Sharing Moro Kris data

[xasterix]

Sharing my recently published Moro Kris article. I'm linking here my Facebook-posted link, there's a Gdrive file includes the references list (the publisher didn't have space for footnotes / references section):

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/fViCFss4kW1GEfNQ/

I felt a need to write the article to straighten out emerging misinformation regarding the Moro kris. Inputs from Moro elders, culture bearers, blade researchers, and historical data were integrated into the article.

As a disclaimer: some data may not be compatible or run directly contrary to previous data (particularly Cato's). Elders and culture-bearers alike have expressed "language misinterpretations" and "lack of context" in some of Cato's data, which I have attempted to straighten out in this article.

The article also presents new data on how to interpret Moro Kris blade engravings, which were previously thought of as "random scribblings" or "from a lost language." The languages, while archaic, are still accessible in modern time. The publication of this article was also motivated/requested by my Malaysian friends, who are keris culture-bearers/experts in their own right.

Have fun reading!

[Sajen]

Thank you very much for sharing!

[JeffS]

Great read, thank you!

[Ian]

Ray, thanks for sharing this interesting update about Moro kris. It is interesting to note how often the modular parts of the sword can be of mixed age and mixed heritage. While this has been appreciated for some time, it's good to see you lay it out with clear examples.

Just a few thoughts and comments.

I notice that all your examples are listed as being from the late 1800s/early 1900s. Do you plan to prepare further information about older Moro kris?

The Malayan influences present a challenge, I think, with respect to the style of kris blades (and hilts to some degree). There are clear Malayan elements in some kris blades that are labeled as Moro in origin. You mention in your article about the intermingling of Moro and Malayan blade smiths, and I wonder if you can elaborate further. Also, which of the references that you list online relates to this intermingling? Was this recorded at the time it occurred, or was it based on individuals' recall of events more than a century ago?

I have read and heard almost nothing about kris from the Sultanate of Brunei. As you know, the Brunei Sultanate predated the Sulu Sultanate and later sultanates on Mindanao. Where do Brunei kris fit into the picture? Are you lumping them with "Borneo kris?" Are "Borneo kris" an extension of "Malayan kris?"

Do you think that the early prototypes of Moro kris were based on Malayan keris, Indonesian keris, Bugis keris, or even Bali keris? To varying degrees, a case can be made for each of these possible sources. Do your informants have any information to share on this?

Lastly, and off topic somewhat, the issue of round tangs attributed to very early Moro kris. In the limited available archeological evidence of Filipino sword/knife tangs predating the 14th C, I have not found any record of round tangs being used. Given the likely methods for using knives and swords at that time, round tangs would likely have not worked very well. Thus, a round tang emulating the keris would have seemed unusual on Moro kris. What I have seen is (almost) round tangs on some Malayan sundang, which might be expected given that much of the Malayan world has a strong keris culture. I think we need to be wary of attributing round tangs to "early" Moro kris, and vice versa in requiring "early" Moro kris to have round tangs.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

Ray, thanks for sharing this interesting update about Moro kris. It is interesting to note how often the modular parts of the sword can be of mixed age and mixed heritage. While this has been appreciated for some time, it's good to see you lay it out with clear examples.

Just a few thoughts and comments.

I notice that all your examples are listed as being from the late 1800s/early 1900s. Do you plan to prepare further information about older Moro kris?

The Malayan influences present a challenge, I think, with respect to the style of kris blades (and hilts to some degree). There are clear Malayan elements in some kris blades that are labeled as Moro in origin. You mention in your article about the intermingling of Moro and Malayan blade smiths, and I wonder if you can elaborate further. Also, which of the references that you list online relates to this intermingling? Was this recorded at the time it occurred, or was it based on individuals' recall of events more than a century ago?

