Very Old Moro Kris

Bill · 23rd May 2005, 05:04 PM

Ian, nice comparison of the 2 blades. Have to agree that both are really old. The hilt on the object sword looks very old & I think the majority would agree, that it must be a replacement. It seems interesting that when we get into older kris, that they usually fall into the 18" catagory, +/- a ". Concidering the humidity & rainfall, doubt that sword could have been excavated. Got a couple that are similar to both those shown, & have to think they have conciderable age. Think the dapor is well executed for thrusting. Have a few swords that have the black patina, (very old), would any one like to give some opinions on that, time wise?

Rick · 23rd May 2005, 05:13 PM

Since krisses are usually viewed within their culture point upwards does this view of the markings change anyones perceptions ?

Rick · 23rd May 2005, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

Ian, nice comparison of the 2 blades. Have to agree that both are really old. The hilt on the object sword looks very old & I think the majority would agree, that it must be a replacement. It seems interesting that when we get into older kris, that they usually fall into the 18" catagory, +/- a ". Concidering the humidity & rainfall, doubt that sword could have been excavated. Got a couple that are similar to both those shown, & have to think they have conciderable age. Think the dapor is well executed for thrusting. Have a few swords that have the black patina, (very old), would any one like to give some opinions on that, time wise?

Bill , do you have any krisses that have either an absolutely flat or even somewhat down curving Gangya top ?

Tom , could this blackness be forging scale unremoved ?

Bill · 23rd May 2005, 06:24 PM

Rick, if you mean, no "trunk" at all, the answer is no.

Rick · 23rd May 2005, 07:47 PM

No Bill , I meant the surface that the hilt meets ; the top of the separate piece (gangya) always seems to have an upward curve to it .

Federico · 23rd May 2005, 09:39 PM

Rick, the lack of carving/fretwork kris I have seen fall into two categories. Those whose fretwork were removed purposely through either corrosion or a misguided owner (Cecil had a scary story about an owner who filed off all the fretwork on his kris), and then those whose shape/proportion would fit fretwork, but the fretwork was simply just never done for some reason or another. The second category has always fascinated me, and Cecil had mentioned it was something that struck him as interesting as well. However, in the few pieces Ive stumbled on (unfortunately never won) they all seemed to be newer pieces (circa late 19th early 20th century) and very new (eg. they looked like they had been collected shortly after being made).

This mystery piece, on the other hand, lacks the proportions to be of the second category (trying to do fretwork there would simply not be enough blade to work with). So then it would seem then that the fretwork either corroded off, or was removed purposely. Anyways, if it still has the gangya intact, I would vote against a Moro attribution. From the pics it would just be too dainty, even for some of the most corroded of archaic styled kris (regardless of who we attribute the form to). On my own archaic style piece, the gangya had fallen off, and when examining it I noticed that the wall were the gangya and the pesi met the walls were paper thin from use of wear, and it would seem far far far more robust shape than this piece given the pics. So if there is a gangya, then I would imagine the tang would be extremely tiny, again not going in line with archaic kris/keris, which have very robust tangs (even when round). I guess we could argue this could be a Moro keris before the change to kris, but it just strikes me funny. I dunno, thats just my opinion, and its hard to work off of pics.

Spunjer · 24th May 2005, 11:20 AM

a spaniard's attempt to recreate a kris from memory, perhaps? kinda odd seeing a kris without fretworks and "elephant's" trunk. also the numbers "1" and "3" looks to be mechanically stamped...

Ian · 24th May 2005, 02:12 PM

Just a note to let you know I added the dimensions of the Mystery sword and the other old Moro kris to the pictures above. As Bill commented, it is a very consistent feaure to find the blade lengths on these early Moro kris to be 18 +/- 1 inch. These two lie within that range, with the blade of the mystery sword being 18 inches from the tip to the hilt.

The mystery sword is a little thinner and slimmer than the other kris. Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. We know that it is corroded and may have lost some thickness relative to the better preserved sword. It is also possible that kris became generally "beefier" over time. Certainly the late 19th C. Mindanao kris became much heavier than earlier examples -- perhaps the mystery sword predates the other one shown beside it.

I think Bill's comments come closest to my own thoughts about this mystery kris.

BTW, I keep this one out of my bedroom and certainly not under my pillow. Who knows what stories it has to tell.

Ian.

tom hyle · 24th May 2005, 02:26 PM

The straight back edge to the ganga is odd, isn't it? But it is seen on k(e)ris, so might be in line with an evolutionary form, as proposed. I don't know that it does lack an elephant trunk. The elephant trunk is the central protrusion within the large cutout at the front edge, yes? I see a protrusion within this area on the discussed sword. It is small (perhaps broken and/or rusted off), and is unusual in its placement, as it departs from the (krisly speaking) top side of the depression partway along, rather than from the center back. The angle seems similar to that on the other shown piece. Can we get a closeup?
Rick might be onto something on how to orient the writing.
The mark looks in a way like a lot of mysterious marks I see on PI and other Spanish colonial stuff; letters or numbers with things that don't seem to be and whose meaning is hard to figure, often seeming to have been chiselled, or to have been struck with (handmade?) stamps that are not entirely standard forms. Both the end characters are odd looking. The center ones do look more like stampings; a 3, an E, an m? and an s? that seems to be obscured by another striking or some sort of damage? I suspect the marking is contemporary with the rehilt.
Rick, it's real hard for me to tell forge scale, especially forge scale with rust, from heavy rust in a photo.

