Yet Another Moro Kriss

[Jazz]

Thanks for everyone's welcome! That was my first guess, that it's a late 1800 sword, when I saw it the first time, but there's something about the way it handles. Also I forgot to mention that the length of just the blade itself is 19", smaller that the typical krisses that was common during the revolutionary/phil-am war and later era, when these swords were more flamboyant and bigger.
As far as what you mentioned Bill, in regards to the smaller cockatoo pommels; that's exactly what I was trying to say, that the smaller ones (smaller that what I have) are truly archaic, perhaps late 1600's/early 1700's, and at some point there has to be a transitional period and I am assuming that this type of cockatoo pommel are the missing link. That is just my opinion , though. And yes, I have etched this, and a few 'marbled pattern' appeared, but I've decided to leave it as it is, since I don't really see the point of the pattern over-riding the inlay pattern. Btw, can you tell me more about the inlay? The Indonesian angle is a possibility as well, but I really don't have any provenanced example to compare it with.
As far as what you mentioned, Battara, the handle wrap is old, and again, I would assume it's original to the sword rather that a rewrapped in the later period.

but the profile of this blade is nothing like the "archaic" kris from the 1700s.

David, could you please explain what an archaic kriss profile would be? I would like to compare this with what I have. Thank you in advance.

This looks like a late 19th/early 20th C kris with an even more recent hilt.

Ian, I was under the impression that later hilts were bigger and more flamboyant, therefore I would respectfully disagree that the smaller ones are recent.

Again, thank you for everyone's assessment, More comments would be truly appreciated.

[Rick]

I've always been intrigued by the stylistic differences in these pommels.
I believe the wood one shown may be from a Mindanao tribe.
Welcome Jazz .

[Bill]

It's almost maddening to try & define age & group for each one of these swords. I think one, over times just forms a general opinion of when & where they originated. These groups each had their own craftmen that had different techniques & skills. Then add in, updated or replaced hilts only a generation later may have stylistic changes; engravings or file modification may be added sometime after origination. I've read a bit about customs & religion of the mountain tribes of Luzon. What one may think would be a major definition can be something quite different from one clan in the same group, not to mention other neighboring groups. As soon as you make a rule to follow, you'll find an example that discounts the theory.

[David]

Jazz, if you own Robert Cato's book Moro Sword you can find examples of the "archaic" form of kris which he would date to the 1700s. I don't personally own one of these so i can't post one, but they tended to be less wide and with less and deeper curves. They were probably used much more as a stabbing weapon than a slashing one, more like their Indonesian keris counterpart. Though you cannot see the full profile of the blade i believe Rick's second posted kris, with the ivory kakatau, would be an example of this type. Note also how the line of the gangya goes pretty much straight across on this blade as opposed to yours or Rick's other example where the line takes a 45 degree turn. This is usually another sign of an earlier blade.
Now that i can see the close-ups i am not sure what it is that you believe is writing (Jawi or otherwise). I think that all the inlay is just design features and not intended as writing.
As for the size of your blade, i own 2 kris which date to not earlier than the late 19thC that have blades under 20". I don't think this is a reliable factor in determining age. It is true that the "archaic" forms are generally smaller blade (around 18"), but certainly blades in this length range were made into the 20thC.

[Jazz]

Thank you guys. very interesting responses.