Dating the 3 identifiable ages of the Moro Kris ?

[Boswego]

Frederico,Nechesh,Laban-Thanks for the help ! This is my first Keris (found at a Flea Mkt).Aesthetically to Me,these are certainly some of the most beautiful weapons ever created-I can see how You'd get hooked on collecting them.Each one's a unique work of art,they combine the spritual with a complete utilitarian purpose.Its like finding an artifact that combines the exoticness of Atlantis or Conan with great tribal intensity.

[Rick]

This site will surely interest you .

http://www.bakbakan.com/swishkb.html

[MABAGANI]

Of interest, early 16th and 17th century European explorers observed and wrote that the native warriors of the Brunei, Sulu and Mindanao sultanates carried swords and daggers, most likely the kampilan and kris. Now, when the kris turned into a sword is up for speculation. I'd still guess it was in the time of Sultan Kudrat and possibly earlier during his father's reign. During this period, Moro Sultanates were joining alliances to strengthen their Islamic faith and fend off foreign invasion. In Moro history, these were the only two leaders who were able to consolidate forces from the different regions and islands.

[Federico]

Originally Posted by MABAGANI

Of interest, early 16th and 17th century European explorers observed and wrote that the native warriors of the Brunei, Sulu and Mindanao sultanates carried swords and daggers, most likely the kampilan and kris. Now, when the kris turned into a sword is up for speculation. I'd still guess it was in the time of Sultan Kudrat and possibly earlier during his father's reign. During this period, Moro Sultanates were joining alliances to strengthen their Islamic faith and fend off foreign invasion. In Moro history, these were the only two leaders who were able to consolidate forces from the different regions and islands.

Development, during the Kudrat period would seem to suggest reaction to Western impetus, so the 16th Century would be our early date. However, if as we discussed in previous threads, that the Maranao and Iranao (aka Iranun) people were key to the development and diffusion of kris in Moroland, then we have a varied stepping stone of development, with Maranao lands having the kris first, spreading to Maguindanao lands, and finally to Sulu. Which could give us a period between the 16th-18th century for the kris as sword to be completely diffused through the region. Which in turn could explain A. the tendency for Sulu blades as having the most keris like resemblence (eg. since they were introduced last they had the least time to develop into larger blades, and thus bare the most keris like elements) B. could explain why so many Archaic style seem to be Sulu blades via the trunk theory (as being later period pieces they would have the most chance of surviving). Then again, we're back to speculation in this regard. My gut feeling is that in the end we will not be able to prove anything concretely due to lack of provenance.

Anyways, this is part of what I posted on a different forum in regards to Hurley as a reference:

However, I would like to stress, while I often use Hurley myself as a reference in my research papers, he is not a very accurate account of events. There are a number of problems that Hurley's work contain. Firstly, Hurley's books are not primary sources when viewing early Philippine history, particularly prior to the US arrival to PI, and even then it is still largely put together from second hand accounts (eg. interviews with soldiers). For his early history he relies heavily on Blair and Robertson's History of the Philippines, in which he gets Legaspi's account. As a secondary source, the history presented in Swish of the Kris, is Hurley's interpretation of events, and particularly his editorial commentary on Spanish ineptitude is his opinion of events, not necessarily what really happened. Beyond being a secondary source, Hurley was not a trained historian. If you look into his background, Hurley was a wandering spirit, who tried his hand at many things, including what brought him to PI, dreams of owning a plantation in Zamboanga, however he was not a trained historian. That being the case, his interpretation of past historical events, beyond the problems in theoretical frameworks of the time, are further inhibited by his lack of training. Furthermore, Hurley was an adamant anti-Spaniard. You gotta remember he is part of a group of American settlers who came to PI to rid the country of what they felt was Spanish laxity and excess, and bring American rule and order. It is not surprising that he is so critical of Spanish occupation. Finally, Swish of the Kris was written by a man seeking to cast a flamboyant air to his stay in PI. It was written for popular consumption, and not hard research.

