MORO KRIS HOW OLD IS THIS ONE

Battara · 5th April 2008, 09:08 PM

IMHO - I would place this at around 1930s based on the style of okir used at the base of the blade near the hilt. The pommel is bone. I am wondering if the line is a fake or indicative of a truly separable ganga. Also the pointed tip of the blade leads me to think this is later as well. I don't see any lamination on this either, also often indicative of laster pieces.

It looks Maguindanao to me.

Dajak · 5th April 2008, 09:30 PM

Hi Battara the blade is laminated

and ganjar separated

Ben

David · 5th April 2008, 09:30 PM

Hi Ben. Better pictures would help. It's really hard to make any judgement on the ganja line when the photo isn't sharp.
That said i think Jose's assessment probably isn't that far off. I think the hilt might be a latter addition.

Dajak · 5th April 2008, 09:58 PM

Look at the needle

Ben

David · 5th April 2008, 10:17 PM

Well, that settles that then.....

Battara · 6th April 2008, 08:40 PM

Ok then.....I would now say the early 1920s if is laminated and ganga is separate. David has a good point about the hilt - I agree.

Andrew · 6th April 2008, 10:10 PM

I thought this was an "archaic" blade type (per Cato)?

Is it a later blade in an older style?

David · 6th April 2008, 11:11 PM

My take Andrew is that it is one of the later blades that showed up in the early 20th century that attempted to recreate the features that were found on the archaic models.

5th April 2008, 09:30 PM	#2
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Hi Battara the blade is laminated and ganjar separated Ben Last edited by Dajak; 5th April 2008 at 09:55 PM.

5th April 2008, 09:58 PM	#4
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Look at the needle Ben Attached Images

5th April 2008, 09:08 PM	#1
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	IMHO - I would place this at around 1930s based on the style of okir used at the base of the blade near the hilt. The pommel is bone. I am wondering if the line is a fake or indicative of a truly separable ganga. Also the pointed tip of the blade leads me to think this is later as well. I don't see any lamination on this either, also often indicative of laster pieces. It looks Maguindanao to me.

5th April 2008, 09:30 PM	#3
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	Hi Ben. Better pictures would help. It's really hard to make any judgement on the ganja line when the photo isn't sharp. That said i think Jose's assessment probably isn't that far off. I think the hilt might be a latter addition.

5th April 2008, 10:17 PM	#5
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	Well, that settles that then.....

6th April 2008, 08:40 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Ok then.....I would now say the early 1920s if is laminated and ganga is separate. David has a good point about the hilt - I agree.

6th April 2008, 10:10 PM	#7
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	I thought this was an "archaic" blade type (per Cato)? Is it a later blade in an older style?

6th April 2008, 11:11 PM	#8
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	My take Andrew is that it is one of the later blades that showed up in the early 20th century that attempted to recreate the features that were found on the archaic models.