The 10th to 15th century Visayan kris, & earlier artifacts

[kai]

Hello David,

(Being slow and distracted while working on my response, Ron and Alan beat me to it - I'm keeping this unedited though.)

I am having a difficult time seeing this as anything but an Indonesian keris, in spite of the rectangular tang. The blade bears little resemblance to any other Philippines kris we have seen, but has much in common with early keris such as the blade shape and the carvings which look very much like a double puthut form at the base.

Yes, it does look like puthut style but during that time frame, this style might not have been limited to what we today know as Indonesia. (And half of modern Indonesia apparently never had any keris culture...)

However, I see some features that make me think that this might be at best a copy of this style rather than being an expression of a genuine tradition (wether locally crafted or coming to Bohol as trade or as a gift from a foreign power):
1. This blade is essentially flat - no thickening at the gonjo area nor at the puthut areas while the tang is a mere extension of the blade.
2. The details of the putative puthut carvings don't fit any anthropomorphic features but appear to be merely geometrical by design.

There is also, i believe, record of early Indo Keris with square or rectangular tangs. The only thing that remotely resembles a Moro kris here is the tang which isn't very decisive IMO.

Yes, and its proportions aren't typical "Moro" either - I don't think we can closely link it with the surviving kris tradition in the area.

Even as a traded blade it might very well have become a choice "A" object for the person buried. There is just no telling here.

In basically any warrior culture a blade is much more than a weapon. The choice of what constitutes the most important personal piece for someone of status (and, thus, being able to afford more than a very few blades) may very well be the perceived talismanic/magic/religious properties which most likely would also make treasured gifts from powerful foreign sources eligible. From the length I believe it's safe to assume that this most likely wasn't the person's primary war sword but rather something more "personal" anyway.

I would think that if these blades were prevalent in the area during this era that far more than this one single example would have turned up by now. Hardly enough evidence exists to form any opinion of the origin of this single blade let alone to completely reverse the generally accepted theory that the keris developed first in Java before making it's way to the Philippines. Even the evidence of a parallel development is lacking as this seems to be the only example of a "kris" from this time period in the Philippines. Where are all the other artifacts?

I believe we need to be more patient and remember that iron is prone to fast corrosion (as well as getting overlooked by non-professionals just trying to make a living). Iron artefacts do turn up but since so little archeology is actually being done throughout SEA, good evidence accumulates at a slow pace (and subsequent analysis/publishing being even slower).

Regards,
Kai

[migueldiaz]

Messrs. David, spunjer, AG Maisey, and kai, many thanks for your comments!

Thanks most especially to Alan for the exhaustive commentary covering the various aspects of the discussion at hand. Coincidentally, I was reviewing the other day Alan's article on the origin of the keris.

Dr. Dizon also saw this thread by the way. And he mentioned that we should also consider the situation at the time -- i.e., that ancient Filipinos, Indonesians, and Malaysians were all maritime people, and there was really no distinct boundaries amongst them. Being genetically and culturally close relatives, he added that these peoples freely shared metal technologies among them.

On the subject kris, I also noticed that it was described that it appears that the blade's edge has more carbon content. Am mentioning this for whatever it is worth.

Lorenz

[migueldiaz]

Double-edged symmetrical blades with a 'pinched' portion near the hilt, and a 'swollen' part near the tip, are actually common in precolonial Philippines (pre-16th century).

The Boxer Codex painting (1590) shows Zambals of Luzon (northern Philippines) using such a blade. The excavated Cebu blade (central Philippines) shown is likewise precolonial. The subject kris was found in Bohol incidentally, and Bohol is Cebu's neighbor (they speak the same language).

Finally, the blade shown in the other pic is most probably precolonial, too.

Hence the subject kris with a very similar blade profile is very much Filipino in this respect.

[migueldiaz]

The other Filipino prehispanic blades have a more regular taper from the guard, to the point. The pic of the lone dagger is from 'nacho'.

[migueldiaz]

From Laos/Cambodia/Thailand, we also see a similar blade profile. The pic below (and the ones to follow) are from the book, Images of the Gods: Khmer Mythology in Cambodia, Laos & Thailand.

[migueldiaz]

To put the above blade in context, the other blade types that can be seen in those ancient [Thai/Laotian/Cambodian] temples are below. The longer blades, as well as the captions of the daggers shown, can be found in this album.

[migueldiaz]

Dr. Dizon was kind enough to see me the other day. Here's some of the things he mentioned to me:

[1] on the bent tip of the Visayan kris -- he said that it is a sign that the blade owner willed when he was alive that the blade will be buried with him; bending the tip was a gesture that the blade is not to be used anymore -- in effect, this is another sign to look for when one is assessing the authenticity of an alleged excavated blade; he said that this practice was also done in other regions

[given the practice of ancestral worship then, these desires of the old folks were surely followed to the letter; the success of harvests and business enterprises were believed then to be heavily dependent upon the benevolent intervention of the departed forefathers]

[2] the similarity of the Visayan kris with old Javanese kerises, etc., is not surprising because there were really no borders then amongst what is now Phils., Indo., & Malaysia

[3] he added that blacksmiths then were itinerant, and thus all the more that we should see similarity in designs

[4] as far as artifacts found in ship wrecks in the country are concerned, he said he has never seen a bladed weapon [except for the katanas in the San Diego wreck, 1600, near Batangas] -- his conclusion is that the bladed weapons of ancient Phils. were not imported; we made our own

[5] he has also never seen blade artifacts in the country that are wavy -- all are straight [thus we can tentatively conclude here that the wavy/naga blade is a relatively recent concept]

[6] rather than mining iron ore and then smelting them, it's always easier to recycle old iron or steel as less effort is required

[7] also, as steel gets recycled (and heated and pounded once more to get the slag [impurities] out), all the more that the quality of the steel gets better

[8] thus it was quite popular in the olden days to use "drift iron", i.e., metal coming from various sources and then recycled.