As I mentioned before I have cited Hurley in numerous papers. However, his work is most valuable as an insight into American perceptions of PI at the time, as well as being one of the few accounts that deal in some detail with the early American occupation of PI. He was close friends with Majorl Hugh Scott, a key player particularly in the numerous battles in the Southern Philippines, of particular note the Battle of Bud Dajo.

[MABAGANI]

[QUOTE=Federico]Development, during the Kudrat period would seem to suggest reaction to Western impetus, so the 16th Century would be our early date. However, if as we discussed in previous threads, that the Maranao and Iranao (aka Iranun) people were key to the development and diffusion of kris in Moroland, then we have a varied stepping stone of development, with Maranao lands having the kris first, spreading to Maguindanao lands, and finally to Sulu. Which could give us a period between the 16th-18th century for the kris as sword to be completely diffused through the region. Which in turn could explain A. the tendency for Sulu blades as having the most keris like resemblence (eg. since they were introduced last they had the least time to develop into larger blades, and thus bare the most keris like elements) B. could explain why so many Archaic style seem to be Sulu blades via the trunk theory (as being later period pieces they would have the most chance of surviving). Then again, we're back to speculation in this regard. My gut feeling is that in the end we will not be able to prove anything concretely due to lack of provenance.

Actually, the Maranao were the last to convert to Islam. Their favored sword being the kampilan. For the archaic kris to develop in such a uniform style there would have to be a convergence, which is why I point to Kudrat and his father, during the height of the Maguindanao's power.

[Federico]

[QUOTE=MABAGANI]

Originally Posted by Federico

Actually, the Maranao were the last to convert to Islam. Their favored sword being the kampilan. For the archaic kris to develop in such a uniform style there would have to be a convergence, which is why I point to Kudrat and his father, during the height of the Maguindanao's power.

While the last to convert, they are still converted to Islam by our earliest potential birth of the archaic style, the 16th century (albeit by the latter part of the 16th century). Also, the Maguindanao favored the kampilan as well (as many pictures of Maguindanao courts, and the invariable kampilan bearers would attest), which in relation to the Maranao favor of the weapon, I would consider similar. I do believe that, while the idea of convergence during the Kudarat period, could explain diffusion through Mindanao, it falls short when considering Sulu. Kudarat had definitely strong control over much of Mindanao, but the extent of his and Mindanao cultural influence over Sulu during this period is questionable. I still feel that the most likely introduction point for the kris into Sulu would be the advent of Iranun colonists into the Sulu sultanate. Warren, in his works, suggests there was considerable cultural change in the Sulu sultanate during this period, in particular due to the Iranun infusion. Then again, we also have the question, was the change from keris to kris a rapid change or a gradual? If rapid, then Maranao origins could still be applicable despite a late introduction of Islam (then again we are also still working on the premise that Islam brought with it Malay culture, something I feel is defendable, particularly when looking at Lumad tribes, particularly those related to Moro groups such as the Tirruray), but then if not rapid what kind of time-line are we dealing with, and would the Kudarat period be enough time?

[MABAGANI]

The territory of the Maranao being geographically inland does not support a keris to kris origin, further neither early mythologies, the Darangen nor the Indapatra mention the use of the kris. Like Islam, the keris diaspora would have been through Brunei, Sulu to Mindanao, but the impetus for change from keris to kris point to the Maguindanao and their rise to power.
Of note, all the Moro courts including Sulu had kampilan bearers.
Warren's works concentrate heavily on Sulu in a later period after the Maguindano decline.
Look back to the works by Majul and Laarhoven, they specifically note Sulu/Mindanao alliances during the reign of Buisan and Kudrat, two generations of father and son, consolidating forces among the Moro sultanates including Sulu, Basilan, Brunei, Ternate, Makassar, even the Iranun and Maranao during this period fell under Sultan Kudrat's sphere. During Buisan's time Sulu and Mindanao joined forces to fight over control of the Visayas against the Spanish, these relationships carry over to Kudrat, who becomes one of the most powerful leaders in Moro history.