Kris: Sulu or Sumatra?

[RobT]

Hi All,

When I pulled my Christmas present from the sheath, I said to my wife that it is a very nice Sulu kris. Then I flipped the sheath over and saw “SUMATRA KRISS” printed on the 8 sided (originally) label. You would think that whoever collected the sword would know where they got it from but, given that the label looks like something that may have been put on by a museum, the collector may not have been the one who did the cataloging. Still, one would think (or at least hope) that the person who did the cataloging had a reason for the designation. So, Is there anything about this sword that marks it as likely to be from Sumatra or is it just a probable museum catalogue error?
Specs: Blade about 22” (55.8cm) long with lenticular cross section. Steel baca baca. Non ferrous metal ferrule. Wooden cockatua pommel. Hilt wrap of cord (a bit of a train wreck) with two leather bands (one below the pommel and one after the ferrule).
When I got the piece, the blade, baca baca, ferrule, and pommel were all covered with a thick layer of shellac or lacquer which strengthens the museum suspicion but did nothing to prevent a good amount of rust from forming on the blade (but surprisingly, not on the baca baca). A dip in one of my EvapoRust tanks took care of the blade rust but didn’t completely remove the coating. Even after rubbing the blade with a lacquer soaked 3M pad, some of the coating remains. The pommel is still fully coated as found.
Even though the blade style looks rather old, the blade itself is rather thin and fairly flexible so I suspected that it may be a newer blade with with a ganja iras and a fake ganja line. Inspection of the line with a hand lens was inconclusive but the hilt is loose (no surprise there) so I pulled it off. I still can’t tell for sure but have provided two shots of the tang.

Sincerely,
RobT

[kai]

Congrats, Rob!

Be proud: Your training paid off! (There are many uninformed collectors, dealers, and even curators. Never trust any uncorroborated story; never trust any label that can't be verified.)

Given that the Tausug were heavily plying the waters of the archipelago, there still is a slim chance that the piece might have been collected on Sumatra. It doesn't look like a museum tag though.

I agree that the piece is Sulu. (They got the first 2 letters right... )

The katik (gangya) certainly looks separate to me. I'd place the blade as very late 19th century to early 20th century.

Is the clamp magnetic? I'd guess at nickel "silver" though (same as the ferrule).

Regards,
Kai

[David]

I nice Christmas present, and i would agree with Kai that it certainly isn't a Sumatran sundang, it is indeed a Moro kris.
Obviously i'm not sure who label this kris as "Sumatra" either, but i will say that there is never any guarantee that museum curators get such identification correct. I have been in a number of major museums and seen mislabelled keris and other items. Edged weapons are not every museum curator's strong points. Of course they often will politely blow us collectors off when we try to set them straight, because how dare we know better than them when we don't have their degree. LOL!

[xasterix]

Nice kris! I think it's Moro, from Mindanao, then later on in its career, Lumad-appropriated.

[RobT]

Thank you kai, David, and xasterix. Your responses not only set my mind at ease but also served to restore any street cred that I may have lost with my wife. I am glad everybody likes the kris. I will clean the grey EvapoRust patina off the blade and etch it with 3% nital. I will either restore (or more likely) replace the hilt cording (but will leave the leather bands). Lastly I will replace the band that holds the baca baca to the hilt (the remaining stub appears to be copper, not brass).

kai,
I did do a magnet test on the baca baca. In the initial test the small (.3” [8mm] diameter), ceramic magnet was strongly attracted, so I concluded that the baca baca was ferrous metal. At the time, I was puzzled by the amount of rust on the blade versus the complete lack of rust on the baca baca and also thought it strange that the metal of the baca baca matches the look of the metal on the ferrule which is non magnetic (tested with the hilt removed from the blade). I Dismissed these two anomalies but your supposition that that the baca baca may be nickel silver led me to do another test. I got a strip of aluminum of the same width and thickness as the baca baca and laid it on the blade. The magnet was just as strongly attracted as it had been in my first test so it is obvious that the magnet was being attracted to the blade not the baca baca. Thanks for the heads up. Perhaps, after I really clean the blade and etch it, whether or not the ganja is separate will become clearly apparent. The blade certainly looks like it could be 19th century.

David,
Your experiences with museum curators and mine with many antique dealers are the same. As time has gone by, because of their disinclination to drink, I have become less and less interested in leading horses to water.

xasterix,
Using Cato’s classification, the elephant’s trunk area on my kris appears to be more consistent with Sulu (Tausug, Samal, Yakan etc) rather than Mindanao (Marano or Maguindanao). Am I mistaken? Also, what features make it “Lumad-appropriated”. Additional info is always good.

