A very, very old Moro kris

[Ian]

Thanks for all your comments so far.

I don't know whether early Malay kris differed from early Moro kris. I suspect they were fairly similar, as it has been postulated that the Filipino kris may have given rise to the Malay kris. Nor do I know how early Moro kris differed from early Brunei kris. I'm calling this one a Moro kris, but it could be Malay or Brunei in origin.

A central twist core flanked by hardened edges is typical of many early Moro kris that we have seen on these pages. The twist core could reflect a higher quality of sword, and a higher chance of it surviving to the present time, so I don't think we should be too carried away by the presence or absence of a twist core. I don't know how frequently twist core appears on Malay or Brunei kris, but I suspect the technique was not invented by Moro panday.

There is one feature that I mentioned earlier that is unusual on this sword, and that is the gap below the elephant trunk area and the adjacent gangya, as indicated by the arrow in this picture.

I have seen this before on very old Moro kris displayed in a Spanish Museum, but I am struggling to find the picture in our archives. I will post a copy of that picture when I find it again. My question to our experts is, have you seen this feature on Malay or Brunei kris, or any of their Indonesian keris relatives?

[Ian]

The origins of the Moro kris are very uncertain. Early in the days of this vbb Forum, there was a useful discussion about dating the three main ages of the Moro kris: "Archaic" (pre-1800); "19th C" (roughly 1800–1900); "Modern" (1880–present); and perhaps we could add "post-Modern" (1930–present). Emphasis was placed on the difficulties of identifying reliable, provenanced, pieces from the pre-1800 era. I won't rehash the details here, but it is clear that there was no consensus on how to date the archaic forms of kris used by Filipino Muslims. In the spirit of that discussion, the following keris, in combination with the OP of this thread, may offer some clues.

The following pictures are taken from "Traditional Weapons of the Indonesian Archipelago" by Albert van Zonneveld (Plate 169 and loose cover photograph). The keris is described as Bugis from South Sulawesi, with Javanese elements. Here is Albert's description of Plate 169:

Note the provenanced date of acquisition in the mid-18th C and the likelihood that the keris was much older, perhaps dating from the mid-17th C. Albert notes that the sword dates from before the presence of Islam. Here are pictures of that magnificent keris and its scabbard:

The important areas to note are numbered in the picture immediately above.

The "elephant trunk" (1) that curves well down past the "mouth" (2). The recurved area with a clear bulge below the mouth that resembles a "leg and foot" to me (3). The gap (4) below the "foot' that separates it from the ganja (gangya). There is a well demarcated line of separation (5) between the ganja and the rest of the blade; this separation line is virtually straight, except at its left end where there is a very short down-turned section.

When placed side by side, the two swords look quite similar in these areas. Yes, there are differences, and one could attribute these to cultural adaptations or choices, But there is enough similarity for me to argue that they are fairly close cousins with regard to the features shown. The original kris in this thread shows less artistic skill than the Sulawesi keris, but the former was likely designed for use as a weapon while the latter was purely decorative.

From inspection of the Sulawesi keris, it is apparent that very early features of Bugis keris can be found in the Moro/Malay kris that is the subject of this thread. Since the Moro kris is often considered a pre-genitor of the Malay kris, and Mindanao kris are thought to pre-date kris in the Sulu Archipelago, it is plausible to think that kris developed by the Maranao, the Maguindanao, and perhaps the Iranum may have drawn inspiration from the Bugis in the earliest development of the Moro kris. It is interesting that the "bulge" below the mouth area persisted in Maranao kris construction up to at least the early 20th C, but is not seen in Maguindanao or Sulu kris of the late 19th–early 20th C (this point has been illustrated by Robert Cato in his book Moro Swords). Adaptation and change are to be expected over time. However, it is not unreasonable to think that some Mindanao tribal groups in pre-Islamic times took the Bugis keris model and adapted it to become a fighting sword instead of a dagger. One might expect that the oldest of these emerging sword weapons would have the closest resemblance to the Bugis model.

All this is a lot of speculation, of course, and comprises plausible arguments based on supposition. The type of chatter that rattles around forums like this one. It's not really scientific evidence. A scientist would say that it is hypothesis-generating. Finding the evidence to support or refute such hypotheses is very difficult. One approach I've taken is to go through Artzi Yarom's old web site and look at his sold kris. I picked out those that resembled Maranao kris and those that did not. I then looked at indicators of age (length and width of blade, patination, etc.). Results will be posted on these pages when I finish looking at the pictorial evidence.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Ian

There is one feature that I mentioned earlier that is unusual on this sword, and that is the gap below the elephant trunk area and the adjacent gangya, as indicated by the arrow in this picture.

Hi Ian,

This gap between blade and gangya seems by these archaic blades not an uncommon feature. See one of my kris.

Regards,
Detlef