KRIS WITH TALISMAN

tanaruz · 30th May 2020, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

The blade looks Sulu/Tausug to me, although the hilt does look a little more Maguindanao.

Hi Sir,

1) yes, the hilt does look a little more of Maguindanao;

2) blade: sulu/tausug: what are the feature/s of a kris blade that points it to the probability that it is of tausug origin? or maguindanaoan or maranao? very interested to know.

Rick · 30th May 2020, 03:10 AM

Some time spent with the Search engine here may help with your questions regarding identifying tribal origins.
Search terms like Sulu Kris, Tausug Kris, Maranao Kris etc.

Ian · 30th May 2020, 12:53 PM

Hi tanaruz:

I agree with your Maranao attribution based on Cato's identification of kris by tribal groups. As I'm sure you know, Cato identified distinct differences among Sulu (Tausug) and Mindanao (Maguindanao and Maranao) kris. I have attached a picture of his illustrative examples below, showing the elephant trunk area of Sulu (Tausug) kris [A], Maranao kris [B], and Maguindanao kris [C, D]. It's fairly clear that your example most closely resembles the Maranao form shown by Cato. The blade of yours is also straight and wide, wider than most Sulu kris but consistent with Mindanao kris of the late 19th-20th C.

The talismanic/magical inscriptions on the blade are a wonderful find, and I agree with David that we will likely never know what these meant to the owner of the sword. They do indicate, however, that this was a "special" sword imbued with powers such as providing a safe and successful outcome for the wielder of it. Who knows what spirits, good or evil, may lie within this blade.
.

Battara · 30th May 2020, 11:55 PM

It is not unheard of to sell a blade from one tribe to someone of another tribe who places their own tribal hilt on it, and thus the mixing of styles on some Moro pieces, or even Bisayan and Moro pieces.

tanaruz · 31st May 2020, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

Hi tanaruz:

I agree with your Maranao attribution based on Cato's identification of kris by tribal groups. As I'm sure you know, Cato identified distinct differences among Sulu (Tausug) and Mindanao (Maguindanao and Maranao) kris. I have attached a picture of his illustrative examples below, showing the elephant trunk area of Sulu (Tausug) kris [A], Maranao kris [B], and Maguindanao kris [C, D]. It's fairly clear that your example most closely resembles the Maranao form shown by Cato. The blade of yours is also straight and wide, wider than most Sulu kris but consistent with Mindanao kris of the late 19th-20th C.

The talismanic/magical inscriptions on the blade are a wonderful find, and I agree with David that we will likely never know what these meant to the owner of the sword. They do indicate, however, that this was a "special" sword imbued with powers such as providing a safe and successful outcome for the wielder of it. Who knows what spirits, good or evil, may lie within this blade.
.

Hi Sir,

First of all, my utmost appreciation for the information (and the pictures). A couple of questions (I hope you won't mind):
1) "elephant trunk area"-is this the area (encircled in yellow)?

2) blade: "straight and wide, wider than most Sulu kris but consistent with the Mindanao kris of the late 19th-20th century"- question: wider by approximately how many centimeters than most Sulu kris?

I really need to find and purchase the book by Cato. I know that the book is quite rare.

All the best and be safe all,

Yves

Battara · 31st May 2020, 04:40 PM

Yes that is usually the best way to distinguish the tribal differences. The back of the ganga (or opposite side of the yellow areas) is another way, as well as decoration/okir/ukkil motifs.

Ian · 31st May 2020, 11:57 PM

As far as Robert Cato's book, Moro Swords, is concerned, it was a limited single edition printing and has been out of print for several years. A controversial book, you will find varying opinions of it on these pages if you search for "Cato." Another book has been promised for several years, written by Philipinos, but has yet to be published. Part of the problem seems to be the secrecy of information coming from Moro sources who insist on the utmost confidentiality. As a result, Cato remains the most authoritative published work on Moro swords, despite a number of areas where he is likely incorrect.

