Kris: Sulu or Sumatra?

[Battara]

Xasterix you bring up a good point of the fittings. I agree that they are later. You also reminded me that I saw a Maguindanao kris with the exact same shape of wranga and overall scabbard shape. So I stand corrected on the scabbard.

Would you be willing so show what you mean a out the mouth cavity - I can't seem to envision what you are saying.

[RobT]

kai,
Here are the close-ups you asked for and they show just how bad the cord wrap is. The cord goes under the leather bands and the bands (made of rough hide) appear to be glued on. I know that leather bands aren’t traditional on kris hilts but I’d be willing to bet that whoever did the cord wrap was Filipino and also added the bands. For that reason, I would like to leave them as part of the blade’s history but I don’t know if I can get them loose to rewrap the hilt without destroying them. If I can’t save them, I’ll replace them with wound or braided rattan because I am sure that the band next to the pommel is needed to hide a join between the pommel and hilt.

xasterix,
I have always been a bit leery about Cato’s classification for two reasons. 1) The defining area is rather small and the culturally denoting differences are rather subtle. For a culturally differentiating trait, you would think that the feature would be more prominent and the differences would be more marked. 2) As far as I know, Cato provided no documentation to support his classification. We don’t know what data he used, how or where he got it, or the size of his sample.
Unfortunately, for me, the classification offered by your curator-researcher friend suffers from the same problems that I have with Cato. The area your friend considers defining is even smaller than Cato’s and the difference is even more subtle. As for your friend’s source, without copious and independentI information, I tend to view any statements provided by tribal elders as a definite maybe. After all, village elders are the source of wildly improbable legends which were passed on to them by their elders and which they now happily pass on to the next generation.
Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that your friend is incorrect or that you are wrong to use his parameters. What I am saying is that we now have two conflicting classifications based on unverified statements (somebody just shoot me) so you can make your choice and take your chance. What we need (and are unlikely to get) is a rigorous comparison of a large number of kris of known provenance and age to get a trustworthy classification (if such exists).
Thanks for the Lumad info. I think the baca baca is nickel silver as is the ferrule.

Sincerely,
RobT

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by RobT

kai,
Here are the close-ups you asked for and they show just how bad the cord wrap is. The cord goes under the leather bands and the bands (made of rough hide) appear to be glued on. I know that leather bands aren’t traditional on kris hilts but I’d be willing to bet that whoever did the cord wrap was Filipino and also added the bands. For that reason, I would like to leave them as part of the blade’s history but I don’t know if I can get them loose to rewrap the hilt without destroying them. If I can’t save them, I’ll replace them with wound or braided rattan because I am sure that the band next to the pommel is needed to hide a join between the pommel and hilt.

xasterix,
I have always been a bit leery about Cato’s classification for two reasons. 1) The defining area is rather small and the culturally denoting differences are rather subtle. For a culturally differentiating trait, you would think that the feature would be more prominent and the differences would be more marked. 2) As far as I know, Cato provided no documentation to support his classification. We don’t know what data he used, how or where he got it, or the size of his sample.
Unfortunately, for me, the classification offered by your curator-researcher friend suffers from the same problems that I have with Cato. The area your friend considers defining is even smaller than Cato’s and the difference is even more subtle. As for your friend’s source, without copious and independentI information, I tend to view any statements provided by tribal elders as a definite maybe. After all, village elders are the source of wildly improbable legends which were passed on to them by their elders and which they now happily pass on to the next generation.
Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that your friend is incorrect or that you are wrong to use his parameters. What I am saying is that we now have two conflicting classifications based on unverified statements (somebody just shoot me) so you can make your choice and take your chance. What we need (and are unlikely to get) is a rigorous comparison of a large number of kris of known provenance and age to get a trustworthy classification (if such exists).
Thanks for the Lumad info. I think the baca baca is nickel silver as is the ferrule.

Sincerely,
RobT

No worries Rob, I understand your apprehension. You bring up a good point- consensus of Sulu-based elders is also needed in order to strengthen this alternative classification theory (I view it as such, until definitely proven). For my part, I try to apply it on kris/kalis that I encounter (which is to say, not much- there are much fewer old kris/kalis remaining here in PH than in other countries, ironically).

By the way, it was told to me that Cato got his data from a prominent US-based researcher/collector/dealer (he's retired now) who interfaced with Moro elders decades ago. To be honest, the only respected and acknowledged source among locals in PH are elders. Oral tradition has preserved a lot of PH culture. There's no other source. Even outsiders who did ethnographic studies in PH relied mostly on elders for their data. There's no alternative to that... the nuance is that passed-on knowledge can evolve, or be re-interpreted (even misinterpreted)- but at the end of the day, what the elders say is what most Filipino and Moro tribes would view as "legit." Because only the elders have access to indigenous knowledge not openly shared with outsiders. They are knowledge-keepers, first and foremost. And that includes the form and function of traditional blades.

[kai]

Thanks, Ray!

Could you please post some pics of clear Sulu pieces according to this classification? I checked my collection and did not find a single example which seemed to fit your description - so, I guess I must be misinterpreting.

I understand that Bob Cato did quite a bit of work on collections/musea; he also was in contact with Cecil Quirino and other interested expats. I assume that responsibility for his conclusions was his own.

I fully agree on obtaining (and carefully documenting!) as much info from local elders as possible; oral traditions can yield amazingly consistent results (or be way off). I'd be especially keen to hear what might be the take of the diverse Sulu groups on this issue!

Regards,
Kai

[RobT]

From kai: "I fully agree on obtaining (and carefully documenting!) as much info from local elders as possible; oral traditions can yield amazingly consistent results (or be way off). I'd be especially keen to hear what might be the take of the diverse Sulu groups on this issue!"

kai,
I would really like to know what the elders from all the kris making groups have to say about the matter and whether all the groups agree.

Sincerely,
RobT

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Battara

Xasterix you bring up a good point of the fittings. I agree that they are later. You also reminded me that I saw a Maguindanao kris with the exact same shape of wranga and overall scabbard shape. So I stand corrected on the scabbard.

Would you be willing so show what you mean a out the mouth cavity - I can't seem to envision what you are saying.

Hello sir, sorry I wasn't clear- it's this part, supposedly.