right simply because he wrote it down. While there may in fact be a more scholarly and academic approach to other forms of arms that have been studied in far greater detail such as European and India swords i am afraid we are at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes the SEA. This doesn't mean that we should not use similar tried and true methods for our research and theory building, but i don't see why we need fully realized and completely supported evidence just to question theories by Cato that are not well sources and referenced themselves.

[Rick]

Rick,

Alan Maisey commented earlier that the cockatoo had a strong symbolic meaning in the Indonesian Archipelago and Malaysia, but he did not know about the significance in Moroland.

Ian.

Well, that's what I was wondering.
If it had no significance in Moroland then we might be able to discount it as an influence with a fairly clear conscience.

[David]

Here is some information on birds (and serpents...as Alan suggested earlier these tend to operate together in many mythologies). There is no mention of kakatau in these descriptions, though some birds are mentioned by their given name rather than species. According to other sources i have read Magaul (Manaul), one of the most important birds to Moro mythology, was supposedly a Sarimanok.
https://www.aswangproject.com/role-birds-serpents-philippine-mythology/

[David]

The Ardana could be another candidate.
http://www.ancientpages.com/2017/01/25/mythical-beautiful-adarna-bird-and-its-harmful-magical-power-in-mythology-of-philippines/

[David]

Amihan seems to be related to the Manaul myth, an ancient king who was transformed into a bird.
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Amihan_(mythology)

[David]

What i am not finding in any of my internet searches is any kind of mythological connection with the kakatau (cockatoo) in Moro culture. If anyone has found any such links maybe they can post them.

[CCUAL]

so 3 years later and i guess no one else has a similar type of pommel...

moving along, i bid on this kris last night just because i don't have this type of pommel in my collection. what's interesting is, instead of going about in making it as an abstract sarimanok, this one is realistic. i just hope whoever won that piece would post some close up pictures once it's all cleaned up


Ron....after the auction was ended the seller emailed me and noted that kris and scabbard were mismatched, I told him it's okay but it would be nice to have the matching scabbard! he told me that there was another scabbard that should have went on thesame auction but it was for the smaller dagger. I will sell it to you for $25, here it was, perfect fit!

no damage on the pommel/handle what so ever, but a forging crack on the blade. enjoy

[CCUAL]

... a very good example of an earlier kris. (two krises to the left)

[Rick]

About that Cockatoo...........
Anyone?

[Spunjer]

Rick,
when i started collecting, i was wondering why the pommel is referred to as cockatoo when there's no correlation between that particular bird and the Moro people. i realize that these weapons, much like anything else around them, is steep in symbolism. we already know that the blade symbolizes the Naga, a much revered creature among the Moros, and pre-hispanic Filipinos for that matter. again, going back to our belief before Islam and Catholicism arrived.
so i double checked if the cockatoo has some sort of symbolic meaning among the Moros, and for the life of me, i can't find anything. the earliest i've seen these pommels being referred to as cockatoo were in the catalogs during first quarter of the 20th century. in my humble opinion, someone started labeling them as cockatoo, without knowing what exactly they represent. these same catalogs would refer to some of these pommels as "made out of caribou's horn". of course we now know that there are no caribous in the Philippines. even Cato wasn't so sure about this. again, let's look at what he wrote:

All barung pommels, and many kris pommels, are modeled after the head of the cockatoo (known to the Malays as the "kakatua" or "kinadangag"). This magnificent crested parrot is native to the Southern Philippines and Indonesia. Its elaborately-feathered crest, curving beaks and stately regal bearing have captured the imagination of Moro artists for many centuries. The cockatoo motif became widely accepted throughout the South in a relatively short period of time.

Some Indonesian swords were fitted with pommels that are somewhat akin to the Moro kakatua. It is possible that early hilt makers in the Southern Philippines came into contact with the motif in the course of their trading and combative encounters with the Indonesians. Upon their return to the Morolands, artisans probably redesigned the motif, imbuing it with their own unique style and flavor.

To the Muslim Filipinos, the kakatua motif symbolizes lightness, and the ability to fly up into the heavens, leaving danger and death far behind.

ok, so the regal-ness of these magnificent birds has captured the imagination of the Moro artist for centuries, and yet it would take for them to trade with the Indonesians to realize that, "hey, i got an idea; why don't we use that same regal bird that's been capturing our imagination for centuries as a motif for our pommel. heck, the Indonesians were using it. so it doesn't look like we copied them, let's add our unique style and flavor!"
yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

so a Cliff Note version to your question: no, the cockatoo is not in any Moro sagas, myth, and legends.

CCUAL
bro, congratulations in snagging that piece! i'm pretty sure i was the bidder you outbidded, lol, but no worries, it wasn't meant for me. thanks for posting some close ups!

[CCUAL]

CCUAL
bro, congratulations in snagging that piece! i'm pretty sure i was the bidder you outbidded, lol, but no worries, it wasn't meant for me. thanks for posting some close ups![/QUOTE]

sorry about that bro, but for sure when i am ready let go "kris sarimanok" will be a gift to you.
;)

[Gustav]

In 1985, there was a big Philippines exposition in Germany, and Museum fuer Voelkerkunde in Munich (which has an important and early (many collected before 1883) collection of Kris) did publish a small book. There is an article by Rose Schubert (curator for SEA), which explains the hilt pommels (especially Junggayan) exactly the way Ron sees them.

