[Federico]

Ok, I get busy, go offline for a while, and here is a nice long post on barongs. Well since a lot of ground has been covered here, Ill try and see if I can slip in the best I can. Since this is a barong thread, Ill address only barongs, Ill address kris in the other thread, with one exception.

Labantayo, one hint at the possible traditional use of the garab, may come from the book Muddy Glory by Russel Roth. If I remember rightly (I dont have the book in front of me), if we associate the garab with the pulahan aka. pulajan aka. dios-dios of Samar and Leyte, at least one account in this book attributes to them that they were known for a double sword style. Now this is vague, does not necessarily point to the garab, and not very helpful but it is something.

As for the barong in FMA, as LabanTayo has noted a simple trace of your arts lineage should clear that up. Unfortunately, particularly for those of us in the US and Europe, most FMA that we are seeing has a very limited, and I stress limited set of sources. Eg. the Stockton Guros (Angel Cabales, Leo Giron, etc...), Pekiti Tersia (eg. Leo Gaje), Modern Arnis (Remy Presas), Doce Pares (either Diony or Cacoy), etc... While there are a plethora of teachers these days, you trace back and it comes back down to a small handful. Out of that handful, almost none have any real connection to Moroland, let alone a Moro fighting art. Of all the old manongs, I dont believe (with the exception of Tatang Illustrisimo) that really any claimed to be teaching a Moro art. Yet, it is the 2nd and most often 3rd and 4th generation teachers/students that seem to be spreading this myth. So where does it start, and how do you make sense out of it. If your teacher was from the US, his teacher from Visayas, and his teacher's teacher from Visayas, where does the Moro enter in the picture to teach the teacher some Moro technique let alone base the art off of a Moro weapon. Further complicating matters, is how non-blade oriented many FMA groups have become. Definitely a good way to generate power with a stick, can be very different depending on the type of blade weapon one is using. I know many in my own Eskrima group, who cannot translate their FMA into a blade because of their lack of any real blade experience. The stick in Arnis/Eskrima was intended as a training tool only for beginning students, and for many it was a good training tool because one grew up with a bolo, and did not have to re-learn how to handle it. I know from my father's own story about how his grandfather tried to teach him "arnis" a stick never entered the equation, and training was all bolo all the time. Anyways, that being said, I know in my own training, while certain principles can be taken as a universal applications of motion, none of the moves have really struck me as built around Moro weaponry. I have always felt the moves much more comfortable and natural to execute using bolo, rather than kris or barong.

Spunjer, as for Arnis/Eskrima only existing in Visayas, that can easily be traced back to the limited number of teachers who have openly taught here in the US. Visayan's were well represented amongst the early Filipino immigrants in the US, while other groups were not. There are definitely non-Visayan Eskrima/Arnis styles that werent simply taught to them by some Visayan. I can think of at least one group that pops up immidiately to my mind, and that would be Garimot Arnis. There are definitely many many different styles still in PI, that have not been taught outside of their families, let alone publically, and unfortunately even more that have been lost due to modernization. Visayas, particularly Cebu, is very well known, particularly due to the efforts of the Canete brothers, in their promotion of FMA as a more public affair. But I can assure you, that for many family styles, FMA is not something to be shared with the public, but something to be cherished and kept within the family alone. But beyond this, what constitutes FMA in itself varies greatly. I know my great-grandfather supposedly learned his style piece by piece, from his voyages as a sailor. A core set of techniques, but also adding Chinese/Indonesian/Malaysian techniques as his voyages brought him into contact with other styles from port to port. There does definitely seem to be a core connection between the FMA weapon arts and the ocean/sailors.

Anyways, as for the origin of the Barong. I still feel the answer, like the origin of the kris, lies in finding provenanced pieces. Without a provenanced pieces, we are dealing with theory. Eg. when a myth speaks of a Barong, is it speaking of the barung sword as we know it in Sulu, the barong demon as is pernicious amongst many Malay states/cultures, or something different. Do modern Maguindanao claim the sword, where do their origin myths attribute it to? Unfortunately, I do not know which 17th account you are referring to, and to what context the barong is mentioned. But one thing that is equally important, aside from identifying what exactly they are describing, would be in what context are they describing it? Anyways, it is not something I have given much thought to, as I have always felt it deeply rooted in Sulu culture, in much the same way I feel the Kampilan has been rooted to Mindanao. Though Zamboanga, the Iranun, and Balangingi Samal definitely throw wrenches into theorization. Most particularly Zamboanga, a melting pot region in which one finds Mindanao and Sulu groups and items mixing freely. Hmmmm....I had a better response before oh well...