A Very Old Kris

[migueldiaz]

Here's the 2nd slide, i.e., various Filipino costumes, from the 1590 Boxer Codex. Note that it appears that everywhere in Luzon (northern Philippines) and the Visayas (central Phils.), the same symmetrical blade with bifurcated hilt was used.

On the one hand, one can become suspicious as to whether the painter just became lazy and thus painted the same sword type over and over again.

On the other hand, the painter's attention to details (on the dress, accessories, etc.) tends to negate that apprehension.

In any case, I think the point is that for a long time as far as our country is concerned, it looks like there's some homogeneity in sword design. Perhaps they figured that if it ain't broke, then one should not fix it.

[migueldiaz]

Then almost a hundred years later, in the Visayas as recorded by the Spanish priest Alcina, the same sword design persisted.

Pls. note that the design is almost identical to Hutterer's Early Iron Age Cebu dagger, especially the 'ice pick' on the hilt's pommel -- and this after about 2,000 years!

As a side note, the placement of the sword on the right side of the waist makes sense then. Because if one were to hold the hilt with the right hand as if holding an ice pick (and not as if holding a hammer), then a quick strike to the enemy can easily be made with said 'ice pick'.

[migueldiaz]

But in the midst of said homogeneity in sword design for at least 1,000 to 1,500 years (i.e., from 500 to 400 BC [the Argao, Cebu dagger], till the 10th to 15th century [the Bohol kalis, per below and above]), suddenly we see a branching off -- that is, the Bohol kalis with an assymetrical axis, and with guard with 'blade catchers'.

Hence to my mind, this Bohol kalis appears to be the granddaddy that eventually morphed into the more popular form of the kris, which is the Moro kris.

Of course things did not happen in isolation. Philippines and Indonesia (and Malaysia) are archipelagos. And thus their borders leak like a sieve. In fact perhaps there's not much concept of borders then.

And Ron has already pointed out to us before that the 900 A.D. Laguna [Luzon] Copperplate Inscription is a fine example of the cross-pollination that's happening then -- the inscription was written in a combination of Old Tagalog [i.e., Luzon], Old Javanese, and Old Malay.

To recap, my tentative conclusion then is that the [Bohol] kalis I first posted above appears to be the proto-Philippine kris.

And to my mind, the other missing link that we need to find is a subsequent kalis which developed a gandik -- and at that point, perhaps that could very well be the first Philippine kris.

Now going back to the porous nature of the political boundaries between what will become Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia, would anybody know when the first keris with gandik appeared? as in what century?

That would then provide a reference as to the time the Phil. kalis may have incorporated the gandik into the crossguard. We have to remember though that that feature per se (i.e., the 'elephant trunk') already appeared in the hilt of Philippine swords, as early as the 10th to 13th century. Thus, it's more of an issue of the timing of the movement from the hilt, to the guard ...

[David]

Originally Posted by migueldiaz

Now going back to the porous nature of the political boundaries between what will become Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia, would anybody know when the first keris with gandik appeared? as in what century?

That would then provide a reference as to the time the Phil. kalis may have incorporated the gandik into the crossguard. We have to remember though that that feature per se (i.e., the 'elephant trunk') already appeared in the hilt of Philippine swords, as early as the 10th to 13th century. Thus, it's more of an issue of the timing of the movement from the hilt, to the guard ...

In Javanese terms the "gandik" is not the "elephant trunk". That would be the "kembang kacang" in the diagrams you posted above. While this feature seems to be present in all Moro kris it is not a necessary feature on the Indonesian keris, but the gandik is.
As for this so-called "elephant trunk" feature on Moro kris, my feeling about it's intention is that sometimes it is supposed to be an elephant, sometimes a bird and sometimes even a naga. I have examples that clearly show all three of these forms. Just as it's Indonesian cousin comes in a variety of animal motifs (elephant, naga, singo, etc.) in the kembang kacang, so i believe does the Moro kris.

