A very, very old Moro kris
 

This was a recent purchase online from a British auction house.

It is obviously an archaic Moro kris, with the blade probably being older than the fittings. A very notable feature of the blade is a central, twist core area that shows a lot of corrosion relative to the more peripheral parts of the blade. There are five luk on this half-waved, half-straight blade.

There is a clearly separate gangya. The "elephant trunk" area is interesting. The trunk extends well below the "mouth" and the area below the "mouth" shows a slightly protruding bulge. For me this raises the possibility that the blade was of Maranao manufacture. Below the "elephant trunk/mouth" area is a noticeable gap between it and the gangya—an unusual construct.

The grip is covered with heavy silver or white brass in segments separated by prominent rings. Between the rings is okir work carved into the silver. A single asang asang is present and made of a yellow metal that might be brass or suassa—gold, perhaps with some copper and silver alloyed with it (that would need to be tested). The pommel is of an old kakatua style, with a "beak" but no "crest." The crest may have been present long ago but lost due to damage (but repaired well). Or the pommel may have been made that way originally, as there are other extant examples of this style.

The scabbard is a mixture of woods. The sampir is a particularly nice piece of finely polished banati (bunti) wood, with fine grain showing chatoyance. The roughly rectangular shape of the sampir is consistent with a Maranao style. Below the sampir is a small horn spacer. The remainder of the scabbard is made from two pieces of spalted wood. Again the wood has been finely polished and is very hard. I suspect a type of teak. The toe is another piece of polished hardwood.

Three main clues suggest to me that this a very old Maranao kris: the hilt (style and okir work), scabbard (sampir), and the "elephant trunk/mouth" area of the blade.

As to just how old this one may be is not easy to answer. A fellow forumite and I are of the opinion that this sword is a pusaka that was handed down through generations. Both the hilt and scabbard are likely replacements (probably in the 19th C). The blade, however, is likely much older—perhaps 17th C or even back to the very early period of Spanish colonization. How such an early sword ended up in a British auction is hard to say, but it could well have passed through several hands after being brought back by a Spanish official or colonist from the Philippines.

Comments, ideas, criticisms are all welcome.
.

Hi Ian,

A very nice kris! Congrats!

The sampir looks a little bit awkward in combination with the sampir, could it be a later replacement?

Regards,
Detlef

Hi Detlef.

Yes, the sampir could be a later replacement and the horn spacer may have been used to fit the sampir more snugly. There is also evidence of an old band around the mid-scabbard that was glued at some time (but now lost).

Frankly it looks like an early Sulu blade with Indonesian sundang dress. The fittings are silver with tarnish (yellow first before they turn brown).

The okir and style of chasing fits more Indonesia to me. Now it is true that the small ring bands are not typical in style, they are more similar to Indonesian rings than Moro.

The sampir burl also fits with those of Indonesia.

I have seen blades traded from the adjacent regions with blades from one place with fitting from another.

Also the asana-asang is more in keeping with Indonesian ones, though some Moro ones come close to this form in Sulu.

I could be off base as the Moro kris is really only a secondary interest for me (in spite of the fact that it was a Moro kris that indeed started me on my current addiction), but i wonder if this kris is not just very old instead of "very, very old". I mean, yes, it is obviously an old kris in what we know as the "archaic" form, but when i look at the gangya i see this series of holes where on a kris from the 17th centry or older i would expect to see actual greneng. Of course, i have seen this before, but on later kris. Also extent of the 45 degree angle rise at the end of the gangya seems to me to be a later development. My thought would therefore be 18th century. Dress could be 19th or even early 20th C. Nice find Ian.

Hello Jose,

I think you mean Malay instead of Indonesian?;)

Regards,
Detlef

Thanks for all your comments so far.

I don't know whether early Malay kris differed from early Moro kris. I suspect they were fairly similar, as it has been postulated that the Filipino kris may have given rise to the Malay kris. Nor do I know how early Moro kris differed from early Brunei kris. I'm calling this one a Moro kris, but it could be Malay or Brunei in origin.

A central twist core flanked by hardened edges is typical of many early Moro kris that we have seen on these pages. The twist core could reflect a higher quality of sword, and a higher chance of it surviving to the present time, so I don't think we should be too carried away by the presence or absence of a twist core. I don't know how frequently twist core appears on Malay or Brunei kris, but I suspect the technique was not invented by Moro panday.

There is one feature that I mentioned earlier that is unusual on this sword, and that is the gap below the elephant trunk area and the adjacent gangya, as indicated by the arrow in this picture.


I have seen this before on very old Moro kris displayed in a Spanish Museum, but I am struggling to find the picture in our archives. I will post a copy of that picture when I find it again. My question to our experts is, have you seen this feature on Malay or Brunei kris, or any of their Indonesian keris relatives?

