Pagan races of the Malay Peninsula - Sabrizain.org

CHAP. IX GENERAL REMARKS 405
I have not succeeded in discovering the smallest differ-
ence between them from the decorative point of view.
Vaughan-Stevens himself, in spite of his lonc(
article upon this subject, headed " goh " and " gah,"
is continually confusing them, and as his own editor
points out, his remark that "others {sc. designs) could
not be reduced (to a size that would suit the blow-
pipe), and hence were retained as 'goh' or 'gah,'"'
shows that in his mind there was no essential
difference between them. Elsewhere, after comparing
the blowpipe and "goh" patterns, he derives the
blowpipe patterns from a " goh," whereas, according
to his own general theory, it was from a "gah" that
these patterns were evolved. Elsewhere, again, he
refers to both "goh" and " gah " together as dart-
quivers. The only conclusion that can be drawn, as
his own editor quite rightly points out, is that
Vaughan-Stevens really found no specific difference
between his " goh " and "gah " patterns, and that his
theory of the evolution of the blowpipe patterns from a
"gah" rests upon some misapprehension of his own.
The fact of the matter is (in my own mind at least
I am sure), that both these forms of the widespread
bamboo receptacle should be included in one class
merely as receptacles, without any reference to what
their contents might be. In fact the word " go' " in
Semang ( = " gob " in Andamanese)" is the exact equi-
valent of the Malay " tabong," and merely signifies a
vessel or holder formed from a single internode of a
large kind of bamboo, which had, as a rule, certain specific
' In orig. "gor" and "gar" (j/