I doubt it's her own idea (of course everything is possible), so I give the publications she put in her bibliography (besides publications already mentioned by Ron in #35):

Casiño, Eric S. 1981, "Arts and Peoples of the Southern Philippines", in Gabriel Casal, "The People and Arts of the Philippines", Los Angeles: Museum of Cultural History, University of California.

Cole, Fay-Cooper, 1914, "The Wild Tribes of Davao District, Mindanao", Field Museum of Natural History, Publ. 170, Antrhropological Series, Vol. XII, No. 2, Chicago.

Foy, W., 1899, "Schwerter von der Celebes See", Publikationen aus dem Königlichen Ethnographischen Museum zu Dresden, Band XII, Dresden.

and, more popular, Juynboll, 1928, "Philippines" and David Szanton, 1963, "Art in Sulu: A Survey", in IPC Papers Nr. 3.

[Ian]

In 1985, there was a big Philippines exposition in Germany, and Museum fuer Voelkerkunde in Munich [which has an important and early (many collected before 1883) collection of Kris] did publish a small book. There is an article by Rose Schubert (curator for SEA), which explains the hilt pommels (especially Junggayan) exactly the way Ron sees them. ... Gustav,

This is excellent news! Would it be possible to scan the article into a PDF file and post it here as an attachment? It is possible to attach .PDF files to a post in the same manner as .JPG and other graphics files.

I have copies of the Casino, Cole, and Foy references but they are on a ship at this time heading for Australia. From memory, I don't recall anything about Moro hilts and their attribution in those references. I don't have the other references you mention. Can you provide more details about the IPC Papers (what does IPC stand for?).

I look forward to reading what Dr Schubert has to say.

Regards,

Ian.

[Ian]

... these same catalogs would refer to some of these pommels as "made out of caribou's horn". of course we now know that there are no caribous in the Philippines. Ron, you are being a little disingenuous here. Every Filipino knows that carabao (or sometimes kalabaw) is the every day common term for the domesticated water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis carabanesis). That carabao might get transliterated to "caribou" is hardly surprising, although clearly incorrect. Nevertheless, the intent of the description is true, some of these pommels were made from carabao horn.

... even Cato wasn't so sure about this. again, let's look at what he wrote:

All barung pommels, and many kris pommels, are modeled after the head of the cockatoo (known to the Malays as the "kakatua" or "kinadangag"). This magnificent crested parrot is native to the Southern Philippines and Indonesia. Its elaborately-feathered crest, curving beaks and stately regal bearing have captured the imagination of Moro artists for many centuries. The cockatoo motif became widely accepted throughout the South in a relatively short period of time.

Some Indonesian swords were fitted with pommels that are somewhat akin to the Moro kakatua. It is possible that early hilt makers in the Southern Philippines came into contact with the motif in the course of their trading and combative encounters with the Indonesians. Upon their return to the Morolands, artisans probably redesigned the motif, imbuing it with their own unique style and flavor.

To the Muslim Filipinos, the kakatua motif symbolizes lightness, and the ability to fly up into the heavens, leaving danger and death far behind.

ok, so the regal-ness of these magnificent birds has captured the imagination of the Moro artist for centuries, and yet it would take for them to trade with the Indonesians to realize that, "hey, i got an idea; why don't we use that same regal bird that's been capturing our imagination for centuries as a motif for our pommel. heck, the Indonesians were using it. so it doesn't look like we copied them, let's add our unique style and flavor!"
yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Ron,

You are assuming that Cato implies that the Southern Philippines was fascinated by the cockatoo before contact with Indonesians. However, contact between seafaring Southern Filipinos and peoples to the south of them is believed to have occurred for more than a thousand years (I don't have my historical texts with me at present, but I'm sure that is correct).

That the cockatoo does not appear in Moro traditions is a major weakness of the Cato hypothesis and would seem to contradict his statement that "its elaborately-feathered crest, curving beaks and stately regal bearing have captured the imagination of Moro artists for many centuries." The further south one goes, however, the more likely Cato is to be correct.

If Moro craftsmen did initially copy the style from more southern groups, and so far I know of no scholarship to suggest that they did not, then they may have chosen to keep the style for a variety of reasons. I have used a number of my kris and barung for cutting tests. The beak of the pommel forms a very comfortable resting place for the little finger, while the hypothenar eminence of the palm rests against the crest. This is an ergonomic design well suited to cutting and chopping, allowing the hand to firmly grasp the hilt and preventing slippage of the grip or twisting of the blade when striking. Thus, the adoption of the southern style pommel (kakatua) by the Moros may have had something to do with the ergonomics of the weapon.

This makes some sense to me. It also makes sense that further changes occurred over time, and that what was introduced initially as a hilt representing a kakatua may have come to represent something else that was more consistent with Moro traditions.

