"Is it really a Cockatoo?"

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Spunjer

... 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://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/a4c67...4caceee80c.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]

Originally Posted by 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. 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.

[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.

[David]

Originally Posted by Ian

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.

[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

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by Ian

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]

Originally Posted by Gustav

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

Thanks 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,

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) 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

[xasterix]

Necro'ing this thread because I fancied putting a Maranao kris (with a vintage hilt) beside my vintage sarimanok.

It's pretty close- but in the correct-side-up orientation, not in the upside-down pommel orientation. The upside-down is incompatible because a sarimanok's tail is always upward-oriented

[David]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Necro'ing this thread because I fancied putting a Maranao kris (with a vintage hilt) beside my vintage sarimanok.

It's pretty close- but in the correct-side-up orientation, not in the upside-down pommel orientation. The upside-down is incompatible because a sarimanok's tail is always upward-oriented

Well, as with most things that we encounter in SEA, there are multiple ways of interpreting just about everything. So while we can imagine just the head depicted here with the the kris in one orientation i don't think we need to dismiss the possibility of the entire body being depicted in the reverse position. And while i agree that in most old sculptural depictions of sarimanok the tail section is oriented upward i have also seen many images of sarimanok (albeit, more recent ones) where it goes downward.
Regardless of how we interpret it though, i still favour sarimanok as the bird in question. I cannot find anything in Moro or Filipino lore that makes any strong spiritual connect to the kakatua, while sarimanok has strong mythological connections in this area.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by David

Well, as with most things that we encounter in SEA, there are multiple ways of interpreting just about everything.

Good point- although it's very much possible to isolate the imagery based on the traditions inherent in each Moro tribe within a specific era- in my example, since it's vintage Maranao sarimanok and vintage Maranao hilt, the upturned version is the strong basis, and not the upside-down (since the down-tail emerged in modern time already). The Maranao elders and researchers that I've consulted with also never discussed the pommel in an upside-down fashion, so that says a lot.

But that doesn't mean the upside-down version ceases to be a possible symbolism- at least from other POVs. Symbolism may differ depending on the Moro tribe in question- what may be a "kakatua as sarimanok" from the Maranao POV, for example, may be a different interpretation from the Yakan POV; at the same time the Tausug have their own symbolism, etc. Additionally- Mindanao-made kakatua differs from Sulu-made kakatua in terms of design aesthetic. And it's not only the pommel- oral traditions regarding the origin of shared blades such as the kris/kalis, for example, may vary not only per tribe, but per family lineage as well.

In a nutshell, interpretation of Moro imagery is based (and modified) by the following:
1. Era (and sometimes area too)
2. Tribe
3. Family lineage

These should all be taken into context to arrive at a strong interpretation regarding symbolism/imagery.

[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...

Regards,
Kai