Talismanic or just randomly placed copper dots

Bill · 5th September 2008, 05:40 AM

another thought on this. Dead man's sword. Captured or a fallen fellow warrior, the Jen would have failed the previous owner if killed in battle. Lack of metal/time & no lack of enemies could necessitate re-use.
I worked in a craft job that had a occasional death. The deceased's tools were known as "dead mans tools" & always thrown in the dumpster. I can only imagine what may have been thought about a sword with a Jen that failed. Perhaps this is why we see the talismanic markings many of the "tang repaired" blades. It may not be tang related at all but tossing out a bad Jen.

Tim Simmons · 5th September 2008, 08:00 AM

Strange as it seems that sounds better to me. I feel there must be some cultural reason for this construction. The more you think about the many thousands of these examples being broken in the field then repiared and recaptured, it sarts to fall apart. To me anyway.

kai · 6th September 2008, 01:38 AM

Hello Bill,

Quote:

I can only imagine what may have been thought about a sword with a Jen that failed. Perhaps this is why we see the talismanic markings many of the "tang repaired" blades. It may not be tang related at all but tossing out a bad Jen.

The bad luck stigma is certainly true (from the original and neighboring cultures point of view). The obvious thing to do might be performing rituals, removing the gangya, seeking help by special people to imbue more successful powers, maybe even adding some talismanic features (if your status allows you to do so!). However, AFAIK there's no verified notion (from within Moro culture as well as other SEA cultures) that the tang is anything special which needs to be replaced...

Regards,
Kai

Bill · 6th September 2008, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

However, AFAIK there's no verified notion (from within Moro culture as well as other SEA cultures) that the tang is anything special which needs to be replaced...

Regards,
Kai

Hi Kia, wasn't thinking this had to do with the tang at all but the area of the sword, the place, where the Jen stays. I don't know where exactly that is but was speculating the little square. & the only way to replace that, would require replacing the tang.
Don't expect to find hard solid rules. Research on mountain tribes in Luzon claims that rituals varied greatly from one clan to the next in the same village.
I haven't paid much attention to which groups these "tang replacements" come from but it strikes me, they are what Cato called cross overs. I believe that the so called cross overs are from the Cotabato areas, but am far from certain if limited to those area.
I've got 3 or 4 of these, I'll have to check for similarities.

Tim Simmons · 6th September 2008, 08:12 PM

I am just thinking aloud here. This thread is heating up which is nice. We are just collectors rather than qualified academics. However we have just the same ability to question and advance our understanding of the present ideas, we can pool so many examples?

This is the only Moro Keris I have but it displays the feature in discussion so well. I am not a blade smith but I would like to suggest that in this example the feature is not a repair or a replacement but all part of the original construction. I can only think by the size of the handle that the tang is short around 3-4 inches. It is also off set not following the centre line of the blade, this helps the weight forward feel in the hand. The short tang is aided by the clamps?

There are two parts to the blade, the blade and the base part. These elements are machted to each other in a very precise manner. I would like to suggest that all three parts blade, base and tang are assembled at the same time. First the blade and base are made to fit and as especially as the tang is off set it is forge welded in place so to accomadate the base element.

I make this only as a suggestion but I do question why every oddity has to be a replacement or a repair. A big question arises, do we see the tang feature in weapons without the seperate base element to the blade?????

I feel if you examine these pics it can be seen as three parts put together at the same time. Possibly this is a regional style? different smiths? possibly with some cultural meaning?

kai · 6th September 2008, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Perhaps this is why we see the talismanic markings many of the "tang repaired" blades.

One more note: I think we still need to verify this assumption: I've seen "plenty" of tang repairs/features on plain blades.

OTOH, talismanic markings seem to come with high quality blades as a rule. Like inlaid blades and twistcore blades, I'm pretty sure they were restricted to owners of high(er) status. Otherwise, you'd expect to see a decent amount of genuine warrior kris with talismanic features...

If there is such a relationship between talismanic features and high quality blades and/or high status, you'd also expect these to be more readily repaired and successfully handed down for generations than run-of-the-mill kris of commoners. Thus, no surprise that a higher proportion of old blades would show such features. Not to mention, that a longer service time also enhances the chance that a repair may be needed eventually...

Regards,
Kai

Rick · 6th September 2008, 02:31 AM

Unfortunately so many kris were destroyed that we may not have enough examples to really determine the why of this phenomenon .

As for an inherent weakness in design; I can't for the life of me understand how the kris tang could fail before the handle/hilt attachments would .

5th September 2008, 05:40 AM	#1
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	another thought on this. Dead man's sword. Captured or a fallen fellow warrior, the Jen would have failed the previous owner if killed in battle. Lack of metal/time & no lack of enemies could necessitate re-use. I worked in a craft job that had a occasional death. The deceased's tools were known as "dead mans tools" & always thrown in the dumpster. I can only imagine what may have been thought about a sword with a Jen that failed. Perhaps this is why we see the talismanic markings many of the "tang repaired" blades. It may not be tang related at all but tossing out a bad Jen.

5th September 2008, 08:00 AM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,935	Strange as it seems that sounds better to me. I feel there must be some cultural reason for this construction. The more you think about the many thousands of these examples being broken in the field then repiared and recaptured, it sarts to fall apart. To me anyway.

6th September 2008, 08:12 PM	#5
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,935	I am just thinking aloud here. This thread is heating up which is nice. We are just collectors rather than qualified academics. However we have just the same ability to question and advance our understanding of the present ideas, we can pool so many examples? This is the only Moro Keris I have but it displays the feature in discussion so well. I am not a blade smith but I would like to suggest that in this example the feature is not a repair or a replacement but all part of the original construction. I can only think by the size of the handle that the tang is short around 3-4 inches. It is also off set not following the centre line of the blade, this helps the weight forward feel in the hand. The short tang is aided by the clamps? There are two parts to the blade, the blade and the base part. These elements are machted to each other in a very precise manner. I would like to suggest that all three parts blade, base and tang are assembled at the same time. First the blade and base are made to fit and as especially as the tang is off set it is forge welded in place so to accomadate the base element. I make this only as a suggestion but I do question why every oddity has to be a replacement or a repair. A big question arises, do we see the tang feature in weapons without the seperate base element to the blade????? I feel if you examine these pics it can be seen as three parts put together at the same time. Possibly this is a regional style? different smiths? possibly with some cultural meaning?

6th September 2008, 02:31 AM	#7
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,378	Unfortunately so many kris were destroyed that we may not have enough examples to really determine the why of this phenomenon . As for an inherent weakness in design; I can't for the life of me understand how the kris tang could fail before the handle/hilt attachments would .