There is reason, however, to ascribe an Indian origin to the term; whilst the practice, apart from the term, is of no rare occurrence in Indian history. Thus Tod records some notable instances in the history of the Rājputs. In one of these (1634) the eldest son of the Raja of Mārwār ran a-muck at the court of Shāh Jahān, failing in his blow at the Emperor, but killing five courtiers of eminence before he fell himself. Again, in the 18th century, Bījai Singh, also of Mārwār, bore strong resentment against the Tālpura prince of Hyderabad, Bījar Khān, who had sent to demand from the Rājput tribute and a bride. A Bhattī and a Chondāwat offered their services for vengeance, and set out for Sind as envoys. Whilst Bījar Khān read their credentials, muttering, 'No mention of the bride!' the Chondāwat buried a dagger in his heart, exclaiming 'This for the bride!' 'And this for the tribute!' cried the Bhattī, repeating the blow. The pair then plied their daggers right and left, and 26 persons were slain before the envoys were hacked to pieces (Tod, ii. 45 & 315).
But it is in Malabar that we trace the apparent origin of the Malay term in the existence of certain desperadoes who are called by a variety of old travellers amouchi or amuco. The nearest approach to this that we have been able to discover is the Malayālam amar-kkan, 'a warrior' (from amar, 'fight, war'). [The proper Malayālam term for such men was Chaver, literally those who took up or devoted themselves to death.] One of the special applications of this word is remarkable in connection with a singular custom in Malabar. After the [Zamorin] had reigned 12 years, a great assembly was held at Tirunāvāyi, when that Prince took his seat surrounded by his dependants, fully armed. Any one might then attack him, and the assailant, if successful in killing the Zamorin, got the throne. This had often happened. [For a full discussion of this custom see Frazer, Golden Bough, 2nd ed., ii. 14 sq.] In 1600 thirty such assailants were killed in the enterprise. Now these men were called amar-kkār (pl. of amar-kkan, see Gundert s.v.). These men evidently ran a-muck in the true Malay sense; and quotations below will show other illustrations from Malabar which confirm the idea that both name and practice originated in Continental India. There is indeed a difficulty as to the derivation here indicated, in the fact that the amuco or amouchi of European writers on Malabar seems by no means close enough to amarkkan, whilst it is so close to the Malay āmuk; and on this further light may be hoped for. The identity between the amoucos of Malabar and the amuck runners of the Malay peninsula is clearly shown by the passage from Correa given below. [Mr Whiteway adds—"Gouvea (1606) in his Iornada (ch. 9, Bk. ii.) applies the word amouques to certain Hindus whom he saw in S. Malabar near Quilon, whose duty it was to defend the Syrian Christians with their lives. There are reasons for thinking that the worthy priest got hold of the story of a cock and a bull; but in any case the Hindus referred to were really Jangadas.">[ (See [JANCADA]).
De Gubernatis has indeed suggested that the word amouchi was derived from the Skt. amokshya, 'that cannot be loosed'; and this would be very consistent with several of the passages which we shall quote, in which the idea of being 'bound by a vow' underlies the conduct of the persons to whom the term was applicable both in Malabar and in the Archipelago. But amokshya is a word unknown to Malayālam, in such a sense at least.
We have seen a-muck derived from the Ar. aḥmaḳ, 'fatuous' [(e.g. Ball, Jungle Life, 358).] But this is etymology of the kind which scorns history.
The phrase has been thoroughly naturalised in England since the days of Dryden and Pope. [The earliest quotation for "running amuck" in the N.E.D. is from Marvell (1672).]
c. 1430.—Nicolo Conti, speaking of the greater Islands of the Archipelago under the name of the Two Javas, does not use the word, but describes a form of the practice:—
"Homicide is here a jest, and goes without punishment. Debtors are made over to their creditors as slaves; and some of these, preferring death to slavery, will with drawn swords rush on, stabbing all whom they fall in with of less strength than themselves, until they meet death at the hands of some one more than a match for them. This man, the creditors then sue in Court for the dead man's debt."—In India in the XVth C. 45.
1516.—"There are some of them (Javanese) who if they fall ill of any severe illness vow to God that if they remain in health they will of their own accord seek another more honourable death for his service, and as soon as they get well they take a dagger in their hands, and go out into the streets and kill as many persons as they meet, both men, women, and children, in such wise that they go like mad dogs, killing until they are killed. These are called Amuco. And as soon as they see them begin this work, they cry out, saying Amuco, Amuco, in order that people may take care of themselves, and they kill them with dagger and spear thrusts."—Barbosa, Hak. Soc. 194. This passage seems to show that the word amuk must have been commonly used in Malay countries before the arrival of the Portuguese there, c. 1511.
1539.—"... The Tyrant (o Rey Ache) sallied forth in person, accompanied with 5000 resolute men (cinco mil Amoucos) and charged the Bataes very furiously."—Pinto (orig. cap. xvii.) in Cogan, p. 20.
1552.—De Barros, speaking of the capture of the Island of Beth (Beyt, off the N.W. point of Kāthiāwār) by Nuno da Cunha in 1531, says: "But the natives of Guzarat stood in such fear of Sultan Badur that they would not consent to the terms. And so, like people determined on death, all that night they shaved their heads (this is a superstitious practice of those who despise life, people whom they call in India Amaucos) and betook themselves to their mosque, and there devoted their persons to death ... and as an earnest of this vow, and an example of this resolution, the Captain ordered a great fire to be made, and cast into it his wife, and a little son that he had, and all his household and his goods, in fear lest anything of his should fall into our possession." Others did the like, and then they fell upon the Portuguese.—Dec. IV. iv. 13.