I have read and heard almost nothing about kris from the Sultanate of Brunei. As you know, the Brunei Sultanate predated the Sulu Sultanate and later sultanates on Mindanao. Where do Brunei kris fit into the picture? Are you lumping them with "Borneo kris?" Are "Borneo kris" an extension of "Malayan kris?"

Do you think that the early prototypes of Moro kris were based on Malayan keris, Indonesian keris, Bugis keris, or even Bali keris? To varying degrees, a case can be made for each of these possible sources. Do your informants have any information to share on this?

Lastly, and off topic somewhat, the issue of round tangs attributed to very early Moro kris. In the limited available archeological evidence of Filipino sword/knife tangs predating the 14th C, I have not found any record of round tangs being used. Given the likely methods for using knives and swords at that time, round tangs would likely have not worked very well. Thus, a round tang emulating the keris would have seemed unusual on Moro kris. What I have seen is (almost) round tangs on some Malayan sundang, which might be expected given that much of the Malayan world has a strong keris culture. I think we need to be wary of attributing round tangs to "early" Moro kris, and vice versa in requiring "early" Moro kris to have round tangs.

Hullo Ian, thanks for the feedback!

1. Regarding older Kris. I refrained from them because I wanted to keep the data as airtight as possible...ideally, oral traditions backed by, or directly reflected in historical documentation. The original article had extensive footnotes attributing each data to either or both oral tradition and historical documentation. Unfortunately the publisher likely didn't have space for the footnotes, so it wasn't published. Late 1800s/early 1900s had a lot of documentation both from the Spanish and American sides; that's why I focused on that era.

Older Kris present a huge challenge because while the oral tradition does exist (and blade experts have really sound theories), it's harder to get pre1800 written sources; I imagine I'll have to access deeper Spanish and Dutch texts to populate the historical documentation side. Then there's the complication of "completing the circle" or matching the pre1800 history of both Moro and Malay sides (they had a lot of interactions from that era up to precolonial). I imagine it'll take probably another decade for me to come up with a solid publication that would fill in as many gaps as possible regarding older Kris.

2. Regarding the Malay keris/Kris side: I planned to expound on that connection longer, but I was running out of article space (the publisher has a strict word limit). Aside from what I mentioned earlier, completing the Moro-Malay circle, the terminology is also pretty complicated- my Malaysian friends have distinctions between keris sundang/Moro sundang vs Malay sundang vs tempasuk sundang (Iranun/East Malay); all of these can be found in the Malay archipelago, but made in different areas and by different groups of people. My Malaysian friends echo what's written in some older publications the Moro/keris sundang is "the youngest and most battle-worthy" in the keris family.

I focused on Borneo because that was the site of a major Moro colony (Sabah, the one in contention nowadays), hence I believe that it was the "center" of interactions between Moro and Malay artisans, a melting pot of sorts. This is also supported by the provenance of many museum samples; a lot of Malay-looking Krises were noted to come from Borneo.

3. Regarding the other keris, I didn't dive into that as there are keris experts who would be able to expound on that in a well-researched and authoritative manner; however in my personal capacity, I believe the Bugis had significant interaction with the Moros, especially since one of their scripts- Lontara Bugis- appears on pre-1900 Mindanao-made Krises. It's also mentioned in Spanish documentation that the Moro employed Bugis captains and sailors (as they were highly capable at sea), especially before and during the Moro Raids era.

4. I don't have a satisfactory theory yet for the round-tang puzzle. Hopefully with more round-tang samples and historical documents, we'll be able to figure that one out someday.

[Ian]

Ray,

Thanks for the detailed responses!

Do you have any thoughts about Brunei kris? I would have thought that the Brunei Sultanate would feature in some of these Moro interactions, and it once controlled an extensive part along the western Borneo coast, including N. Borneo (Sabah). It's defeat by the Spanish in the late 15th C led to a decline, but it made a comeback in the 17th-18th C until the British intruded into the region.

