Ethnographic Arms & Armour - Talismanic symbols on moro kris blades gallery!

Ethnographic Arms & Armour (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/index.php)

- Ethnographic Weapons (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Talismanic symbols on moro kris blades gallery! (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=14086)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dark379

Hi I like to share my old moro keris which have Talismanic symbols....and i like also to consult this sword about its age, whether it is 19th or 20th century..... by the way about the cloth cover of the sword i think it was put later on, but the wooden scabbard is quit look old already and its handle..

Sorry, overlooked your original posting. Welcome to the forum and thanks for sharing this nice kris!

While adding it to this talismanic gallery is certainly warranted, I believe it would also deserve to be discussed in a seperate thread of its own - please also add dimensions and confirm that the sampir/gangya is seperate!

IMHO this kris is definitely Moro craftmanship: blade probably Maguindanao including the nice danganan hilt; the grip braiding with the exposed silver strips is reminiscent of the upper Cota Bato region. I'd estimate it originates from the last quarter of the 19th century. The textile and bead work on the scabbard is obviously Lumad - a closer look may allow to identify the tribe and period; the wooden scabbard also looks Lumad to me. Alas, a Moro kris that received a Lumad scabbard after changing owners on Mindanao. Congrats, nice find!

Regards,
Kai

Here's mine, relatively simple compared to the others on this thread. The blade is wide, but thin and flexible. The kris is very light.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VVV (Post 149858)

David,

It was Aleister Crowley who defined (stipulated) the difference between the two kinds of magic (magic vs magick) you describe. I assumed in my comment that you were aware of this fact based on your interest in "magick". Obviously I was wrong on this. My comment that the term "magick" is semi religious of course presupposed that you were familiar with its background.

Michael

Hi Michael. Since Detlef has revived this thread i just noticed that i never responded to your last post to me. Yes, i am very familiar with Crowley's writings and that he is indeed credited with first making this spelling distinction (magick vs magic). So no, you were not wrong on this. However, it does not change the fact that personally i have chosen to adopt the spelling of magick with a "k" whenever i use the word when it is associated with "real" magick as opposed to stage magic such as slight-of-hand or other performance tricks. This distinction for me has little to do with what Crowley's chosen magickal practices were. It is simply a way to separate the spiritual from entertainment. Obviously magick squares have nothing to do with entertainment in this regard, so i will continue to use the spelling of magick with a "k" when i discuss these things. Sorry if folks find this confusing. :)
Also sorry this response took more than 10 years! LOL! :D

Adding a couple more :) heavy kris on the top/left, very light kalis on the bottom/right.