So far in our exchanges I have refrained from commenting about my own inquiries on this subject because I don't think they are very useful to the discussion. But here they are for what it's worth. In the late 1990s and early 2000s I spent considerable time in the Philippines (mainly Luzon, Palawan, and Mindanao) pursuing a number of health-related projects. My work took me to Mindanao in the late 1990s and would have continued there but for the 2001 attack on New York and the resulting risks to Americans traveling to Muslim hot spots. In the course of these visits, I also came across a few swords and dealers. Among other things I asked them about the pommel style that Cato called kakatua. Without prompting them or suggesting the name kakatua, I asked what this style was meant to represent. As far as I know, none of them had read Robert Cato's work.

My principal Manila antiques dealer (who was Tagalog) said he thought it represented a cockatoo, based on discussion with his Muslim suppliers of arms (I did not get information about where these suppliers were from). Two dealers in Davao City (both Cebuano) said they did not know, but one thought it might be an eagle. One dealer from Zamboanga thought it was based on a parrot but then said he really did not know. Who knows what to make of this information. However, no mention was made of a mythical rooster.

Ian.

[Gustav]

Ian,

IPC stands for Institute of Philippine Culture, Quezon City. The Publisher was Manila University Press.

The article by Schubert written in German, but there is a summary of it in van Duuren's "Krisses" bibliography (2002, Pictures Publishers), and I guess, it should be mentioned also in Tim Rogers' bibliography as he edited van Duuren's book. Here the text by van Duuren:

"Essay about the various weapons of the pirates of the Sulu Islands and North Mindanao, in the accompanying book to the eponymous exhibition that toured Germany in 1985. The author's interest centres on the form of kampilan, a broadsword, and of the Philippine kris, which weapons in her opinion bear the mark of the Dayak people and may subsequently have found their way via Borneo to the southern Philippines where their definitive forms were established. Not only does she contribute an in-depth tratise on local forging techniques, but she also proffers (sic) a surprising new view of the respective kris hilts generated in their wake. Schubert interprets these hilts, the biggest of which have a baroque, curly knob, as representations of a long-tailed bird. This bird form becomes evident once the tip of the blade points upwards; then the knob is shown to be a bird in full flight which carries the kris on its back. The author substantiates her vision with photographs and drawings showing the hilts upside down. However, her views fail to take into account the general consensus that the knob of the Sulu kris represents a stylised bird's head, more specifically that of a cockatoo."

Regards,
Gustav

[kai]

Arjan kindly has the file on his site (https://www.mytribalart.com/articles):
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/a4c672_7bc4fe65f9f144878148044caceee80c.pdf

[Ian]

Kai,

Thank you for that link. Interesting interpretation by Rose Schubert. I was hoping that this paper would have some data to support Ron's ideas, but it seems that Schubert was guessing as much as we are. Turning the hilt upside down, or switching the head for the tail as I suggested earlier in this thread, are different ways of looking at the representation, but we have no way of knowing if any of these interpretations are correct without clear data to support them.

The suggestion that having the wavy blade (naga) positioned above the representation of the bird would be inconsistent with the naga interpretation of the blade offered by Alan and Ron.

Gustav,

Thank you very much for bringing this interpretation of the hilt to our attention and for noting van Duuren's comments. It is interesting to read that Schubert's views in 1985 ran contrary to the accepted notion that the pommel represented a cockatoo. The German exhibition preceded Cato's publications and the "general consensus" of a cockatoo being depicted on Moro weapons appears to have been around longer than Cato's work. That raises the question of when and how the cockatoo attribution started.

Ian.

[David]

Thank you for that link. Interesting interpretation by Rose Schubert. I was hoping that this paper would have some data to support Ron's ideas, but it seems that Schubert was guessing as much as we are. Turning the hilt upside down, or switching the head for the tail as I suggested earlier in this thread, are different ways of looking at the representation, but we have no way of knowing if any of these interpretations are correct without clear data to support them.
Do we have any "clear data" to support that the pommel is a kakatau other than the say-so of Cato and what a few people have claimed they heard here or there? Clearly when you asked the question when you were in the Philippines you got a variety of answers for different dealers that you asks. Some seemed to think kakatau, some said eagle, others didn't know. I don't find it particularly surprising that they would be unaware that it might indeed represent a sarimanok. You could ask the average Javanese person about the deeper meanings of aspects of the keris and in this day and age you would indeed find that most would not be aware of any deeper significance, at least not anything specific. So much information about origins and symbolism has been lost in this region.
You wrote in response to Ron:
If Moro craftsmen did initially copy the style from more southern groups, and so far I know of no scholarship to suggest that they did not, then they may have chosen to keep the style for a variety of reasons. I have used a number of my kris and barung for cutting tests. The beak of the pommel forms a very comfortable resting place for the little finger, while the hypothenar eminence of the palm rests against the crest. This is an ergonomic design well suited to cutting and chopping, allowing the hand to firmly grasp the hilt and preventing slippage of the grip or twisting of the blade when striking. Thus, the adoption of the southern style pommel (kakatua) by the Moros may have had something to do with the ergonomics of the weapon.
Can you tell us what "southern style pommel (kakatau)" you are referring to here. AFAIK this style of pommel is of Moro origin. While it does sometime appear on Malay sundangs i don't believe i have ever seen one old enough on those weapons to be able to say the style originated in those areas. So i don't understand your theory here that this pommel form was adopted from a more southern area and then kept because its ergo dynamic design added in cutting and chopping. :shrug:

[Ian]

David:

All good points. I am not privy to any data Cato may have used. From the comment of van Duuren about the "general consensus" favoring a cockatoo, it appears that more than Cato have shared this opinion and that perhaps it was not his idea originally.

