Dating the 3 identifiable ages of the Moro Kris ?

[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.

[Federico]

I still feel the cultural exchange, during the Kudarat/Buisan period, from Maguindanao to Sulu questionable. As you have noted, this is a period of alliances with other Sultanates, however these Sultanates retained their own sense of cultural/political sovereignty. Whereas in Mindanao, the Maguindanao under Kudarat held political and cultural hegemony. What comes to question in the Maguindanao/Sulu relationship in this period, is that if the Sultanates retained their own, and there were multiple Sultanates involved (as you noted Ternate, Makassar, etc...) why was the kris sword vs. keris dagger limited in its diffusion to Sulu, and not Ternate? Also, as you would note in Majul and Laarhoven, these points of convergence were not necessarily contiguous events during both ruler's reigns, but rather intermittent and need based in nature. Would this be enough for the necessary cultural/technological diffusion necessary? Not necessarily a negating factor, but still a factor. Finally, do not both the Darangen and Indapatra stem from pre-Islamic roots? As such, if we assume the kris to be rooted in Islamic introduction into Moro society, then it would of course be natural that there would be no mention of the kris, but rather the kampilan (which existed prior to Islamic/Malay cultural introduction).

[MABAGANI]

The same can be asked of Makassar and Ternate, an explanation can be they both fall to foreign rule, while Brunei, Sulu and Mindanao remain independent. If you've read either the Darangen or the Indapatra, they both had pre-Islamic roots but in the Darangen, there began a mix of Islamic culture intertwined with earlier beliefs, yet still no mention of the kris, a curiousity...
So where does Sulu/Tausug and the barung in your opinion fall into place, if the Maranao and Iranun retain the kampilan early on as their weapon of choice with the kris coming at some later point. Again it is in the 17th century where I find first mention of the barung and strangely it is in relation to Maguindanao history. In regards to the diffusion of the keris to kris, I don't see it only limited to Sulu, there are clear examples of the early form transcending the major Moro regions that remained independent including Brunei, Sulu, Maguindanao and Maranao each carrying their own characteristics but only one verifiable point in history where they converge, during the rise of the Maguindanao Sultanate, an explanation for the uniform shape of the early kris form. This does not point to an exclusive origin to the Maguindanao but a joint effort among the various Sultanates to consolidate culturally. The barung became favored among the Tausug and was later used to indentify themselves as a distinct group as they began their rise to power while the Maguindanaos declined.
btw After studying Tausug Silat and the traditional use of the barung, I see no relation to what I've heard repeated over and over among some eskrima and arnis practitioners and the short stick or close range fighting systems, that their art is based on the barung, its been passed on as truth for as long as I can remember but needs a good hard look at reality among FMA teachers.

[Federico]

In the case of Makassar and Ternate, while one could argue why the kris eventually falls to dis-use in relation to European colonialism, at the time of Maguindanao assedency under Kudarat, they still have a largely autonomous range. If the kris diffused under Kudarat allied groups, they would have still been independent enough to adopt it during the time. However, as evidenced in the Wilhelm keris, discussed in previous kris evolution threads, if we assume the keris to have the older date of 1650s which would be in the Kudarat period, it is definitely still a keris and not an archaic kris. So what archaic kris do we have from this period in allied areas, to support the Maguindanao diffusion theory in the Kudarat period? It comes back to the circular argument of provenance, and beyond provenance context. As you know, colonies of Iranun and Balangingi were wide spread far beyond the old Sultanates rings of hegemony, and ethnic memory has been diffused in larger populations in as short as 50-100 years. Then, do we even have a archaic example that can be dated to the Kudarat period of the 17th century. The most famous depiction of Kudarat is him with a Kampilan, which would have and has been a campaign sword of war. The diffusion of the archaic kris is dependent on an early origin of the kris, but is it possible at this early date the kris could still be a keris? Again, back to provenance. Anyways, if we adopt Majul's notion of the Islamization of Mindanao, we adopt a viewpoint of varying waves of Islamic proselization (Sp?), in which ever greater waves of Islamic culture begins to be brought in at differing points, culminating in the formation of Sultanates. Is it possible then, that the Islamic trends in the Darangen could A. be later insertions (legends change over time, perhaps such a nationalist epic would have had inserted Islamic themes to satisfy later audiences Islamic Identity). B. have been written at a point in which early Islamic themes had been introduced, but still prior to the full introduction of Malay culture. Finally is cultural diffusion dependent on State sponsorship, such as official Maguindanao ascendency? There are many examples that would suggest no (eg. Western cultural diffusion into the former Communist block), so would later loose raiding during the 18th century be a potential point of diffusion amongst groups, that while not officially state allied, out of practicality come into contact? Anyways, I still feel the answer lies in a survey of provenanced collections added to our theoretical history/cultural debate. Without one or the other, it is lacking, but with both I think we can find answers. Now, who wants to sponsor this survey