[Spunjer]

lorenz, thanks for the excellent mini-dissertation! question tho: do you know if those gold handles have round or rectangular holes? i was wondering if you ever seen the exhibit in person. as far as the bohol kris having a rectangular tang vs. the above kris having a squarish/round tang: this is indeed an enigma. hard to believe one evolved/devolved from the other. like Kino said:

..puzzles, like the asang -asang. If they could only talk.

daghang salamat, bai!

on the sidenote:
on that vocabulary by cowie, interesting how the Suluanons back in 1893 has 8 different terms for a kalis tulid and 7 different ones for the kalis lanteh... wonder why the term seko/taluseko wasn't used???

[Andrew]

Great thread, guys. I was going to put the thread Ron linked to in his first post in the classics, but this one is heading there...

[Battara]

I will also make one more note. Antonio de Morga in the 1600s wrote about his travels in the region. In his section on the Philippines, he gives a poor description but mentions the "unusual" form of what the natives call a balarao. This term is still used at the turn of the century for the Mandayan dagger like this one from my collection below:

[migueldiaz]

Originally Posted by David

In Javanese terms the "gandik" is not the "elephant trunk". That would be the "kembang kacang" in the diagrams you posted above. While this feature seems to be present in all Moro kris it is not a necessary feature on the Indonesian keris, but the gandik is.
As for this so-called "elephant trunk" feature on Moro kris, my feeling about it's intention is that sometimes it is supposed to be an elephant, sometimes a bird and sometimes even a naga. I have examples that clearly show all three of these forms. Just as it's Indonesian cousin comes in a variety of animal motifs (elephant, naga, singo, etc.) in the kembang kacang, so i believe does the Moro kris.

David, thanks for the comments. As for Moro swords, I agree that the 'elephant trunk' can represent both naga and bird. I'm not too sure though that in the Moro context, it can also mean an elephant. And it's because historically, there were no elephants in the our islands.

We used to have stegodons in the distant past (based on fossils found). But no elephants then, and now. Well, actually there used to a few (imported) elephants in Sulu, after the ruler of Java in 1395 gifted the Sultan of Sulu with Javanese elephants. This is according to Saleeby (1908), based on written accounts of the Moros (the tarsilah). More on this story can be found here.

On a related matter, Alcina in his 1668 epic work on the history of the Visayas included the elephant as part of the region's fauna. So maybe they also came from Sulu.

So on second thoughts, perhaps the elephant is after all a possible interpretation also of the 'elephant trunk'.

But I think the more important thing we can glean from the above story is that Java and Sulu, and Java and Manila (900 AD, per the LCI), have been corresponding with each other for the longest time.

And for Java to gift Sulu something means that Sulu must have enjoyed some prominence even in those earlier times.

So I think I'll just end this rambling by saying that presumably, the sword designs of each region (Java, Brunei, Sulu, Manila, Cebu, etc.) must have somehow influenced each other, given the close ties among them.

[migueldiaz]

ron, your question on the tang shape kept me thinking all day long.

and so i spent the whole morning (wed.) reviewing those ancient gold hilts at the two museums here in manila. and then i have to dig up hutterer's findings on those cebu daggers that's about a thousand years older.

and here i am still pounding away at the keyboard at 1:00 am the following day. therefore, you owe me a drink of sarsi and a lot of popcorn!

so let's start with the oldest one -- figure 2b according to hutterer is 'early iron age'. iron age in the country is between 500 bc to 900 ad. thus let's say '2b' is 500 to 100 bc. as we can see, the tang appears to be cylindrical.

fast forward to about a thousand years later -- figure 2a per hutterer also, is from "the first millennium a.d. ... [up to the] late 9th century to early 10th century a.d.". and what i think i see is a hexagonal tang. and the hexagonal cross-section appears to carry through, up to the beginning of the blade's forte. these scientific illustrations are pretty accurate. thus i think the hexagon we are seeing is real.

next up are the 10th to 13th century gold hilts ...

[migueldiaz]

these gold hilts i'll show are all from the 10th to 13th century a.d. and these gold hilts constitute the 'universe', meaning there's no other 10th to 13th c. gold hilts that can found (except those in private collection, but i suppose they are fewer).

the first one exhibits a rectangular hole in the hilt, hence a rectangular tang.