Hi David:
Actually, Amuk did not mention the language that was used here, which is why there have been so many questions asked. You and Alan perhaps know him from posts in the Warung Kopi because you two are the only ones who have mentioned a Dutch connection.
As far as the sarimanoek/sarimanok connection, I think it is important to know where Amuk's use of that came from. Before Ron (spunjer) came up with the suggestion, I had never heard of it in connection with a
kris hilt. It is possible Amuk has borrowed the term from this site, in which case it does not tell us anything more than Ron's original suggestion. If the source is different, then it adds support to Ron's suggestion.
As to whether Amuk has presented a representative group of
kris on which to base a classification system, I tend to think they are not sufficiently representative of the major groups. What I'm seeing here are
kris nearly all from the Sulu Archipelago, with perhaps one Maranao (far right) and no examples from the Maguindanao. Cato went to some length to describe the subtle differences in the
kris from different Moro groups and, as shown in the plate from his book that I posted, the terms used for the
kris vary by dialect.
Amuk's classification is based on the blade (number of
luk) and shape of the hilt. I'm not aware that the number of
luk have any major significance among the Moro--perhaps this is more important for the Indonesian
keris. The usual classification is straight, semi-waved, and waved. And for hilt shapes, there are more varieties than the two basic types described by Amuk.
When you say:
What we might want to focus on is Amuk's first statements. Is this truly a good selection of "representative examples [that] illustrate the basic range"?
Is this actually what's being asked of us? If so, I would not have gathered that from Amuk's post.
Ian.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David
As Alan has pointed out, Amuk was pretty clear on the language used here...and yet, every response here has in some way referred to his odd terms and Dutch transliterations. Frankly, i suggest we take Amuk's suggestion and ignore these strange terms since i doubt they hold much weight as legitimate terminology from indigenous sources. I do understand Ron's interest in his use of the word "sarimanoek" (sarimanok) to describe the "kakatau" pommels and also find that interesting, but unless Amuk is interested in discussing his sources for these questionable terms (and it appears he is not), then i don't see much point in our desperate attempts to find reason in them.
As we already, the Moro are made up of numerous tribes, all with their own specific dialects. Even if these names were absolutely correct for a Tausug tribe member they would not be the same for the Maranao. As far as i can tell these terms seem to have originated with a pre-1972 Dutch colonialist who has perhaps incorporated and/or corrupted some Javanese or some other Austronesian languages to create these categories. Why saying "Kalis Naga Galap Lima Sikoe" should be any more correct than simply saying "Kris with Snake-like Five-Wave Blade" is beyond me in this case. 
What we might want to focus on is Amuk's first statements. Is this truly a good selection of "representative examples [that] illustrate the basic range"? |