Pagan races of the Malay Peninsula - Sabrizain.org

624
APPENDIX
"pawer") are '* in part borrowed" from the disease-patterns, even though they
are seldom combined in one comb. Yet it is absolutely essential to suppose that
the flower-patterns {if they 7-eaIly represent flowers) were taken direct from nature
and not in any case borrowed from the "tin-weg." The simplest and, so far as
the writer can see, the only way out of the whole coil, is to suppose that
Vaughan-Stevens was ignorant of the fact that the word "bunga," as used not
only by the Malays but among these tribes, signifies a decorative emblem, border,
or pattern, as well as a flower, without any necessary correlation between its usual
signification and the object (or objects) represented. It can hardly be doubted
that in the (rare) cases in which the flower- and disease-patterns in the same
comb resemble each other, it is the disease part of the pattern that takes after
the flower part of the pattern, and not vice versa, whilst in other cases the disease
part of the pattern may be taken from other objects besides flowers. At all
events it is tenable to suppose, as is here done by Vaughan-Stevens' editor, that
" the object of healing has always been the chief thing," and the working of a
charm an accretion of secondary importance, as among these tribes at all events
the two ideas are indistinguishable. A yet further difficulty (in the way of the
acceptance of the comb-theoiy) lies in the existence of an alternative theory,
also promulgated by Vaughan-Stevens, to the eff"ect that all patterns originated
from the charcoal marks on wood which were employed by the Puttos for the
prevention, expulsion, and conjuration of diseases.
Other narrow bands or panels on the combs are supposed by \"aughan-
Stevens to represent such flowers as are next best in point of efficacy (!), and these
are said to imitate the "was" and "pawer" pattern of other combs, or their
special signs ! Of these all one can say is that an explanation of this kind (as to
the employment of "second-best " (!) patterns) is totally at variance with the
practical character of the race to which the practice is attributed ; and that it is
quite inacceptable ! Dr. Preuss himself sees that these bands are too narrow to
represent anything eftectively, and that their "purport" [if any!] "would be
exceedingly insignificant " !
Here follows a statement in detail of the flower-theory, which we have shown
in the text to be utterly untenable—a mere house of cards that falls with a crash
when the lowest card has been removed. The conclusive arguments against it
are too numerous to be repeated here, but we may perhaps be permitted to ask
a few pertinent questions. Why should a "tepi"-line represent both pistil
and stamens of a flower, especially when the word is nothing more than the ^Ialay
word "tepi" = edge or border, and neither pistil nor stamens can by any flight
of imagination be nominally regarded as the edge of a flower ? To what race,
either of savages or civilised men, would it occur to represent the smell as part of
a flower, and as requiring visible illustration ? What race of savages on an
equally low plane of culture is able to distinguish between the pistil, stamens, and
sepals at all, terms which have simply been invented for the purposes of botanical
analysis ? Why again are the petals, which we might fairly expect to rank as
the most important part of a flower in the eyes of a native, and the only part of
a flower, in fact, that is recognised by the Malays (a race immeasurably in advance
of the Semang as regards culture), entirely omitted and disregarded?
The Charm-hieroglyphics {sic) of the Negritos in Malacca.
In vol. Ixxv. (No. 23) of Globus there is given an account of Vaughan-Stevens'
combs, with especial reference to the signs said to be used for various parts of the
body (see vol. i. pp. 434, 435 of text). The "one hundred and forty combs are
divided into seventy pairs, each of which is directed against a disease whose
name is usually given, but not explained," nor is there, as a rule, the smallest
clue to any of the sicknesses given. As regards the signs for parts of the body,
only one or two of these could (as Dr. Preuss points out) be identified without
il