![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,396
|
![]()
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:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|