When you speak of the Iranum in Borneo, does this imply a connection with the other Mindanao Moro groups or with Sulu Moros? The Philippine Iranum in Mindanao were geographically proximate to the Maguindanao and Maranao Sultanates, and were politically under the Maguindanao Sultanate for quite a long time, they seem to have had strong ties also with the Sulu Sultanate.

Both the Iranum and Sama had extensive trade routes with Malayan regions and Indonesia, as well as the Celebes, the Moluccas, and Bali. Strong bilateral relations also existed between the Maguindanao Sultanate and Ternate, home of the spice trade in the Moluccas.

All of these represent potential sources for the introduction of the Indonesian keris into Moro culture. I think longstanding trade routes and state/diplomatic voyages need to be carefully considered before anointing any one group as the instigator of the Moro kris. Brunei, Indonesian, Malayan, Bugis, and even Balinese keris/kris may have played their part at different times in the development of the Moro kris.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

Ray,

Thanks for the detailed responses!

Do you have any thoughts about Brunei kris? I would have thought that the Brunei Sultanate would feature in some of these Moro interactions, and it once controlled an extensive part along the western Borneo coast, including N. Borneo (Sabah). It's defeat by the Spanish in the late 15th C led to a decline, but it made a comeback in the 17th-18th C until the British intruded into the region.

When you speak of the Iranum in Borneo, does this imply a connection with the other Mindanao Moro groups or with Sulu Moros? The Philippine Iranum in Mindanao were geographically proximate to the Maguindanao and Maranao Sultanates, and were politically under the Maguindanao Sultanate for quite a long time, they seem to have had strong ties also with the Sulu Sultanate.

Both the Iranum and Sama had extensive trade routes with Malayan regions and Indonesia, as well as the Celebes, the Moluccas, and Bali. Strong bilateral relations also existed between the Maguindanao Sultanate and Ternate, home of the spice trade in the Moluccas.

All of these represent potential sources for the introduction of the Indonesian keris into Moro culture. I think longstanding trade routes and state/diplomatic voyages need to be carefully considered before anointing any one group as the instigator of the Moro kris. Brunei, Indonesian, Malayan, Bugis, and even Balinese keris/kris may have played their part at different times in the development of the Moro kris.

Halloo again Ian,

I've insufficient data about Brunei kris, my Malay friends didn't mention that area much in relation to sundang. The relationship of the Moros with the Brunei Sultanate was actually volatile throughout the centuries; while there was a time that the Sulu Sultanate "saved" the Brunei royalty versus a coup, there was also a time that Sulu Sultanate itself staged an attack against the Brunei Sultanate, which led to the Brunei forces assaulting the Sulu Sultanate in PH. What's retained by via oral tradition, according to my Malay friends, is the manner by which the Sulu warriors "saved" the royalty, with their kalis supposedly.

Regarding the Iranun, my Malay friends believe that they're related to the PH-archipelago Iranun.

I agree on your assertion regarding careful consideration on which keris-producing area likely made the most influence on Moro kris. And I would also add other influences, such as the Chinese, who were very close to the Moro, and who supplied them with iron ingots. I would go with one of Krieger's assertions, that "successive foreign influences" was what led to the development (and uniqueness) of PH blades, including the kris.

[adamb]

I thought I’d chime in here, specifically regarding the above observation that the Bugis had frequent interactions with the Moro. Not an expert, but I note this illustration of a Moro kalis/keris with cockatoo pommel in Matthes’ 1874 Ethnographic Atlas of the Bugis, depicted among a collection of Bugis keris and badiks which I believe Matthes acquired during his time in South Sulawesi. I should note that it is described in the book as a sword of the Sulu raiders. Perhaps the forum members could comment on the specific origin of this piece.

[Ian]

Hi adamb,


Thanks for posting this picture. I am keen to post some comments about this drawing of a Moro kris, but I don't want to preempt Xasterix's response. I'll wait until he has expressed his thoughts.


Ian.