Just where the "cockatoo hilt" style may have originated is unclear. It could have been a migration northwards through Borneo similar to the wavy blade form of the keris. You say that there are no old examples of this hilt form that would support a southern influence. How old do they need to be? If we are talking about 17th or 18th C, then I believe that our forum host, Lee Jones, has an example from that era that was discussed on the old UBB forum (may it rest in peace). IIRC, that kris had a small cockatoo pommel in a style associated with Malaysia or Borneo. I'm away from my books at the moment, but again if I recall correctly Albert van Z. shows several Borneo kris with similar pommels in his book on the arms of the Indonesian Archipelago.

An alternative view is that the pommel style was a back diffusion, from north to south, with its origin in Moroland and then spreading back to Borneo and Malaysia. However, we need to look at the geopolitical forces operating a couple of hundred years ago. At that time the Sulu Archipelago was very much under the influence and control of the Brunei Sultanate. Influences tend to spread from those in power to the subordinate groups, rather than the other way around. How likely is it that a bunch of quarrelsome subordinate groups on the periphery of the Muslim world would influence weapons widely in the region? I don't know, and I don't think anyone else who might post here would know for sure either.

Frustratingly, we are left with a bunch of inductive ideas and very few ways of testing the hypotheses generated. We have one explanation for the shape of the pommel that another author has labeled a "consensus view." It seems to me that it is necessary to topple that idea before a new one can take its place. Which is to say that the "cockatoo hilt" idea stands until, through a deductive process, it can be shown to be wrong. [Obviously all ideas can be discussed and debated, but in the end there is only one that survives the test of truth.]

Ian.

[Gustav]

Gustav,

Thank you very much for bringing this interpretation of the hilt to our attention and for noting van Duuren's comments. It is interesting to read that Schubert's views in 1985 ran contrary to the accepted notion that the pommel represented a cockatoo. The German exhibition preceded Cato's publications and the "general consensus" of a cockatoo being depicted on Moro weapons appears to have been around longer than Cato's work. That raises the question of when and how the cockatoo attribution started.

Ian.

Ian,

to me it seems that the German exhibition preceded Cato's book, but not the comments by van Duuren. He surely was influenced by Cato's view writing he's article on Schubert, as in the same bibliography under Cato, R., Moro Swords, he mentions "the hilt knob in Cackatoo (sic) shape" and writes: "Moro Swords is - at the time of writing - the definitive work on the Philippine kris."

Regards,
Gustav

[Ian]

Ian,

to me it seems that the German exhibition preceded Cato's book, but not the comments by van Duuren. He surely was influenced by Cato's view writing he's article on Schubert, as in the same bibliography under Cato, R., Moro Swords, he mentions "the hilt knob in Cackatoo (sic) shape" and writes: "Moro Swords is - at the time of writing - the definitive work on the Philippine kris."

Regards,
GustavThanks Gustav.

Van Duuren's comments seem off the mark if he expected that she would have known about the cockatoo hilt theory in 1985, and Cato did not publish his book until about 10 years later! I'm thinking he had something else in mind when he wrote: "However, her views fail to take into account the general consensus that the knob of the Sulu kris represents a stylised bird's head, more specifically that of a cockatoo." A consensus implies agreement among several people, and his comment seems to indicate she should have known this in 1985. Curious.

Ian.

[Spunjer]

Ron, you are being a little disingenuous here. Every Filipino knows that carabao (or sometimes kalabaw) is the every day common term for the domesticated water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis carabanesis). That carabao might get transliterated to "caribou" is hardly surprising, although clearly incorrect. Nevertheless, the intent of the description is true, some of these pommels were made from carabao horn.

it's true, every Filipino worth its salt would know the term, and yes, i'm with you that the term "carabao" was most likely been transliterated to caribou, but the thing is, Joe Public from Missouri back in the 1920's who collected these bringback souvenirs doesn't know any better, and i highly doubt any Filipino back then would be able to correct him, or Bannerman for that matter. Just like the term "cockatoo"...

[kai]

Hello Ian,

Thanks for your added info!


My principal Manila antiques dealer (who was Tagalog) said he thought it represented a cockatoo, based on discussion with his Muslim suppliers of arms (I did not get information about where these suppliers were from). Two dealers in Davao City (both Cebuano) said they did not know, but one thought it might be an eagle. One dealer from Zamboanga thought it was based on a parrot but then said he really did not know. Who knows what to make of this information. However, no mention was made of a mythical rooster.
Was the dealer from Zamboanga of Moro origin? I reckon the others are not really authoritative informants on Moro culture and any Moro runners (bringing the pieces in) may well have been ignorant at that late time period (or rather chosen to not divulge cultural knowledge to outsiders).