Ian · 1st June 2020, 02:09 AM

On the subject of kris dimensions, it is clear that archaic kris (pre-19th C) were slimmer and shorter than subsequent kris. In the 19th C, kris appear to have become longer and wider than their ancestors, and this trend was exaggerated in the late 19th C among the Maranao and Maguindanao. Tausug kris also increased in size during the 19th C, but not to the extent of the Mindanao kris in the lat 19th C, although some Tausug kris of the 20th C may have got closer. It's not easy to give precise dimensions because of the changes that developed over time. Some of the Mindanao kris can be about 1.75 inches in width at the first luk, and the gangya are also wider and thicker than earlier examples or Tausug kris in general.

The best way to appreciate the differences between kris from the various tribal groups is to lay examples side-by-side from each group that were made in the same era. From memory, I think Cato's book shows some pictures where he has done that. Certainly he talks about the greater size of Mindanao kris in the late 19th C.

30th May 2020, 12:53 PM	#3
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,071	Hi tanaruz: I agree with your Maranao attribution based on Cato's identification of kris by tribal groups. As I'm sure you know, Cato identified distinct differences among Sulu (Tausug) and Mindanao (Maguindanao and Maranao) kris. I have attached a picture of his illustrative examples below, showing the elephant trunk area of Sulu (Tausug) kris [A], Maranao kris [B], and Maguindanao kris [C, D]. It's fairly clear that your example most closely resembles the Maranao form shown by Cato. The blade of yours is also straight and wide, wider than most Sulu kris but consistent with Mindanao kris of the late 19th-20th C. The talismanic/magical inscriptions on the blade are a wonderful find, and I agree with David that we will likely never know what these meant to the owner of the sword. They do indicate, however, that this was a "special" sword imbued with powers such as providing a safe and successful outcome for the wielder of it. Who knows what spirits, good or evil, may lie within this blade. . Attached Images

30th May 2020, 03:10 AM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,268	Some time spent with the Search engine here may help with your questions regarding identifying tribal origins. Search terms like Sulu Kris, Tausug Kris, Maranao Kris etc.

30th May 2020, 11:55 PM	#4
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,148	It is not unheard of to sell a blade from one tribe to someone of another tribe who places their own tribal hilt on it, and thus the mixing of styles on some Moro pieces, or even Bisayan and Moro pieces.

31st May 2020, 04:40 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,148	Yes that is usually the best way to distinguish the tribal differences. The back of the ganga (or opposite side of the yellow areas) is another way, as well as decoration/okir/ukkil motifs.

31st May 2020, 11:57 PM	#7
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,071	As far as Robert Cato's book, Moro Swords, is concerned, it was a limited single edition printing and has been out of print for several years. A controversial book, you will find varying opinions of it on these pages if you search for "Cato." Another book has been promised for several years, written by Philipinos, but has yet to be published. Part of the problem seems to be the secrecy of information coming from Moro sources who insist on the utmost confidentiality. As a result, Cato remains the most authoritative published work on Moro swords, despite a number of areas where he is likely incorrect.

1st June 2020, 02:09 AM	#8
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,071	On the subject of kris dimensions, it is clear that archaic kris (pre-19th C) were slimmer and shorter than subsequent kris. In the 19th C, kris appear to have become longer and wider than their ancestors, and this trend was exaggerated in the late 19th C among the Maranao and Maguindanao. Tausug kris also increased in size during the 19th C, but not to the extent of the Mindanao kris in the lat 19th C, although some Tausug kris of the 20th C may have got closer. It's not easy to give precise dimensions because of the changes that developed over time. Some of the Mindanao kris can be about 1.75 inches in width at the first luk, and the gangya are also wider and thicker than earlier examples or Tausug kris in general. The best way to appreciate the differences between kris from the various tribal groups is to lay examples side-by-side from each group that were made in the same era. From memory, I think Cato's book shows some pictures where he has done that. Certainly he talks about the greater size of Mindanao kris in the late 19th C.