Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - The 10th to 15th century Visayan kris, & earlier artifacts

laEspadaAncha · 17th May 2011, 06:07 PM

Hello Miguel Diaz,

Great and fascinating post - thank you for sharing it.

While I am no expert on the kris, Moro or otherwise, as Gustav so eloquently put it in an earlier post in another thread, "a serious collector should at least be an amateur ethnologist," or something to that effect, and it is in this light I humbly comment below.

If I understand correctly, Dr. Dizon was the archeologist who published this paper on the kris. By his own admission, the dating of the site was limited to and by the following factors:

1. Site (i.e., contextual content of the grave)
2. Type
3. Metallurgical treatment of the iron items

Now, by his estimation, these items are dated to the Period of Contact or Trade, i.e., the 10th-15th century, CE.

I think it deserves mention that there was likely extensive trading and exchange taking place by this period, not just within the Philippine archipelago, but by extension, throughout the Indonesian archipelago as well.

In other words, in light of additional evidence, there is no reason to exclude the possibility this individual item may have found its way to Bohol by trade. As evidenced by digs all over the world, there is no shortage of trade goods to be found in burial sites, as often such items held every bit as much (and sometimes more) prestige than indigenously-produced goods due to their relative scarcity.

In short, the presence of this example of this form in a grave in the Visayas is not, IMHO, a sufficient condition to refute existing and established opinions of the Indonesian origin of the form.

17th May 2011, 06:07 PM	#21
laEspadaAncha Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 608	Hello Miguel Diaz, Great and fascinating post - thank you for sharing it. While I am no expert on the kris, Moro or otherwise, as Gustav so eloquently put it in an earlier post in another thread, "a serious collector should at least be an amateur ethnologist," or something to that effect, and it is in this light I humbly comment below. If I understand correctly, Dr. Dizon was the archeologist who published this paper on the kris. By his own admission, the dating of the site was limited to and by the following factors: 1. Site (i.e., contextual content of the grave) 2. Type 3. Metallurgical treatment of the iron items Now, by his estimation, these items are dated to the Period of Contact or Trade, i.e., the 10th-15th century, CE. I think it deserves mention that there was likely extensive trading and exchange taking place by this period, not just within the Philippine archipelago, but by extension, throughout the Indonesian archipelago as well. In other words, in light of additional evidence, there is no reason to exclude the possibility this individual item may have found its way to Bohol by trade. As evidenced by digs all over the world, there is no shortage of trade goods to be found in burial sites, as often such items held every bit as much (and sometimes more) prestige than indigenously-produced goods due to their relative scarcity. In short, the presence of this example of this form in a grave in the Visayas is not, IMHO, a sufficient condition to refute existing and established opinions of the Indonesian origin of the form.