It sure is like pulling good teeth... :o

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ron,

the earliest i've seen these pommels being referred to as cockatoo were in the catalogs during first quarter of the 20th century. in my humble opinion, someone started labeling them as cockatoo, without knowing what exactly they represent.
That's certainly plausible - we've seen that happening with quite some collectors' terminology and also science is often trottling along with "published" ideas until they get challenged by critical thinking and, especially, facts...

Alas, could you please add data? (I. e. citing those references you've found, especially the early ones!) I assume these are dealers' cats like Oldman? TIA!

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ian,

Thank you for that link. Interesting interpretation by Rose Schubert. I was hoping that this paper would have some data to support Ron's ideas, but it seems that Schubert was guessing as much as we are.
Sorrily, she does not clearly state whether this is her own idea or gleaned from another source. As she doesn't give any citations when explaining this idea (while doing so elsewhere in the paper), one would tend to believe this was her own deduction; she also does not mention the sarimanok.

I certainly would be cautious of her suggestion that the bird is actually meant to be carrying the sword (blade). Or at least to utilize this assumption to argue for a "correct" orientation of the stylized figural carving.

Even for a warrior society like the Moro groups, most of the time a sword pommel will on display while carried in scabbard (i. e. with the pommel pointing up). However, this certainly is not its most crucial use, even for a status piece. Thus, the jury is still out on how any of these possibly/probably talismanic features were assumed to "work" by traditional Moro cultures.


Turning the hilt upside down, or switching the head for the tail as I suggested earlier in this thread, are different ways of looking at the representation, but we have no way of knowing if any of these interpretations are correct without clear data to support them.
We certainly can look for additional hints from genuine pommels. The only example with a pretty compelling figural style that comes to my mind would be Chris' sarimanok kris (pics in post #50 above (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpost.php?p=229800&postcount=50)) and even that is stylized/ukilized enough to leave room for arguing if one wanted to play devil's advocate.


The suggestion that having the wavy blade (naga) positioned above the representation of the bird would be inconsistent with the naga interpretation of the blade offered by Alan and Ron.
Not necessarily inconsistent IMHO. (And the other orientation would be not work out nicely as well.)

Undoubtably, there is lots of carry-over from earlier cosmologies into the Moro tradition(s); however, one would expect details to change/(d)evolve over time and there usually is enough flexibility to add another bonus feature or two... ;)

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Frustratingly, we are left with a bunch of inductive ideas and very few ways of testing the hypotheses generated. We have one explanation for the shape of the pommel that another author has labeled a "consensus view." It seems to me that it is necessary to topple that idea before a new one can take its place. Which is to say that the "cockatoo hilt" idea stands until, through a deductive process, it can be shown to be wrong. [Obviously all ideas can be discussed and debated, but in the end there is only one that survives the test of truth.]
I'm afraid i completely disagree here. IF Cato's theory actually had been clearly sourced and references for his kakatau theory had been disclosed in his writings i might well agree. But simply because his idea is the only one published or that occasionally someone has mentioned that the kakatau theory is a "consensus view" (Consensus of whom exactly? When? Where? Why?) is not enough in my mind to validate it as the superior theory. It does not seem that the kakatau theory has been any more "tested" than the sarimanok one. I see no reason why both these theories should not be given equal standing as theories since neither can be seen as anything more than an inductive idea at this point. There is no substantial fact to be toppled here. :shrug:

[kai]

I'm afraid I completely agree with David here. ;)

We should compile data for both hypotheses (as well as looking out for additional claims) and compare their respective standing in due time.

Regards,
Kai

[David]

I'm afraid I completely agree with David here. ;)

We should compile data for both hypotheses (as well as looking out for additional claims) and compare their respective standing in due time.

Regards,
Kai
Hey Kai, maybe neither of us should be afraid. Peaceful co-existence of theories is not something that we need fear. LOL! ;) :)

[kai]

Hello Ian,

From the comment of van Duuren about the "general consensus" favoring a cockatoo, it appears that more than Cato have shared this opinion and that perhaps it was not his idea originally.
It sure wasn't his idea - Ron traced the notion back to the early 20th c.
It would be more interesting whether he had Moro informants confirming this view - he did not wrote that down though...


Just where the "cockatoo hilt" style may have originated is unclear. It could have been a migration northwards through Borneo similar to the wavy blade form of the keris.
Well, the keris migrated over the sea. There are enough Malay coastal settlements around Borneo as well as other islands to allow for convenient "stepping stones" and keeping in touch.


You say that there are no old examples of this hilt form that would support a southern influence. How old do they need to be? If we are talking about 17th or 18th C, then I believe that our forum host, Lee Jones, has an example from that era that was discussed on the old UBB forum (may it rest in peace). IIRC, that kris had a small cockatoo pommel in a style associated with Malaysia or Borneo.
Given the scarcity of well-provenanced pieces from the early colonial period, I doubt we'll ever know for sure. I also believe we should be very cautious with estimating the absolute (rather than relative) age of any pieces! With a lot of work, we may be able to establish lines of evolution but reliably linking those to "real" historical events will be more than tough IMVHO.

Also note that hilt types we currently associate with Malaya, may not have been confined to Malaya in earlier times nor necessarily being of Malay origin!


