These two Moro
kris are recent acquisitions and are still in "as found" condition. I'm posting them now in light of some recent discussion about
the dating of Moro kris, and some of the style
characteristics of Maguindanao asang asang.
Most Moro
kris collectors would label these two as 19th C in origin. However, there are differences in style that suggest one likely predates the other.
1. Maguindanao matidto (straight blade)
Blade length (incl.
gangya): 55.5 cm (21.9 in.)
Width of blade (mid-point): 3.25 cm
Hilt length: 10.6 cm
OAL: 66.1 cm (26 in.)
Width of
gangya (tip to tip): 10.6 cm
Height of
gangya at tang: 6.5 mm
Thickness of
gangya at tang: 7.0 mm
This blade is of laminated construction (as shown by prior etching with ferric chloride). The
ricikin shows a
secah kasang (elephant trunk),
gandhik,
praen (tusk), and
lambe gajah (elephant lips). The orientation of these features is similar to the "Modern Indonesian
Keris" although the
lambe gajah straddle the line of separation between the
gandhik and the
gangya, instead of appearing low on the
gandhik. There is no
sogokan or
blumbanggan.
Greneng and
jenggot are present, and both show wear. There is a single, one-piece,
asang asang. The hilt is a single piece of carved
banati wood, topped with a very small
kakatua pommel, having a beak but no crest. The grip is bound with criss-crossing rattan, which also secures the extension of the
asang asang. The scabbard is made of bamboo over wood and bound with plaited rattan strips.
.
2. Maguindanao lanti (fully-waved blade)
Blade length (incl.
gangya): 58.2 cm (22.9 in.)
Width of blade (mid-point): 4.5 cm
Hilt length: 11.0 cm (4.3 in.)
OAL: 69.2 cm
Width of
gangya (tip to tip): 12.25 cm
Height of
gangya at tang: 10.2 mm
Thickness of
gangya at tang: 9.0 mm
A fully-waved blade of nine
luk (
luk 11 by current Indonesian
keris convention) with an acutely angled point. The
ricikin show a
secah kacang,
praen,
gandhik, and
lambe gajah;
greneng and
jenggot are also present and are well preserved. The
sogokan and
blumbanggan are absent. The space formed by the
secah kacang and
gandhik is circular (consistent with late Maguindanao representation) and occurs later than the more traditional forms resembling the "Modern Indonesian Keris" (Cato* has commented on this feature as a guide to Maguindanao
kris of the second half of the 19th C and later). There is a single, one-piece
asang asang. The hilt is wrapped in black thread and widens from the
gangya to the pommel. The wooden pommel is an octagonal shape that is an uncommon style of "horse hoof" pommel seen on some Maguindanao
kris. There is no scabbard.
.
Comparing these two Maguindanao kris.
The two swords differ somewhat in length and weight. The second one feels "heavier" in the hand, while the first, although by no means a light sword, feels less "heavy." The slightly shorter, narrower, and thinner blade of the first one contribute to this.
Significant differences in the
ricikin and
gangya point to the first one being the older sword. The "elephant trunk-
gandhik" area of the first sword is a more traditional style that predates the more recent style of the second one. The length, height, and thickness of the
gangya of the first are all smaller than the second one. The height of the
gangya, in particular, can be a useful guide to age IMHO, with older swords having shorter
gangya than late 19th C ones.
Also contributing to the age assessment is the style of pommel. The very small
kakatua without a crest, as seen on the first sword, is often seen on swords pre-dating 1800. The flared hilt and "horse hoof" pommel on Maguindanao
kris seem to be features of the second half of the 19th C and later.
It is interesting to note a one-piece
asang asang is present on both these swords. Recent discussion
here noted that this feature appears to have arisen in the second half of the 19th C. It's presence on the first sword seems out of place, and perhaps it was a later replacement.
Lastly, I would draw your attention to the tips of each blade. The first example has a rounded tip that does not come to an acute point, while the second has an acute point and is less rounded. The latter feature is seen almost exclusively from the late 19th C on.
I believe that the first sword was made no later than the early 19th C, and the second no earlier than the mid-19th C.
These are both "no frills" fighting swords. At roughly 22 and 23 inches in overall length, respectively, both are on the larger end of the
kris spectrum.
.
If we look at the history of the Moro Wars outlined
in a recent post in another thread, there was a gap in Spanish aggression between 1737 (a peace treaty signed) and 1851 (renewed Spanish attacks). During this period, the two sides were evenly matched and conflict favored neither side. The Spanish made improvements in their military equipment, particularly the acquisition of steam-powered gunships capable of navigating the rivers of Mindanao and Sulu. This development gave them a considerable advantage by the mid-19th C. Hence the renewed assault on Moro strongholds.
The second sword above corresponds, I believe, to the Spanish-Moro conflicts resuming in 1851. It represents a small increase in length, width, and thickness relative to the first sword from pre-1850. However, the difference in size and weight between the two swords is not great. The measurements of the
kris from pre-1850 shows it is a large
kris also. So, to what era of conflict did this
kris correspond. Perhaps we need to go back to the prior period of Spanish-Moro fighting in the first half of the 18th C to find the origin of this version of the Maguindanao
kris. Or perhaps it is necessary to go even further back to the 17th C in the history of these wars to identify the modifications made to the earliest Moro
kris to arrive at the bigger and heavier versions shown here.
Please note that I am
not saying that the first
kris shown above was made in the early 18th C, but rather that it represents a style that perhaps was used at that time.
Reference:
* Robert Cato. "Moro Swords." Graham Brash, Singapore. 1996.