Moro hilt, a question of region.

Gavin Nugent · 14th November 2009, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Folks, I just received these pictures from a "lurker" who was going to also bid on this same item. He received these pictures of the original tag (that got lost) before bidding was closed. He offers these as an answer to the question of origin. Thank you to our lurker friend.

Thank you Battara. I was aware of the 'presumed provenance' but were not prepared to accept the tag notations until further investigation has taken place once I received the item. There was no reason to cloud efforts to establish the style and form with focus on the stated provenance

Obviously there was intent to bid on it due to these details.
Do you Battara think it is of the Maranao people?
Does Mr lurker care to share any information?
I have been told by many here you are very knowledgeable on the subject Battara and I like all readers would love to hear more thoughts on this piece?

You note the tag as missing? Whilst now having these images printed for all to see it may deter the tag being used on another such example and miss leading history.

I look forward to hearing more from you as you are more learned on the subject.

Gav

David · 14th November 2009, 02:42 AM

I found this information on Wikipedia in regards the the Camp Vickers mentioned on the tag. I saw no mention of a "Battle of Camp Vickers" and it doesn't seem to have been build until 1902. It was indeed under Capt. Pershing's command. There was a 'Battle of Pandapatan" however which apparently was just a mile from where the camp was :
The expeditionary force built Camp Vickers one mile south of Pandapatan, and Davis assigned Pershing to Baldwin's command as an intelligence officer and as director of Moro affairs. As director, Pershing had a veto over Baldwin's movements, which was an unstable arrangement. This arrangement was tested when survivors of Pandapatan began building a cotta at Bacalod. Baldwin wanted to move on the hostile Moros immediately, but Pershing warned that doing so could create an anti-American coalition of the surrounding datus, while some patient diplomacy could establish friendly relations with most of the Moros, isolating the hostile minority. Baldwin grudgingly agreed. On June 30, Pershing assumed command of Camp Vickers, and Baldwin returned to Malabang. A command the size of Camp Vickers would normally have gone to an officer with the rank of Major, and a careful shuffling of personnel would be required to ensure that reinforcements to the Camp did not include officers that were senior to Pershing.
On July 4, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt issued a proclamation declaring an end to the Philippine Insurrection and a cessation of hostilities in the Philippines "except in the country inhabited by the Moro tribes, to which this proclamation does not apply."[3] Later that month, Davis was promoted and replaced Chaffee as the supreme commander of American forces in the Philippines. Command of the Mindanao-Jolo Department went to Brig. Gen. Samuel S. Sumner. Meanwhile, Pershing settled down to conduct diplomacy with the surrounding Moros, and a July 4th celebration had 700 guests from neighboring rancherias. In September 1902, he lead the Macui Expedition, which resulted in a victory that did much to establish American dominance in the area. On February 10, 1903, Pershing was declared a datu by the formerly hostile Pandita Sajiduciaman of the Bayan Moros (who had been defeated at the Battle of Pandapatan)—the only American to be so honored. Pershing's career at Camp Vickers culminated in the March Around Lake Lanao during April and May 1903. Also known as the Marahui Expedition, it included the Battle of Bacolod and First Battle of Taraca but was otherwise peaceful. This expedition quickly became a symbol of American control of the Lake Lanao region and was regarded as a landmark event by the inhabitants of that region.

Spunjer · 14th November 2009, 05:00 AM

did this tag came with it???
at a glance, it does seem to carry a lot of weight, since the names and places were significant, but it doesn't make any sense. during the moro campaign, there were a lot of moro/american skirmishes, but regarding major battles, there were few. as david mentioned, there was no Battle of camp vickers. if what the tag meant "battle of pandapatan", then yes, it happened. it was the first hostile action between the moros and the american forces. to explain why it doesn't make any sense, one has to look at what really happened.

it was in may, 1902 when seven companies from the 27th Infantry, and with the help from 25th Battery Field Artillery took the battle to the moros. technically the battle was labeled as Battle of Bayan in history books. the americans encountered two kotas or forts in this battle, namely kota binadayan, the smaller one, and kota pandapatan, were the major battle was fought. it was in kota pandapatan, where lieut. thomas vicars (vickers) got killed. as far as who led the battalions; major william scott led the first attack (at binadayan), but then col frank baldwin assumed command at the attack on pandapatan. when these were all happening, capt john pershing was in marawi, miles away from the actual battle. in the end, the sultan of bayan, his heir, the rajah muda, and the sultan of pandapatan were killed.
weeks later, a camp was built not too far from the battle site, and it was named after the lieutenant. it was then when capt. pershing took command of the camp.
going back to the tag, the chronology, characters, etc., are just screwed up somehow:

there were no battles in 1901
battle of camp vickers never happened
john pershing wasn't the commander during the battle

the tag does look old though. is it possible that this was added a few years later, to garner interest to early days collectors? military catalogs such as bannerman, who has been printing catalogs since the 1800's, comes to mind. i'm pretty sure there were collectors back then, who, like there present incarnations, would love to get a piece of a well-provenanced weapon.

just my .02 cents..