The origins of the Moro kris are very uncertain. Early in the days of this vbb Forum, there was a useful discussion about dating the three main ages of the Moro kris: "Archaic" (pre-1800); "19th C" (roughly 1800–1900); "Modern" (1880–present); and perhaps we could add "post-Modern" (1930–present). Emphasis was placed on the difficulties of identifying reliable, provenanced, pieces from the pre-1800 era. I won't rehash the details here, but it is clear that there was no consensus on how to date the archaic forms of kris used by Filipino Muslims. In the spirit of that discussion, the following keris, in combination with the OP of this thread, may offer some clues.

The following pictures are taken from "Traditional Weapons of the Indonesian Archipelago" by Albert van Zonneveld (Plate 169 and loose cover photograph). The keris is described as Bugis from South Sulawesi, with Javanese elements. Here is Albert's description of Plate 169:

Note the provenanced date of acquisition in the mid-18th C and the likelihood that the keris was much older, perhaps dating from the mid-17th C. Albert notes that the sword dates from before the presence of Islam. Here are pictures of that magnificent keris and its scabbard:


The important areas to note are numbered in the picture immediately above.

The "elephant trunk" (1) that curves well down past the "mouth" (2). The recurved area with a clear bulge below the mouth that resembles a "leg and foot" to me (3). The gap (4) below the "foot' that separates it from the ganja (gangya). There is a well demarcated line of separation (5) between the ganja and the rest of the blade; this separation line is virtually straight, except at its left end where there is a very short down-turned section.


When placed side by side, the two swords look quite similar in these areas. Yes, there are differences, and one could attribute these to cultural adaptations or choices, But there is enough similarity for me to argue that they are fairly close cousins with regard to the features shown. The original kris in this thread shows less artistic skill than the Sulawesi keris, but the former was likely designed for use as a weapon while the latter was purely decorative.

From inspection of the Sulawesi keris, it is apparent that very early features of Bugis keris can be found in the Moro/Malay kris that is the subject of this thread. Since the Moro kris is often considered a pre-genitor of the Malay kris, and Mindanao kris are thought to pre-date kris in the Sulu Archipelago, it is plausible to think that kris developed by the Maranao, the Maguindanao, and perhaps the Iranum may have drawn inspiration from the Bugis in the earliest development of the Moro kris. It is interesting that the "bulge" below the mouth area persisted in Maranao kris construction up to at least the early 20th C, but is not seen in Maguindanao or Sulu kris of the late 19th–early 20th C (this point has been illustrated by Robert Cato in his book Moro Swords). Adaptation and change are to be expected over time. However, it is not unreasonable to think that some Mindanao tribal groups in pre-Islamic times took the Bugis keris model and adapted it to become a fighting sword instead of a dagger. One might expect that the oldest of these emerging sword weapons would have the closest resemblance to the Bugis model.

All this is a lot of speculation, of course, and comprises plausible arguments based on supposition. The type of chatter that rattles around forums like this one. It's not really scientific evidence. A scientist would say that it is hypothesis-generating. Finding the evidence to support or refute such hypotheses is very difficult. One approach I've taken is to go through Artzi Yarom's old web site and look at his sold kris. I picked out those that resembled Maranao kris and those that did not. I then looked at indicators of age (length and width of blade, patination, etc.). Results will be posted on these pages when I finish looking at the pictorial evidence.

Hi Ian,

This gap between blade and gangya seems by these archaic blades not an uncommon feature. See one of my kris.

Regards,
Detlef

Agree with David on this point. What I would consider as a very, very old kris is this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...highlight=kris

Regards,
Detlef

My one Archaic kris seems to have the same gap, though to a lessor extent.

Have fun,
Leif

Examination of the tang with X-rays
 

Today I visited a veterinarian friend who has an X-ray machine. By cranking the machine up to 90kV and 0.5 mA I was able to get some very respectable views of the tang through the silver wrap on the handle. I first positioned the blade flat on the plate, 0º, and then took pictures at 30º, 45º, 60º and 90º of rotation from the horizontal plane. I expanded each digital image and referenced measurements to the diameter of the silver wrap at the same point. By measuring the width of the tang and of the silver wrap at several points along the tang in each of these views, I found that the tang diameter at each position was the same in all views [within the precision of my measurements (± 0.2 mm)]. This effectively excludes a flattened or square tang construction, leaving a tapering round tang as the remaining possibility.

Unfortunately, the image files were too large for my thumb drive, so I will have to go back next week and retrieve the images. I will post them here once they have been resized.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David (Post 289926) ... i wonder if this kris is not just very old instead of "very, very old". I mean, yes, it is obviously an old kris in what we know as the "archaic" form, but when i look at the gangya i see this series of holes where on a kris from the 17th centry or older i would expect to see actual greneng. Of course, i have seen this before, but on later kris. Also extent of the 45 degree angle rise at the end of the gangya seems to me to be a later development. My thought would therefore be 18th century. Dress could be 19th or even early 20th C. Nice find Ian.

David, the issue of greneng, or the absence of such, is an interesting one. The example shown here by Lief has some greneng, still visible but seriously worn down. Detlef's example similarly shows almost no definable greneng. So perhaps these ancient kris had greneng to some extent that simply got worn down with time. And the Java keris in Moro dress referenced by Detlef appears never to have had greneng.