Sincerely,
RobT

[Battara]

In my experience this would be a Sulu blade. The top of the scabbard in this boat shape is also indicative of Sulu pieces.

However, there was a lot of trade in the region with Tausug people, so would not be surprised if it might have been traded in Sumatra. I think it more likely that the dealer gave it a mistaken attribution.

[kai]

Thanks, Jose, I forgot to discuss the implications of the scabbard: If this kris found its way to Sumatra, it almost certainly would have received a Melayu scabbard.

The covering of the scabbard is certainly unusual. If it's not a later cover-up by any dealer, it might point to final use outside the Moro groups, indeed.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Thanks for the update, Rob!

I will either restore (or more likely) replace the hilt cording

It looks like a lost cause: If you decide to go for a re-wrap, make sure to keep the original grip binding with the piece for future reference.

but will leave the leather bands

This leather most certainly is not original. Please post close-ups.

Lastly I will replace the band that holds the baca baca to the hilt (the remaining stub appears to be copper, not brass).

Not rarely, this strip is made from another metal.

BTW, if you can remove the hilt, you should also be able to remove the asang-asang. This should help working on the blade.

Regards,
Kai

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by RobT

xasterix,
Using Cato’s classification, the elephant’s trunk area on my kris appears to be more consistent with Sulu (Tausug, Samal, Yakan etc) rather than Mindanao (Marano or Maguindanao). Am I mistaken? Also, what features make it “Lumad-appropriated”. Additional info is always good.

Sincerely,
RobT

Hi Rob! I also used to rely on Cato's classification. However I changed my mind when I was shared data by my curator-researcher friend who's worked with Mindanao and Lumad tribal elders for more than a decade. According to him, the elders dismissed Cato's classification; they don't look at the elephant figural, but rather the shelf below it (the area below the "mouth" of the elephant, like a second mouth). If the shelf opens wide (upper and lower part not perfectly parallel, but 'gaping') then it's Mindanao. If the shelf opens in a linear fashion, with both upper and lower parts parallel, then that's Sulu.

I interpreted the kris as Lumad-appropriated because the ferrule and asang-asang were 'roughly' replaced with unmarked metal- I'm not sure if it's silver, aluminum, or alloy. I believe those parts are also younger than the rest of the sword ensemble. If it were properly replaced by a Moro owner, it usually comes with the |X| placeholder or other engraving. My curator-friend had told me that rough replacements were indicative of later Lumad ownership. They didn't have access to the proper materials as their Moro brothers.

As for the boat-shaped scabbard, Mindanao elders have also ascribed that as theirs, particularly those with Iranun lineage, who used to be extensive seafarers in past eras.

[Battara]

Xasterix you bring up a good point of the fittings. I agree that they are later. You also reminded me that I saw a Maguindanao kris with the exact same shape of wranga and overall scabbard shape. So I stand corrected on the scabbard.

Would you be willing so show what you mean a out the mouth cavity - I can't seem to envision what you are saying.

[RobT]

kai,
Here are the close-ups you asked for and they show just how bad the cord wrap is. The cord goes under the leather bands and the bands (made of rough hide) appear to be glued on. I know that leather bands aren’t traditional on kris hilts but I’d be willing to bet that whoever did the cord wrap was Filipino and also added the bands. For that reason, I would like to leave them as part of the blade’s history but I don’t know if I can get them loose to rewrap the hilt without destroying them. If I can’t save them, I’ll replace them with wound or braided rattan because I am sure that the band next to the pommel is needed to hide a join between the pommel and hilt.

xasterix,
I have always been a bit leery about Cato’s classification for two reasons. 1) The defining area is rather small and the culturally denoting differences are rather subtle. For a culturally differentiating trait, you would think that the feature would be more prominent and the differences would be more marked. 2) As far as I know, Cato provided no documentation to support his classification. We don’t know what data he used, how or where he got it, or the size of his sample.
Unfortunately, for me, the classification offered by your curator-researcher friend suffers from the same problems that I have with Cato. The area your friend considers defining is even smaller than Cato’s and the difference is even more subtle. As for your friend’s source, without copious and independentI information, I tend to view any statements provided by tribal elders as a definite maybe. After all, village elders are the source of wildly improbable legends which were passed on to them by their elders and which they now happily pass on to the next generation.
Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that your friend is incorrect or that you are wrong to use his parameters. What I am saying is that we now have two conflicting classifications based on unverified statements (somebody just shoot me) so you can make your choice and take your chance. What we need (and are unlikely to get) is a rigorous comparison of a large number of kris of known provenance and age to get a trustworthy classification (if such exists).
Thanks for the Lumad info. I think the baca baca is nickel silver as is the ferrule.