Gavin Nugent · 14th November 2009, 06:00 AM

Thanks Gents,

I have hundreds of notes and extracts here from Congress to well known authors and the information you have is very much what many online history books tell but it differs greatly across many researching facets. The battle of Bayan was 1902 as indicated but much more surrounds this scene.

There are records I have of Skirmishes prior to this event with the camp being in these notes and being involved in conflict enroute in 1901. It is a foggy journey and one that will come to light in time but things are getting far ahead of where I wanted to take this for the moment.

The provenance is something I wanted to leave out of the picture in its entirety as it is glossing over to much foundation work that needs to be done first and whilst I appreciate your interest in providing information to sustain or dispel the tag, first thing is first and back to the subject at hand for me, would this be considered a Kampalin form the region of southern lake Lanao?

Battara, you note the LURKER as saying the tag was missing, is this fact and if so, do they know the where abouts of it?
Actually, if anyone knows where it is, it belongs with this sword.
If all proves to be correct with further study of aquisition and decent, someone has tampered with a very important piece of Moro/American History.
I must also note a number of enquiries have already come through my site asking if this is for sale, I will state for the record, it is not.
It was my hope to present this to the Pershing Museum should it all ring true as that both the sword and the tag belong there for all to view and understand.

Thanks

Gav

Spunjer · 14th November 2009, 03:02 PM

hi gav,

sword collection might be my hobby, but first and foremost, filipino history, specifically moro regions is my passion. i'm afraid that none of what i mentioned came from wikipedia, or any website online if that's what you're inferring. these were based on what i know, and what i've researched. to cite my references, besides books published in that era, i would have to say, came from actual annual reports made by commanding officers in that region during the moro campaigns, diaries passages specifically from pershing, davies, et al, unpublished memoirs, letters, etc, which can be readily had using the local college libraries. also, we have libraries here in ohio which i have done my researches, notably the rutherford hayes museum, who's son, webb hayes was an ardent ethnographic collector, and was one of the first american to broker with the moros while the philippine war was happening. also, there's lots of records at the mckinley museum, who, incidentally was the president of that era when the war broke out. these presidential libraries are but two hour drive from where i live. i have consulted for the hayes museum as well, that's why you will see my name noted various times on their website. all my passion was a direct result in trying to learn more about my collection, and the history tied with it. yes, it's nice to know the significance of those squiggles on the blade, but to know the history behind them is more satisfying, knowing what they were thinking about, etc. etc. it gives one a whole new perspective.

yes you are right that there are much more that surrounds the scene during that fateful day in may 2, 1902. the americans didn't just wake up that day and decided to have a war with the moros. you're right in that there were skirmishes, which led to lots and lots of bicharas, or parleys, and were primarily being made prior and leading to this first battle, and that was what pershing was hedging on, in preventing the battle. but you have a veteran from the then recent indian wars and medal of honor recipient who's mantra was "a good moro is a dead moro" (baldwin), you have an inevitable battle on hand. but this i can assure you, battle of camp vickers never happened, and capt pershing became the senior commander of this post AFTER the battle of pandapatan. and none of these happened in 1901, since all the aforementioned incidents didn't happen until 1902. camp vickers, the battle of pandapatan, capt pershing as the commanding officer, etc.. all 1902 headlines.
if indeed you have the notes and extracts, it should back up everything what i have posted so far.

not to sustain or dispel the tag itself, rather, it's what traveled with the kampilan through time. sometimes, we get our clue from the sword itself, telling us where it originated from, usually by the art form that has some similarity with the okir of that region. but then again there are times when these swords remain quiet, and what we have to go with are those incessant tags that has volumes to say, whether we like the final result or not. i don't understand why you would put the provenance aside, when it offers the best logical clue. if what the tags says it's true, wouldn't it be safe to say then that this was owned by a maranao warrior, hence a lake lanao kampilan?
this particular kampilan attracted me for a couple reasons: the completeness of it, and one of the finest i've seen.

