Kris question to the knowledgeables

BSMStar · 19th January 2006, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

About :
http://www.bibingka.com/dahon/lci/lci.htm

A great link Rick!!!! And a great discovery!!!!

Just when someone claims to see the edge of darkness, someone fines another candle!

Federico · 19th January 2006, 09:55 PM

Thanks for the book recommendation Mabagani, will get a copy asap. Also, thanks for the link Rick, great stuff. It will be interesting to see how this will change academic thought on the subject. I know Ive been very uncomfortable with the whole land bridge theory, for much of the same reasons as Mabagani. I know it is politically appealing, PI as having its own unique cultural origins non-dependent/influenced by foreign groups, but then the current PI map as a whole is such an artificial creation.

Labantayo, I think we are on the same line on Malay presence in Luzon. Scott speaks of early settlements in the area, I believe Majul speaks on their Islamic origins and connections to other regional Sultanates. Now where I think we are having some mis-understanding is that earlier, when I was speaking of Javanese imperical inclusion, I was refering to PI's inclusion as part of the Javanese Majahapit empire. I do not feel that a few settlements, that at least some scholars have hinted at having possible Islamic origins (which would postdate the Majahapit Empire), necessarily proves that we were part of the Majahapit empire. Particularly since they are limited, eg. they do not cover all of Luzon, and are more localized to certain areas, I dont necessarily feel that a later Islamic colonial explanation for their occurence (particularly by the 16th century, the time in which Scott is referring) is unreasonable. If we were part of the Majahapit empire, I would imagine that a couple hundred years of inclusion would spread the influence further into the island. Though I suppose if we used the end date of the empire, then we could argue for an explanation of limited presence, but then I feel we come in conflict with the possible Islamic influences on these settlements. Oh well, anyways I just want to clarify once more, I never said there was no Malay influence on Luzon, but was rather questioning whether that influence constituted our inclusion in the Majahapit empire. Hmm...that was rather long winded and convoluted, oh well I suppose whats new from me.

MABAGANI · 21st January 2006, 07:32 AM

A must read provided by Brian, B.I., "Malaysian Weapons in Arabic Literature" by S.Q.Fatima. It goes into the history of trade and swords in Southeast Asia from the bronze age to pre Islamic Arabia era and on until Christian contact. Ironically, the author's opinion mentions the Keris Suluk of Sulu as the blade closest in form to early bas-reliefs found in Java. Also mentions "main silat and bersilat" in relation to swordplay.

19th January 2006, 09:55 PM	#2
Federico Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA Posts: 312	Thanks for the book recommendation Mabagani, will get a copy asap. Also, thanks for the link Rick, great stuff. It will be interesting to see how this will change academic thought on the subject. I know Ive been very uncomfortable with the whole land bridge theory, for much of the same reasons as Mabagani. I know it is politically appealing, PI as having its own unique cultural origins non-dependent/influenced by foreign groups, but then the current PI map as a whole is such an artificial creation. Labantayo, I think we are on the same line on Malay presence in Luzon. Scott speaks of early settlements in the area, I believe Majul speaks on their Islamic origins and connections to other regional Sultanates. Now where I think we are having some mis-understanding is that earlier, when I was speaking of Javanese imperical inclusion, I was refering to PI's inclusion as part of the Javanese Majahapit empire. I do not feel that a few settlements, that at least some scholars have hinted at having possible Islamic origins (which would postdate the Majahapit Empire), necessarily proves that we were part of the Majahapit empire. Particularly since they are limited, eg. they do not cover all of Luzon, and are more localized to certain areas, I dont necessarily feel that a later Islamic colonial explanation for their occurence (particularly by the 16th century, the time in which Scott is referring) is unreasonable. If we were part of the Majahapit empire, I would imagine that a couple hundred years of inclusion would spread the influence further into the island. Though I suppose if we used the end date of the empire, then we could argue for an explanation of limited presence, but then I feel we come in conflict with the possible Islamic influences on these settlements. Oh well, anyways I just want to clarify once more, I never said there was no Malay influence on Luzon, but was rather questioning whether that influence constituted our inclusion in the Majahapit empire. Hmm...that was rather long winded and convoluted, oh well I suppose whats new from me.

21st January 2006, 07:32 AM	#3
MABAGANI Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 221	A must read provided by Brian, B.I., "Malaysian Weapons in Arabic Literature" by S.Q.Fatima. It goes into the history of trade and swords in Southeast Asia from the bronze age to pre Islamic Arabia era and on until Christian contact. Ironically, the author's opinion mentions the Keris Suluk of Sulu as the blade closest in form to early bas-reliefs found in Java. Also mentions "main silat and bersilat" in relation to swordplay.