I'm away from my books at the moment, but again if I recall correctly Albert van Z. shows several Borneo kris with similar pommels in his book on the arms of the Indonesian Archipelago.
The examples shown in Albert's book are not particularly old; most appear to be Moro blades that ended up in East Borneo.


An alternative view is that the pommel style was a back diffusion, from north to south, with its origin in Moroland and then spreading back to Borneo and Malaysia. However, we need to look at the geopolitical forces operating a couple of hundred years ago. At that time the Sulu Archipelago was very much under the influence and control of the Brunei Sultanate. Influences tend to spread from those in power to the subordinate groups, rather than the other way around. How likely is it that a bunch of quarrelsome subordinate groups on the periphery of the Muslim world would influence weapons widely in the region? I don't know, and I don't think anyone else who might post here would know for sure either.
Well, knowing for sure sets the benchmark very high.

I'd posit that the keris sundang melayu got heavy influence from their Moro cousin till pretty recent times: You see a lot of Moro blades in Malay fittings but hardly any the other way around!

I also believe that you underestimate the Malay trading network which allowed for a continuous flux of trade goods all over the archipelago (additionally aided by traders of many other ethnic groups including Bugis, many Chinese groups, Arab, etc.): The most busy ports were true melting pots with wealthy inhabitants always on the look for cool stuff to display their status! This was going on despite political struggles and Machiavellian strategies. And, of course, more active Moro groups were all over the place with raiding parties and settlements (18th-19th c.).

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ron,

i'm with you that the term "carabao" was most likely been transliterated to caribou
Nowadays we'd blame autocorrection... ;) :o :p

I believe this to be a mere printing error, i. e. a glitch/lapsus introduced during type-setting. Usually proof reading was done by competent specialists; however, this type of mistake is difficult to catch. And a mere catalog might have got less attention (and less funds allocated, too).

Regards,
Kai

[Ian]

Ron,

I was looking through some old reference books and browsing Levine's Guide to Knives and Their Values, ed. Bud Lang, 5th edition, Krause Publishing:Iola, WI, 2001.

Several foreign knives are included in this encyclopedic book, and I have reproduced below the page that shows some Philippines knives. On p. 488 it shows a "Philippines (Northern Mindanao) Moro Dagger" (number G.8). In the description it refers to an "elaborate bird-head ("sarimanuk") hilt of a silver-copper alloy." It further notes that this knife has a "19th century blade in 20th century mounts." I have enlarged that item and posted it below--the pics are not very good owing to the low quality of the original printing.

The hilt style does seem 20th C. to me, maybe post-WWII, and resembles a style that I think was developed for marketing to tourists. Typically, these knives have elaborate hilts and guards with lots of curls. The copper alloy of the hilt and guard is often repeated in the scabbard, which is usually all metal. These highly decorative knives are fairly common and often have thin, poor quality blades made from sheet steel--wavy blades are found on them, and these have sharply pointed luk that likely indicate the waves have been ground rather than forged.

The ornamentation of these hilts resembles to me the depictions of feathers on the mythical sarimanok that you have referenced, and I wonder if this is where the idea that the hilt represents that creature may have arisen.

This is the only reference to a "sarimanuk hilt" I have been able to find.

Ian.


.

[David]

When i search for "Sarimanok hilt" i find a good number of hits lead me to these very old (10-13 century) gold hilts. I do not believe these swords were kris per se, but this does seem to help establish the symbolic use of the Sarimanok within the culture as hilts and pommels for swords going back centuries ago.

[kai]

Hello David,

When i search for "Sarimanok hilt" i find a good number of hits lead me to these very old (10-13 century) gold hilts. I do not believe these swords were kris per se, but this does seem to help establish the symbolic use of the Sarimanok within the culture as hilts and pommels for swords going back centuries ago.
There seems to be no extant sources corroborating that these hilts really were attributed to the same "mythological beast" originally nor has it been established that there is any continuous line of cultural descent. Arguing that the Maranao figurines are similar enough to the gold hilts to prove any connection seems overly enthusiastic to me to say the least.

Thus, I'm far from convinced that this attribution holds any water! I'll ask Lorenz - maybe he can point us to the origin of this attribution/story...

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Thanks, Ian!

I was looking through some old reference books and browsing Levine's Guide to Knives and Their Values, ed. Bud Lang, 5th edition, Krause Publishing:Iola, WI, 2001.

Several foreign knives are included in this encyclopedic book, and I have reproduced below the page that shows some Philippines knives. On p. 488 it shows a "Philippines (Northern Mindanao) Moro Dagger" (number G.8). In the description it refers to an "elaborate bird-head ("sarimanuk") hilt of a silver-copper alloy." It further notes that this knife has a "19th century blade in 20th century mounts." I have enlarged that item and posted it below--the pics are not very good owing to the low quality of the original printing.

The hilt style does seem 20th C. to me, maybe post-WWII, and resembles a style that I think was developed for marketing to tourists. Typically, these knives have elaborate hilts and guards with lots of curls. The copper alloy of the hilt and guard is often repeated in the scabbard, which is usually all metal. These highly decorative knives are fairly common and often have thin, poor quality blades made from sheet steel--wavy blades are found on them, and these have sharply pointed luk that likely indicate the waves have been ground rather than forged.