if your intention is to present that kampilan to pershing's museum, that would be cool. understand tho, that with just that tag backing it up, it will never be 100 percent certain that this was a part of his collection. fortunately, he already have an extensive collection of moro weapons.
what is certain though, and without a shadow of a doubt, is if you present this to the National Museum in the philippines, or better yet, at the Aga Khan Museum in Mindanao State University (Marawi City, Lanao del sur), the moro people will get to view and understand this fantastic specimen of their ancestor.

regards
ron

David · 14th November 2009, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunjer

if your intention is to present that kampilan to pershing's museum, that would be cool. understand tho, that with just that tag backing it up, it will never be 100 percent certain that this was a part of his collection. fortunately, he already have an extensive collection of moro weapons.
what is certain though, and without a shadow of a doubt, is if you present this to the National Museum in the philippines, or better yet, at the Aga Khan Museum in Mindanao State University (Marawi City, Lanao del sur), the moro people will get to view and understand this fantastic specimen of their ancestor.

I would second this. IF you are really feeling the need to donate this to a museum, why not give it back to the people of origin?
BTW, i doubt that someone "tampered" with this tag. It probably just fell off. The string broke or the paper tore. It's obviously old. I don't see a need for conspiracy to explain this and i can't see why anyone would remove it just to hide information or provenance. The tag was probably placed there a while ago, but long enough after the event so that particular facts (dates, names) may have become confused or blurred.
Is there any chance we could see the blade of this kamp? I don't know alot about kamps, but perhaps the blade itself could supply clues to it's tribal origins.

Gavin Nugent · 14th November 2009, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunjer

hi gav,

if your intention is to present that kampilan to pershing's museum, that would be cool. understand tho, that with just that tag backing it up, it will never be 100 percent certain that this was a part of his collection. fortunately, he already have an extensive collection of moro weapons.

Outstanding Ron, well spoken and thank you. It does seem I am and I will be going over a lot of ground you have already covered.
With the passage quoted above Ron, my point exactly. This is why I never wanted the tag that Mr lurker, (fielded by Battara) posted.
So much more can first be done to satisfy origins, decent etc. Relying on a tag to tell me where the sword is from can be counter productive and non conclusive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunjer

what is certain though, and without a shadow of a doubt, is if you present this to the National Museum in the philippines, or better yet, at the Aga Khan Museum in Mindanao State University (Marawi City, Lanao del sur), the moro people will get to view and understand this fantastic specimen of their ancestor.
regards
ron

A very interesting statement Ron, and well noted. What ever direction is ultimately decided the information and images will be sharded with anyone who wishes to know, hopfully a sound base can be provided for further indepth study by others.

Many thanks

Gav

Battara · 14th November 2009, 09:23 PM

Being very busy it has been difficult to get back to the forum. That being said he offered the information as another piece of the puzzle to consider. Sometimes later generations will get the information confused from stories told by the veterans. Not too shocking. I think it was nice that the other person tried to give some help to this inquiry.

As far as origins are concerned, I would not be shocked if this were Maranao since this was a favorite of theirs. What does give me some pause are the wonderful tiger bells. I would love to own one with tiger bells. Not too common and a very nice piece. Even the scabbard carving is of good quality. I agree with Ron in that the great value of this is the completeness of the piece. It is rare for these to have scabbards, much less well carved scabbards intact. Then the bells are an added bonus. I don't remember where Camp Vickers was located in relation to Maranao or Maguindanao territory (of the Battle of Pandapatan). Perhaps this would be a good place to start.

Although the blade does not look to be the typical type of blade usually seen in Moro kampilans, this does not preclude it necessarily from being from Mindanao. We are still learning from examples like this one.

I have a fossil molar barong for example. Fossil molar is rare on Moro pieces and only seen on kris. Yet my example has traits of being Samal and is the only one documented (by me). It is the only one in existence so far. I have learned some new things from this piece.

I know that your piece will shed light one some other things regarding this type of piece.

Before you send it off (if you do) would you post pictures of the piece in it's entirety?

