Moro Kris

Spunjer · 27th June 2011, 04:07 PM

That's one thing about moro weapons: tho we know each are custom made to an individual, we may never know the name of the original owner. Unlike the yataghans and some other middle eastern swords where the name of the original owner were somtimes found on the blade, it's not so with the moro stuff. There's only two other moro weapo
ns i've seen and read that could be attributed to the original owner: a dagger that was given by Datu Piang to Webb Hayes, and a kris that belonged to Datu Natangkup that's in the National Museum in the philippines, as mentioned on cato's book.
I do find the blade interesting in that if we go by what cato wrote, it's a mindanao blade...

Battara · 27th June 2011, 05:42 PM

There was also a lot of trade between Sulu and the Maguindanao............

Spunjer · 27th June 2011, 06:53 PM

That would have been my first impulse, jose, but i just find it hard to believe that all blades that are misplaced based on cato's categorization can be easily dismissed as a "traded blade."

Battara · 27th June 2011, 08:43 PM

Not saying all are trade blades but certainly there was trade between these areas. Note that for example Magindanao pieces do also have woven silver bands like the Sulu.

I also wonder if this could be a type of cross over of which Cato is not aware.

We certainly need more information than Cato provides. Wish Cecil would come out with his book...

I will say that the okir work on the blade and on the silver work does not appear to be Maguinanao or Maranao.

David · 28th June 2011, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

I will say that the okir work on the blade and on the silver work does not appear to be Maguinanao or Maranao.

Frankly this is part of why i wondered if the silver work could be a later addition. That and the fact that the quality of the work does not seem up to the standard i would expect on an old presentation piece.

David · 28th June 2011, 12:34 AM

The first close-up on the asang-asang also seems to show that this is not the original clamp and perhaps not the original hilt.

Rick · 28th June 2011, 02:49 AM

Re pic #4 ; couldn't that just be where the patina was left ?

A shadow line from a not-so-complete clean ?

Spunjer · 28th June 2011, 03:24 AM

Quote:

Frankly this is part of why i wondered if the silver work could be a later addition. That and the fact that the quality of the work does not seem up to the standard i would expect on an old presentation piece.

well, therein lies the problem, david. what's your expectation of what a presentation piece would look like? i mentioned a provenanced piece on my earlier post, so i'm posting the dagger that was given to Lt. Col. Webb Hayes by Datu Piang. would you doubt that as well?

Quote:

The first close-up on the asang-asang also seems to show that this is not the original clamp and perhaps not the original hilt

perhaps i'm missing something, or you see something that i don't, but what makes you think the asang-asang and the handle are not original?

Quote:

I will say that the okir work on the blade and on the silver work does not appear to be Maguinanao or Maranao.

right you are, jose. the symbols on the blade and the silverwork on the bands screams sulu.

27th June 2011, 04:07 PM	#1
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	That's one thing about moro weapons: tho we know each are custom made to an individual, we may never know the name of the original owner. Unlike the yataghans and some other middle eastern swords where the name of the original owner were somtimes found on the blade, it's not so with the moro stuff. There's only two other moro weapo ns i've seen and read that could be attributed to the original owner: a dagger that was given by Datu Piang to Webb Hayes, and a kris that belonged to Datu Natangkup that's in the National Museum in the philippines, as mentioned on cato's book. I do find the blade interesting in that if we go by what cato wrote, it's a mindanao blade...

27th June 2011, 05:42 PM	#2
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,363	There was also a lot of trade between Sulu and the Maguindanao............

27th June 2011, 06:53 PM	#3
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	That would have been my first impulse, jose, but i just find it hard to believe that all blades that are misplaced based on cato's categorization can be easily dismissed as a "traded blade."

27th June 2011, 08:43 PM	#4
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,363	Not saying all are trade blades but certainly there was trade between these areas. Note that for example Magindanao pieces do also have woven silver bands like the Sulu. I also wonder if this could be a type of cross over of which Cato is not aware. We certainly need more information than Cato provides. Wish Cecil would come out with his book... I will say that the okir work on the blade and on the silver work does not appear to be Maguinanao or Maranao.

28th June 2011, 12:34 AM	#6
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,261	The first close-up on the asang-asang also seems to show that this is not the original clamp and perhaps not the original hilt.

28th June 2011, 02:49 AM	#7
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,378	Re pic #4 ; couldn't that just be where the patina was left ? A shadow line from a not-so-complete clean ?