Too Tiny?

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by David

Nope...don't think it's a letter opener...
Some gunongs are, indeed a little on the small side, those yours does seem pretty small. Perhaps it was made for a woman or a child. Do the fittings seem to be silver? Is the pommel ivory? It almost looks a bit like clam shell, which would probably be rarer than ivory, but i can't tell from the photos.
Your blade looks like it isn't laminated, but i would give it a light etch with vinegar to be sure.
Bottom line, i would say that you did not screw up, unless you paid a great deal of money for this.

Perhaps the straight blade and small size saw it used with Betal nut?

[Battara]

Other possibility: it is an early form. Not sure, but smaller forms with out lots of lamination were indicative of earlier forms.

Wish there was more information on these.

I agree though is was not a waste of money.

[Andrew]

Agree w/David--looks like the color of ivory to me.

Was/is betel chewing regularly practiced in the PIs?

Reminds me of the Thai/Burmese "priest knives", but that's really just based on size...

[David]

Originally Posted by Battara

Other possibility: it is an early form. Not sure, but smaller forms with out lots of lamination were indicative of earlier forms.

I think we all wish there was more info on these blades.
From the more bulbous pommel form it would seem it is not an "older" form. The metal work looks fairly nice, but i would still be interested in knowing if it is silver or some other white metal.
...and that would be a yes AFAIK Andrew....betel nut does indeed have a history of use in the Philippines.

[Indianajones]

Will give it my 'go'; not a bad buy would my humble opinion be. The pommel does look like ivory (think too thick mass to be bone) and so white because its 'bleached' by sun n age (and not being handled much). Am wondering what kind of ivory.

Blade may indeed be bit on the simple side, but one cant have it all on one piece, can we?! To my opinion not specifically an early piece as than they would not have used so much silver/metalwork on the sheath (the more early, the rarer metal/silver).
<for betelnut one rather need a more hacking sort of blade as these nuts are hard to crack. Dagger has little use with them>

All in all a nice honest little gunong with a ivory pommel. Sometimes small can also be a plus! Congratulations I would say!
Buy two more and you'l have a collection of them . . .

[A.alnakkas]

Thanks all! am really glad that my first Moro purchase is not that bad hehe

[T. Koch]

It could indeed be dirty ivory, but the grey-ish areas of the hilt suggest bone to me. These areas would be some of the outer grain of the spongiose core tissue. Ivory is much more solid and usually whiter and the material has a more 'live' glow. Hard to explain, but a focused picture of the handle surface should be able to decide it.

Very cool little knife in all regards. I've never personally seen a gunong in hand, so I am also surprised by the size. I like it even better now that I know that it is so small - such a great little stabber!

Thanks for sharing!


Best wishes, - Thor

[A.alnakkas]

Hey guys!

Here are zooms on the hilt. Going to etch the blade whenever am free.

The fittings seem to be silver but cant be sure.

[Battara]

Originally Posted by David

From the more bulbous pommel form it would seem it is not an "older" form.

I forgot about that - very good point. I agree that this is a big indication of being a circa 1930s piece.

Also the more I look at this the more I am inclined to agree that this may be clam shell.

[T. Koch]

My vote still goes for bone, although I guess, it theoretically could be from the outer layers of the clamshell, where the material is more mottled and of lesser quality. In my experience though, craftsmen usually take from nearer the center, where the shell is harder and more compact.
An example would be these Japanese Go-stones, also carved from some unknown Tridacna-species:



- and yes, I am aware that these pictured, are expensive über high-end stones, but they serve to illustrate that purity is an ideal when it comes to worked clamshell.

Rick's suggestion is good IMO. If the handle feels hard, cold and stone-like to the touch, it's probably Tridacna-shell. If you could carefully burn some unexposed part of the hilt, you would quickly be able to determine whether the material is organic or mineral.

*Wouter* I agree with you, but I'm sceptical about the source being caribou though. Unless of course you're referring to the epic 18th century Moro-raid on Santa's Sleigh? It was a massacre... Antler, red noses and little elf limbs everywhere...
Don't you think it's more likely to be from sambar deer or something likewise more local?


Best wishes, - Thor

[Robert]

Thor, I believe that Wouter is referring to carabao/water buffalo bone not caribou though an 18th century Moro-raid on Santa's Sleigh could have produced some unique hilt materials.

Robert

[Sajen]

Look indeed like Tridacna but like Wouter write is the hairline crack is a little bit unusual but could be possible. Like Rick write it is a good test to test the hardness of the material additional have Tridacna a cold feel while bone have a more warm feel like ivory. BTW, nice little gunong.

Regards,

Detlef

[David]

Originally Posted by T. Koch

My vote still goes for bone, although I guess, it theoretically could be from the outer layers of the clamshell, where the material is more mottled and of lesser quality. In my experience though, craftsmen usually take from nearer the center, where the shell is harder and more compact.

Thor, did you look at the examples of Tridacna hilts that i linked to above. While the purity of the material might be of more importance in, say, the Japanese culture, it should certainly be clear from the examples in the thread that i posted that it is not that much of an issue in the Malay world.

[T. Koch]

*David* Thank you for drawing my attention to your link - again. I had indeed missed it the first time around. I see now, that the mottled parts of the shell are indeed being used - at least when we're talking keris hilts. I just find this peculiar. I have myself manually destroyed dozens of Tridacna-shells and even fairly small half-shells, say the size of your average popcorn bowl have maybe 6-7 cm thick shells. Especially the area near the umbo (hinge) of the clam, is comprised of plenty of dense, white material.

Atm. I tend to agree with Wouter: I'm still indecisive, but after seing the phtographs Rick linked to, I'm leaning more towards clam than bone. It's not however TOK-TOK. Bone against glass goes PLOK-PLOK, while clamshell against glass goes KLINK-KLINK. The problem with onomatopoeia is the same as with the hot/cold-distinction: They're both very subjective..

I still say torch it - it's the only way to know for sure! If dissassembly is not an option, I guess comparing it with the sound of a stone against glass, is the next-best thing: They should sound about the same: both harder than bone.

- Very cool discussion. I'm very grateful to have learned this and seen the above photos. Thanks everybody!


All the best, - Thor