Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Ian · 14th May 2018, 07:43 PM

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.

14th May 2018, 07:43 PM	#62
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,029	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.