Sincerely,
RobT

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Battara

Xasterix you bring up a good point of the fittings. I agree that they are later. You also reminded me that I saw a Maguindanao kris with the exact same shape of wranga and overall scabbard shape. So I stand corrected on the scabbard.

Would you be willing so show what you mean a out the mouth cavity - I can't seem to envision what you are saying.

Hello sir, sorry I wasn't clear- it's this part, supposedly.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by RobT

kai,
Here are the close-ups you asked for and they show just how bad the cord wrap is. The cord goes under the leather bands and the bands (made of rough hide) appear to be glued on. I know that leather bands aren’t traditional on kris hilts but I’d be willing to bet that whoever did the cord wrap was Filipino and also added the bands. For that reason, I would like to leave them as part of the blade’s history but I don’t know if I can get them loose to rewrap the hilt without destroying them. If I can’t save them, I’ll replace them with wound or braided rattan because I am sure that the band next to the pommel is needed to hide a join between the pommel and hilt.

xasterix,
I have always been a bit leery about Cato’s classification for two reasons. 1) The defining area is rather small and the culturally denoting differences are rather subtle. For a culturally differentiating trait, you would think that the feature would be more prominent and the differences would be more marked. 2) As far as I know, Cato provided no documentation to support his classification. We don’t know what data he used, how or where he got it, or the size of his sample.
Unfortunately, for me, the classification offered by your curator-researcher friend suffers from the same problems that I have with Cato. The area your friend considers defining is even smaller than Cato’s and the difference is even more subtle. As for your friend’s source, without copious and independentI information, I tend to view any statements provided by tribal elders as a definite maybe. After all, village elders are the source of wildly improbable legends which were passed on to them by their elders and which they now happily pass on to the next generation.
Please don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that your friend is incorrect or that you are wrong to use his parameters. What I am saying is that we now have two conflicting classifications based on unverified statements (somebody just shoot me) so you can make your choice and take your chance. What we need (and are unlikely to get) is a rigorous comparison of a large number of kris of known provenance and age to get a trustworthy classification (if such exists).
Thanks for the Lumad info. I think the baca baca is nickel silver as is the ferrule.

Sincerely,
RobT

No worries Rob, I understand your apprehension. You bring up a good point- consensus of Sulu-based elders is also needed in order to strengthen this alternative classification theory (I view it as such, until definitely proven). For my part, I try to apply it on kris/kalis that I encounter (which is to say, not much- there are much fewer old kris/kalis remaining here in PH than in other countries, ironically).

By the way, it was told to me that Cato got his data from a prominent US-based researcher/collector/dealer (he's retired now) who interfaced with Moro elders decades ago. To be honest, the only respected and acknowledged source among locals in PH are elders. Oral tradition has preserved a lot of PH culture. There's no other source. Even outsiders who did ethnographic studies in PH relied mostly on elders for their data. There's no alternative to that... the nuance is that passed-on knowledge can evolve, or be re-interpreted (even misinterpreted)- but at the end of the day, what the elders say is what most Filipino and Moro tribes would view as "legit." Because only the elders have access to indigenous knowledge not openly shared with outsiders. They are knowledge-keepers, first and foremost. And that includes the form and function of traditional blades.

[kai]

Thanks, Ray!

Could you please post some pics of clear Sulu pieces according to this classification? I checked my collection and did not find a single example which seemed to fit your description - so, I guess I must be misinterpreting.

I understand that Bob Cato did quite a bit of work on collections/musea; he also was in contact with Cecil Quirino and other interested expats. I assume that responsibility for his conclusions was his own.

I fully agree on obtaining (and carefully documenting!) as much info from local elders as possible; oral traditions can yield amazingly consistent results (or be way off). I'd be especially keen to hear what might be the take of the diverse Sulu groups on this issue!

Regards,
Kai

[RobT]

From kai: "I fully agree on obtaining (and carefully documenting!) as much info from local elders as possible; oral traditions can yield amazingly consistent results (or be way off). I'd be especially keen to hear what might be the take of the diverse Sulu groups on this issue!"

kai,
I would really like to know what the elders from all the kris making groups have to say about the matter and whether all the groups agree.

Sincerely,
RobT