14th November 2009, 05:00 AM	#3
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	did this tag came with it??? at a glance, it does seem to carry a lot of weight, since the names and places were significant, but it doesn't make any sense. during the moro campaign, there were a lot of moro/american skirmishes, but regarding major battles, there were few. as david mentioned, there was no Battle of camp vickers. if what the tag meant "battle of pandapatan", then yes, it happened. it was the first hostile action between the moros and the american forces. to explain why it doesn't make any sense, one has to look at what really happened. it was in may, 1902 when seven companies from the 27th Infantry, and with the help from 25th Battery Field Artillery took the battle to the moros. technically the battle was labeled as Battle of Bayan in history books. the americans encountered two kotas or forts in this battle, namely kota binadayan, the smaller one, and kota pandapatan, were the major battle was fought. it was in kota pandapatan, where lieut. thomas vicars (vickers) got killed. as far as who led the battalions; major william scott led the first attack (at binadayan), but then col frank baldwin assumed command at the attack on pandapatan. when these were all happening, capt john pershing was in marawi, miles away from the actual battle. in the end, the sultan of bayan, his heir, the rajah muda, and the sultan of pandapatan were killed. weeks later, a camp was built not too far from the battle site, and it was named after the lieutenant. it was then when capt. pershing took command of the camp. going back to the tag, the chronology, characters, etc., are just screwed up somehow: there were no battles in 1901 battle of camp vickers never happened john pershing wasn't the commander during the battle the tag does look old though. is it possible that this was added a few years later, to garner interest to early days collectors? military catalogs such as bannerman, who has been printing catalogs since the 1800's, comes to mind. i'm pretty sure there were collectors back then, who, like there present incarnations, would love to get a piece of a well-provenanced weapon. just my .02 cents..

14th November 2009, 06:00 AM	#4
Gavin Nugent Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,818	Thanks Gents Thanks Gents, I have hundreds of notes and extracts here from Congress to well known authors and the information you have is very much what many online history books tell but it differs greatly across many researching facets. The battle of Bayan was 1902 as indicated but much more surrounds this scene. There are records I have of Skirmishes prior to this event with the camp being in these notes and being involved in conflict enroute in 1901. It is a foggy journey and one that will come to light in time but things are getting far ahead of where I wanted to take this for the moment. The provenance is something I wanted to leave out of the picture in its entirety as it is glossing over to much foundation work that needs to be done first and whilst I appreciate your interest in providing information to sustain or dispel the tag, first thing is first and back to the subject at hand for me, would this be considered a Kampalin form the region of southern lake Lanao? Battara, you note the LURKER as saying the tag was missing, is this fact and if so, do they know the where abouts of it? Actually, if anyone knows where it is, it belongs with this sword. If all proves to be correct with further study of aquisition and decent, someone has tampered with a very important piece of Moro/American History. I must also note a number of enquiries have already come through my site asking if this is for sale, I will state for the record, it is not. It was my hope to present this to the Pershing Museum should it all ring true as that both the sword and the tag belong there for all to view and understand. Thanks Gav Last edited by freebooter; 14th November 2009 at 07:35 AM.

14th November 2009, 02:42 AM	#2
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	I found this information on Wikipedia in regards the the Camp Vickers mentioned on the tag. I saw no mention of a "Battle of Camp Vickers" and it doesn't seem to have been build until 1902. It was indeed under Capt. Pershing's command. There was a 'Battle of Pandapatan" however which apparently was just a mile from where the camp was : The expeditionary force built Camp Vickers one mile south of Pandapatan, and Davis assigned Pershing to Baldwin's command as an intelligence officer and as director of Moro affairs. As director, Pershing had a veto over Baldwin's movements, which was an unstable arrangement. This arrangement was tested when survivors of Pandapatan began building a cotta at Bacalod. Baldwin wanted to move on the hostile Moros immediately, but Pershing warned that doing so could create an anti-American coalition of the surrounding datus, while some patient diplomacy could establish friendly relations with most of the Moros, isolating the hostile minority. Baldwin grudgingly agreed. On June 30, Pershing assumed command of Camp Vickers, and Baldwin returned to Malabang. A command the size of Camp Vickers would normally have gone to an officer with the rank of Major, and a careful shuffling of personnel would be required to ensure that reinforcements to the Camp did not include officers that were senior to Pershing. On July 4, 1902, President Theodore Roosevelt issued a proclamation declaring an end to the Philippine Insurrection and a cessation of hostilities in the Philippines "except in the country inhabited by the Moro tribes, to which this proclamation does not apply."[3] Later that month, Davis was promoted and replaced Chaffee as the supreme commander of American forces in the Philippines. Command of the Mindanao-Jolo Department went to Brig. Gen. Samuel S. Sumner. Meanwhile, Pershing settled down to conduct diplomacy with the surrounding Moros, and a July 4th celebration had 700 guests from neighboring rancherias. In September 1902, he lead the Macui Expedition, which resulted in a victory that did much to establish American dominance in the area. On February 10, 1903, Pershing was declared a datu by the formerly hostile Pandita Sajiduciaman of the Bayan Moros (who had been defeated at the Battle of Pandapatan)—the only American to be so honored. Pershing's career at Camp Vickers culminated in the March Around Lake Lanao during April and May 1903. Also known as the Marahui Expedition, it included the Battle of Bacolod and First Battle of Taraca but was otherwise peaceful. This expedition quickly became a symbol of American control of the Lake Lanao region and was regarded as a landmark event by the inhabitants of that region.