The ornamentation of these hilts resembles to me the depictions of feathers on the mythical sarimanok that you have referenced, and I wonder if this is where the idea that the hilt represents that creature may have arisen.
I'm not aware of a single antique example of this (hilt) type. Chances are that this is a modern invention by Marawi craftsmen (most likely post-WW2 as you suggest) which received a well-selling attribution... ;)

Regards,
Kai

[David]

There seems to be no extant sources corroborating that these hilts really were attributed to the same "mythological beast" originally nor has it been established that there is any continuous line of cultural descent. Arguing that the Maranao figurines are similar enough to the gold hilts to prove any connection seems overly enthusiastic to me to say the least.
I am arguing nothing here Kai, simply presenting information for consideration. That is why i said that these images "seem to help establish" rather than "here is the evidence that this is true." ;)
I do believe, however, that one can find a great deal of commonality between these old bird-like gold hilts and various depictions of the Sarimanok. They do indeed seem to be abstract bird heads and they look quite similar to many established depictions of Sarimanok.
Here is some further information about the Sarimanok gathered from the internet. There are numerous origin stories so it is difficult sorting out what the actual development of this mythological beast actually is, but it is clearly an old and important symbolic creature to the region while one can find little to nothing showing the importance of kakatau (cockatoo) to the Moro.
BTW, it does seem that most sources of information that i encounter seem to define the word "Sarimanok" as Sari-article of clothing, usually colorful and Manok-chicken or bird. So the Sairmanok is seen as a colorfully dressed bird. In some stories it seems to have its roots with the Maranao totem bird called Itotoro who has an invisible spirit twin called Inikadowa and together they act as a medium to the spirit world.
Another theory is the the Sarimanok came from the Garuda and then developed into its own creature. It does appear, however, that it did exist in Maranao lore before the arrival of the Spanish.
The FMA blog linked here cites its use as a symbol of resistance against the Spanish. Perhaps another reason why such a symbolic presence might end up being represented on a kris used to fight in such resistance.
And yes, none of this is particularly back up by any strong extant sources that Kai (and i believe all of us) would like to see. But i must remind you Cato's hypothesis that the pommel of the kris that we speak about here might represent a kakatau does not really have any more evidence behind it either. ;)

http://pinoy-culture.com/the-sarimanok-the-mythical-bird-of-the-meranao-of-lake-lanao/

http://12fma.blogspot.com/2008/06/sarimanok-filipino-spirit.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarimanok

[Ian]

Thanks, Ian!

I'm not aware of a single antique example of this (hilt) type. Chances are that this is a modern invention by Marawi craftsmen (most likely post-WW2 as you suggest) which received a well-selling attribution... ;)

Regards,
Kai Hi Kai:

Yes, I agree. The fanciful metal hilts and sheaths with baroque-like flourishes seem to be late 20th C. and made in Mindanao. When I visited Zamboanga in the 1990s I found them in the markets and tourist areas where they were moderately inexpensive souvenirs. The blades were disappointing and some were not even sharpened. They were also to be found in tourist outlets in Metro Manila (Intramuros, Makati, Quezon City, etc.) around the same time.


Ian.

[Ian]

I am arguing nothing here Kai, simply presenting information for consideration. That is why i said that these images "seem to help establish" rather than "here is the evidence that this is true." ;)
I do believe, however, that one can find a great deal of commonality between these old bird-like gold hilts and various depictions of the Sarimanok. They do indeed seem to be abstract bird heads and they look quite similar to many established depictions of Sarimanok.
Here is some further information about the Sarimanok gathered from the internet. There are numerous origin stories so it is difficult sorting out what the actual development of this mythological beast actually is, but it is clearly an old and important symbolic creature to the region while one can find little to nothing showing the importance of kakatau (cockatoo) to the Moro.
BTW, it does seem that most sources of information that i encounter seem to define the word "Sarimanok" as Sari-article of clothing, usually colorful and Manok-chicken or bird. So the Sairmanok is seen as a colorfully dressed bird. In some stories it seems to have its roots with the Maranao totem bird called Itotoro who has an invisible spirit twin called Inikadowa and together they act as a medium to the spirit world.
Another theory is the the Sarimanok came from the Garuda and then developed into its own creature. It does appear, however, that it did exist in Maranao lore before the arrival of the Spanish.
The FMA blog linked here cites its use as a symbol of resistance against the Spanish. Perhaps another reason why such a symbolic presence might end up being represented on a kris used to fight in such resistance.
And yes, none of this is particularly back up by any strong extant sources that Kai (and i believe all of us) would like to see. But i must remind you Cato's hypothesis that the pommel of the kris that we speak about here might represent a kakatau does not really have any more evidence behind it either. ;)

http://pinoy-culture.com/the-sarimanok-the-mythical-bird-of-the-meranao-of-lake-lanao/

http://12fma.blogspot.com/2008/06/sarimanok-filipino-spirit.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SarimanokDavid:

Thanks for the additional research. I found the article on the Pinoy-Culture site particularly helpful in setting out diverse theories about the origins of the sarimanok. The blog comments are interesting opinions but offer less than the other article.

