Two old Maguindanao kris--with some differences related to age

[Ian]

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.