14th November 2009, 03:02 PM	#5
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	hi gav, sword collection might be my hobby, but first and foremost, filipino history, specifically moro regions is my passion. i'm afraid that none of what i mentioned came from wikipedia, or any website online if that's what you're inferring. these were based on what i know, and what i've researched. to cite my references, besides books published in that era, i would have to say, came from actual annual reports made by commanding officers in that region during the moro campaigns, diaries passages specifically from pershing, davies, et al, unpublished memoirs, letters, etc, which can be readily had using the local college libraries. also, we have libraries here in ohio which i have done my researches, notably the rutherford hayes museum, who's son, webb hayes was an ardent ethnographic collector, and was one of the first american to broker with the moros while the philippine war was happening. also, there's lots of records at the mckinley museum, who, incidentally was the president of that era when the war broke out. these presidential libraries are but two hour drive from where i live. i have consulted for the hayes museum as well, that's why you will see my name noted various times on their website. all my passion was a direct result in trying to learn more about my collection, and the history tied with it. yes, it's nice to know the significance of those squiggles on the blade, but to know the history behind them is more satisfying, knowing what they were thinking about, etc. etc. it gives one a whole new perspective. yes you are right that there are much more that surrounds the scene during that fateful day in may 2, 1902. the americans didn't just wake up that day and decided to have a war with the moros. you're right in that there were skirmishes, which led to lots and lots of bicharas, or parleys, and were primarily being made prior and leading to this first battle, and that was what pershing was hedging on, in preventing the battle. but you have a veteran from the then recent indian wars and medal of honor recipient who's mantra was "a good moro is a dead moro" (baldwin), you have an inevitable battle on hand. but this i can assure you, battle of camp vickers never happened, and capt pershing became the senior commander of this post AFTER the battle of pandapatan. and none of these happened in 1901, since all the aforementioned incidents didn't happen until 1902. camp vickers, the battle of pandapatan, capt pershing as the commanding officer, etc.. all 1902 headlines. if indeed you have the notes and extracts, it should back up everything what i have posted so far. not to sustain or dispel the tag itself, rather, it's what traveled with the kampilan through time. sometimes, we get our clue from the sword itself, telling us where it originated from, usually by the art form that has some similarity with the okir of that region. but then again there are times when these swords remain quiet, and what we have to go with are those incessant tags that has volumes to say, whether we like the final result or not. i don't understand why you would put the provenance aside, when it offers the best logical clue. if what the tags says it's true, wouldn't it be safe to say then that this was owned by a maranao warrior, hence a lake lanao kampilan? this particular kampilan attracted me for a couple reasons: the completeness of it, and one of the finest i've seen. if your intention is to present that kampilan to pershing's museum, that would be cool. understand tho, that with just that tag backing it up, it will never be 100 percent certain that this was a part of his collection. fortunately, he already have an extensive collection of moro weapons. what is certain though, and without a shadow of a doubt, is if you present this to the National Museum in the philippines, or better yet, at the Aga Khan Museum in Mindanao State University (Marawi City, Lanao del sur), the moro people will get to view and understand this fantastic specimen of their ancestor. regards ron

14th November 2009, 09:23 PM	#8
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Being very busy it has been difficult to get back to the forum. That being said he offered the information as another piece of the puzzle to consider. Sometimes later generations will get the information confused from stories told by the veterans. Not too shocking. I think it was nice that the other person tried to give some help to this inquiry. As far as origins are concerned, I would not be shocked if this were Maranao since this was a favorite of theirs. What does give me some pause are the wonderful tiger bells. I would love to own one with tiger bells. Not too common and a very nice piece. Even the scabbard carving is of good quality. I agree with Ron in that the great value of this is the completeness of the piece. It is rare for these to have scabbards, much less well carved scabbards intact. Then the bells are an added bonus. I don't remember where Camp Vickers was located in relation to Maranao or Maguindanao territory (of the Battle of Pandapatan). Perhaps this would be a good place to start. Although the blade does not look to be the typical type of blade usually seen in Moro kampilans, this does not preclude it necessarily from being from Mindanao. We are still learning from examples like this one. I have a fossil molar barong for example. Fossil molar is rare on Moro pieces and only seen on kris. Yet my example has traits of being Samal and is the only one documented (by me). It is the only one in existence so far. I have learned some new things from this piece. I know that your piece will shed light one some other things regarding this type of piece. Before you send it off (if you do) would you post pictures of the piece in it's entirety?