23rd May 2005, 05:13 PM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,347	How About Since krisses are usually viewed within their culture point upwards does this view of the markings change anyones perceptions ? Attached Images

23rd May 2005, 07:47 PM	#5
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,347	No Bill , I meant the surface that the hilt meets ; the top of the separate piece (gangya) always seems to have an upward curve to it . Attached Images

24th May 2005, 02:12 PM	#8
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,453	Dimensions added Just a note to let you know I added the dimensions of the Mystery sword and the other old Moro kris to the pictures above. As Bill commented, it is a very consistent feaure to find the blade lengths on these early Moro kris to be 18 +/- 1 inch. These two lie within that range, with the blade of the mystery sword being 18 inches from the tip to the hilt. The mystery sword is a little thinner and slimmer than the other kris. Not sure this adds anything to the discussion. We know that it is corroded and may have lost some thickness relative to the better preserved sword. It is also possible that kris became generally "beefier" over time. Certainly the late 19th C. Mindanao kris became much heavier than earlier examples -- perhaps the mystery sword predates the other one shown beside it. I think Bill's comments come closest to my own thoughts about this mystery kris. BTW, I keep this one out of my bedroom and certainly not under my pillow. Who knows what stories it has to tell. Ian.

23rd May 2005, 05:04 PM	#1
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	Ian, nice comparison of the 2 blades. Have to agree that both are really old. The hilt on the object sword looks very old & I think the majority would agree, that it must be a replacement. It seems interesting that when we get into older kris, that they usually fall into the 18" catagory, +/- a ". Concidering the humidity & rainfall, doubt that sword could have been excavated. Got a couple that are similar to both those shown, & have to think they have conciderable age. Think the dapor is well executed for thrusting. Have a few swords that have the black patina, (very old), would any one like to give some opinions on that, time wise?

23rd May 2005, 06:24 PM	#4
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	Rick, if you mean, no "trunk" at all, the answer is no.

23rd May 2005, 09:39 PM	#6
Federico Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA Posts: 312	Rick, the lack of carving/fretwork kris I have seen fall into two categories. Those whose fretwork were removed purposely through either corrosion or a misguided owner (Cecil had a scary story about an owner who filed off all the fretwork on his kris), and then those whose shape/proportion would fit fretwork, but the fretwork was simply just never done for some reason or another. The second category has always fascinated me, and Cecil had mentioned it was something that struck him as interesting as well. However, in the few pieces Ive stumbled on (unfortunately never won) they all seemed to be newer pieces (circa late 19th early 20th century) and very new (eg. they looked like they had been collected shortly after being made). This mystery piece, on the other hand, lacks the proportions to be of the second category (trying to do fretwork there would simply not be enough blade to work with). So then it would seem then that the fretwork either corroded off, or was removed purposely. Anyways, if it still has the gangya intact, I would vote against a Moro attribution. From the pics it would just be too dainty, even for some of the most corroded of archaic styled kris (regardless of who we attribute the form to). On my own archaic style piece, the gangya had fallen off, and when examining it I noticed that the wall were the gangya and the pesi met the walls were paper thin from use of wear, and it would seem far far far more robust shape than this piece given the pics. So if there is a gangya, then I would imagine the tang would be extremely tiny, again not going in line with archaic kris/keris, which have very robust tangs (even when round). I guess we could argue this could be a Moro keris before the change to kris, but it just strikes me funny. I dunno, thats just my opinion, and its hard to work off of pics.

24th May 2005, 11:20 AM	#7
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	a spaniard's attempt to recreate a kris from memory, perhaps? kinda odd seeing a kris without fretworks and "elephant's" trunk. also the numbers "1" and "3" looks to be mechanically stamped...

24th May 2005, 02:26 PM	#9
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	The straight back edge to the ganga is odd, isn't it? But it is seen on k(e)ris, so might be in line with an evolutionary form, as proposed. I don't know that it does lack an elephant trunk. The elephant trunk is the central protrusion within the large cutout at the front edge, yes? I see a protrusion within this area on the discussed sword. It is small (perhaps broken and/or rusted off), and is unusual in its placement, as it departs from the (krisly speaking) top side of the depression partway along, rather than from the center back. The angle seems similar to that on the other shown piece. Can we get a closeup? Rick might be onto something on how to orient the writing. The mark looks in a way like a lot of mysterious marks I see on PI and other Spanish colonial stuff; letters or numbers with things that don't seem to be and whose meaning is hard to figure, often seeming to have been chiselled, or to have been struck with (handmade?) stamps that are not entirely standard forms. Both the end characters are odd looking. The center ones do look more like stampings; a 3, an E, an m? and an s? that seems to be obscured by another striking or some sort of damage? I suspect the marking is contemporary with the rehilt. Rick, it's real hard for me to tell forge scale, especially forge scale with rust, from heavy rust in a photo.