Because Filipino web sites tend to disappear over time, I downloaded these article and post them here as PDF files for future reference.

Ian.

--------------Attachment: Copies of Sarimanok Articles---------------
.

[David]

David:

Thanks for the additional research. I found the article on the Pinoy-Culture site particularly helpful in setting out diverse theories about the origins of the sarimanok. The blog comments are interesting opinions but offer less than the other article.

Because Filipino web sites tend to disappear over time, I downloaded these article and post them here as PDF files for future reference.

Ian.

--------------Attachment: Copies of Sarimanok Articles---------------
.
I agree Ian. What i did find relevant about the blog article was that it had a martial arts perspective and spoke about the Sarimanok as being used as a symbol of resistance against the Spanish. But as i also pointed out, there are no points of reference for these observations so it's hard to say what the truth is here.
Thanks for copying them though. I hate when links disappear.

[A. G. Maisey]

This Sarimanok thing has got me intrigued, but I cannot speak the Maranao language, and since it appears that the Sarimanok first appeared within Maranao culture it is essential that anybody attempting to fathom the original meaning and intent of the word "Sarimanok" must begin by gaining a knowledge of the language, then the culture and society.

So, rather than assemble all of the possible meanings for the two words "sari" and "manok" why not home in on the language of the people who first gave birth to the Sarimanok?

The word "sari" is found in Malay, Indonesian, Javanese, Old Javanese, Sundanese, Balinese. In these languages it has a number of meanings, some related, some unrelated, and it can also be a woman's name.

It would surprise me if it did not have a number of meanings in the Maranao language also, and the probable meaning to choose then becomes a matter of context.

Incidentally, the word "sari" with various accented pronunciations, as well as "sati" and "sara" with a similar number of accented pronunciation variations also appear in Sanscrit. The origin of the word "sari" is far from a settled matter amongst those people who make the study of language their profession.

The word "manuk/manok" appears to be indigenous Malay, and again, where it appears in an Indonesian language it can have a variety of applications, but principally it means "bird".

What is the correct meaning of the word "manok/manuk" in the Maranao language?

When it is understood clearly exactly what the word "Sarimanok" means within an enlightened Maranao cultural context, then perhaps it may be possible go behind this first level of understanding by probing the Maranao cultural understanding of the idea of "Sarimanok".

Possibly when the matter is thoroughly understood, we may find that there is a relationship between the Sarimanok as a pommel and ancestor/dewa/dewi as ancestor that applies with weapon hilts of other Indianised SE Asian states.

[Ian]

Alan,

I agree with much of what you say about understanding the Maranao language and culture. However, the present discussion refers back to the shape of the hilt that Cato has termed kakatua. This shape is not peculiarly Maranao and features prominently among all Moro groups--including the Maguindanao, the various groups in the Sulu Archipelago, and those in N. Borneo and the Brunei Sultanate. The style has also been identified in Malaysian examples.

It would seem that we need to look beyond the Maranao if Ron's thesis is to be tested. That's a substantial task if we are to understand the meaning of sarimanok among all these groups, or even whether sarimanok has a significant meaning for groups other than the Maranao.

Ian.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Ian, I do understand that the discussion concerns the shape of the hilt and whether it actually represents a kakatau or a sarimanok.

I have no intention at all of getting involved in this, simply because I believe I would need to devote far more time than I have available to assemble a cultural, societal and linguistic base that would permit me to provide a defensible opinion.

However, to my way of thinking, and I acknowledge that my way of thinking is very often out of synch with most of the people who contribute to this Forum, to my way of thinking it is absolutely essential to gain an understanding of exactly how the Sarimanok is understood by the people within the Maranao community who have the indigenous cultural knowledge that would enable those people to form a valid opinion in respect of the way in which the Sarimanok can be legitimately understood.

Once that understanding, which is the cultural property of the people who originated the idea of the Sarimanok, is available to people who are outside the framework of Maranao culture and society, then, and only then might it become possible for those "outsiders" to attempt to understand sufficient to form an opinion on the validity of Sarimanok or of kakatua.

I know virtually nothing of Maranao culture, but I do have a pretty solid grasp of the belief patterns of the peoples of the Indianised states of SE Asia. It is my feeling --- I emphasise "feeling" --- that when this matter finally comes to an acceptable conclusion that we shall be able to see connections between the cultural relevance of these Maranao hilts, and the cultural relevance of other weapon hilts throughout Maritime SE Asia, most especially in those parts of SE Asia that can be regarded as having been subject to influence from the Indian Sub-Continent.

But before any of that can happen I believe it is necessary to come to a valid understanding of exactly what it is that is under discussion, and the core of this discussion is centered around two physical things that in their cultural settings have become ideas. My approach to this riddle would be to first attempt to understand those ideas from a Maranao perspective. I would not focus on form and personal opinion, these could come later.

In any case, it is an interesting discussion, even if it seems to be going nowhere. I'm enjoying it.

[Gavin Nugent]

Linky exchange program :)

The icon relevance
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpost.php?p=279779&postcount=70

My perception of the icon
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpost.php?p=279781&postcount=71

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpost.php?p=279787&postcount=72

The further discussion
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=27729