Southern Indian swords and The Moro Kris is there a Connection?

[RhysMichael]

I have not found anything to help with your question. I did find this plate in The Philippine Islands
A Political, Geographical, Ethnographical, Social and Commercial History of the Philippine Archipelago
Embracing the Whole Period of Spanish Rule
With an Account of the Succeeding American Insular Government
By John Foreman, F.R.G.S.
Third Edition, Revised and Enlarged with Maps and Illustrations
London: T. Fisher Unwin
1, Adelphi Terrace.
MCMVI

Its interesting to me because the dress sword of the sultan here looks to have an indonesian flavor. Indian influence was present in Indonesia and could have come to the Philippines through there

I believe Lapu-Lapu (Kaliph Pulaka) was reported to use a Kampilan.

[Jim McDougall]

This is an excellent topic Lew! and well placed questions. I have never really studied the weapons development in Indonesia and the Philippines in depth, but have always considered that migration and colonization from the subcontinent would have carried the weapons of the period to those regions. I believe Alan Maisey has written on the heritage of the keris with some important perspective dealing with this, and seems it is linked here. For information on the Moros, I would presume the book by Cato probably a good reference, but Rick will be the key source around here.

I think the key to ethnographic weapons diffusion is most always trade routes, and seems to be universally applied. As I have travelled through the Southwest and visited American Indian sites, it is amazing to see items from incredible distances that clearly show trade from far away. Tribes in the Four Corners traded not only with the west coast tribes, but from tribes deep in Mexico and Central America. In Mississippi, there was ancient trade between those tribes and those in the northeast as far as Canada.

With the depth of knowledge here on the weapons of Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, I'm sure there will be some outstanding discussion on this subject, and RhysMichael is right on track!!!!

[RhysMichael]

And we need to remember that trade went both ways. I have a photo somewhere of the swords from an Aceh Teuku in a museum that include a kampilan

[fearn]

Hi All,

We might want to be more precise about how weapons diffuse. The reason is that Indonesia and the Philippines are all on millenia-old trade routes (remember the Spice Islands), so a lot of people were moving back and forth through the region, and not all peacefully.

Thing is, there are a bunch of ways weapon designs can move, and I think if we distinguish among them (preferably with examples), it will be useful.

In no particular order, ways a sword design can move:

1. "Stealing with your eyes"--I love this phrase from the martial arts. Basically, someone sees a sword they like and order something similarl from a local smith. In this case, the shape of the blade comes from elsewhere, but the construction techniques are strictly local.

2. Shipwreck or trade: someone physically acquires a weapon, and either redecorates it (i.e. the ornamented spanish blades dug up from Indian graves on Catalina), rebuilds it (new sheath, hilt, etc--the classic trade blades), or reverse engineers it and makes copies (i.e. the Andrea Ferrara blades of Africa, complete with bogus markings).

3. Movement of smiths. In these cases, the whole technology and terminology moves. I'd suspect that in this case, it's more than the blade term (for instance "kalis" might become "keris"), but the mountings, steel type, and most importantly terminology, all move.

Obviously these blend in with each other, but I think there's something useful in distinguishing them. The thing to "watch out for" is "convergent design," where weaponsmiths independently come up with blades of the same shape to do the same job, without talking with each other. There are only so many ways to make a sword, after all.

Comments? Getting back to the thread, can we tell how blades moved, from the evidence?

F

[RhysMichael]

Originally Posted by fearn

Hi All,

We might want to be more precise about how weapons diffuse. The reason is that Indonesia and the Philippines are all on millenia-old trade routes (remember the Spice Islands), so a lot of people were moving back and forth through the region, and not all peacefully.

Thing is, there are a bunch of ways weapon designs can move, and I think if we distinguish among them (preferably with examples), it will be useful.

In no particular order, ways a sword design can move:

1. "Stealing with your eyes"--I love this phrase from the martial arts. Basically, someone sees a sword they like and order something similarl from a local smith. In this case, the shape of the blade comes from elsewhere, but the construction techniques are strictly local.

2. Shipwreck or trade: someone physically acquires a weapon, and either redecorates it (i.e. the ornamented spanish blades dug up from Indian graves on Catalina), rebuilds it (new sheath, hilt, etc--the classic trade blades), or reverse engineers it and makes copies (i.e. the Andrea Ferrara blades of Africa, complete with bogus markings).

3. Movement of smiths. In these cases, the whole technology and terminology moves. I'd suspect that in this case, it's more than the blade term (for instance "kalis" might become "keris"), but the mountings, steel type, and most importantly terminology, all move.

Obviously these blend in with each other, but I think there's something useful in distinguishing them. The thing to "watch out for" is "convergent design," where weaponsmiths independently come up with blades of the same shape to do the same job, without talking with each other. There are only so many ways to make a sword, after all.

Comments? Getting back to the thread, can we tell how blades moved, from the evidence?

F

Good points I would add captured/trophy blades from battles, perhaps that would fit in with your #2

[Jim McDougall]

Very well said RhysMichael and Fearn, these are well placed points on the diffusion of weapons, and of course movement would be both ways, as they were trade routes dealing in exchange. What is most interesting is the compounding of the points of contact via ports of call along the route by sea and various centers and stations on routes by land. In many ways, rather than single extended routes, trade was accomplished essentially by relay at these points. The dimensions of diffusion resulting clearly can be confounding, but is really what makes the detective work in studying ethnographic weapons so fascinating.

Returning to Lew's excellent question concerning the relationship between southern India's weapons and the Moro kris. In looking through Robert Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual" the author discusses the associations between India, Ceylon and Java with the kris. While the material deals of course with southern India and Ceylon, the trade here involved many powers including China, and movement to the Philippines and these principles of diffusion would certainly apply. I guess the key is to discover which historical resources support this.

[katana]

The spread of the Islamic faith may also be a factor in sword similarities...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipino_Muslim