The point you raise about the drilled holes is a good one. The holes look fairly well defined, and show little effects of corrosion. In fact, when I X-rayed the area those holes looked very clean and circular--"punched out." For this reason, I think they are probably a much later addition.

Lastly, the uptilted end of the gangya is seen on the very old Bugis keris example that I have referenced, suggesting that this style of gangya could have been copied from the Bugis at an early time in the development of the Moro kris.

We will have to agree to disagree here Ian. I believe the oldest Moro blades would display "greneng" as all these other examples presented here do show. Detlef's is the exception, but it is not a Moro blade. I can see nothing that leads me to belief the holes in your kris were added at a later date. The holes and the contoured bumps along the edge around them look original to the blade to my eyes. Again, i have seen these on later Moro kris, though i don't know exactly where along the timeline this style began. To me it seems like something that was added to simulate greneng a bit further down the timeline when the concept of greneng was further from its source in Java and less understood by Moro kris smiths. It seems to me that on the earliest of archaic Moro keris we still see greneng as it was originally intended in Java that still maintains the form of ron dha if not the full symbolic intent. That symbolic intent even changed in Java as the keris became a Islamic blade rather than a Hindu one. Over time the style of "greneng" on Moro kris became more varied and divorced from the original symbolic intent of the form. I still think that while indeed an old kris, yours is not part of the oldest group of archaic kris that would have maintained more of the original Indonesian form that it was developed from.

I also think/believe that early Moro blades show greneng.
I think you mean the kris/keris with the broken scabbard, it's not mine, it's in the possession from Michael Marlow. But I believe that this blade had once greneng, it's simply very worn, see the pic.

Regards,
Detlef

I'm fairly certain I handled that blade the last time I went to Sweden, in May of 2022. It's an odd one so it sticks in my head.

In my uneducated hands the blade definitely felt very Javanese and also very old and warn. I think Detlef is probably right that it probably once had a greneng.

Have fun,
Leif

David and Detlef,

You are both much more knowledgeable about keris than I am. Thank you for your thoughts. However, neither of you commented on the presence of a round tang versus a flat or squared tang. In other discussions here, the presence of a round tang was thought to indicate an early form of kris. It has been suggested that the move to a flat tang was to avoid the twisting of the hilt in the hand during use, and that the asang asang were applied for the same reason.

Detlef, do you know if your old kris has a round tang or how long the tang is? IIRC, the tang has become shorter over time, and early tangs were often quite long in the hilt.

Hi Ian,
Yes, I know that it's said that early blades have a round tang. But frankly I haven't seen enough early blades without handles to verify this, but it seems reasonable. But there is still the question from which time frame there was the change from round to square tangs.

And no, I don't know the tang construction by this one nor by the other old kris blade in my possession, I've never dismantled the handles. Sadly I don't have a veterinarian as friend! :D For sure it would be helpful to know it by many more examples, we would know much more.

Regards,
Detlef

Depending on the construction of the hilt, the length of the tang might be a lot easier to test than the roundness of the tang. On my example above, a refrigerator magnet will stick to the hilt (thus indicating ferrous material) at any point between the ganja and the ivory pommel.

Also, I'll be seeing local former forum member this weekend, who happens to have an archaic Kris with a round tang. I'll check to see if his Kris has the gap.

Have fun,
Leif

X-ray of hilt
 

As promised, here are the X-rays of the hilt. The various features visible on the X-ray are shown in the picture below, which was taken mainly to visualize the tang. The tang seems quite long compared with 19th C and more modern kris, tapers slightly from the blade to the end of the tang, and has a slight bend. Also apparent are the thick silver bands spaced along the handle. Looking at the pommel, it is interesting to note a drilled void within it that has been hollowed out to accommodate a peg from the handle which has been fixed to the pommel with a small nail or pin. The pin is visible on the exterior of the hilt and there is a small crack in the wood caused by its presence. The degree of detail in this picture is more than I had expected, although we experimented somewhat to get the desired contrast in the image.
The following table shows how the actual length and width of the tang can be calculated from a print out of the attached picture. Using a vernier micrometer, I measured the actual length of the the silver grip on the sword; this was 8.85 cm. I then measured the length of the same structure on the image; that was 7.85 cm. This meant that all linear dimensions on that X-ray image needed to be corrected by a factor of 8.85/7.85 in order to arrive at the correct linear measurement.

More X-rays of the hilt
 

Here are the views obtained with rotation of the long axis of the sword. They show that tang width at various points along the hilt shows slight narrowing with progressive rotation from horizontal (0º) to vertical (90º), but not enough to suggest that this is a flat tang. The flattening is somewhat accentuated by the sword coming off the table as it was rotated, because of the effect of the gangya. Allowing for some parallax by referencing the width of the tang to the width of the cylindrical hilt at the same point, indicated little difference in width of the tang in each projection. This suggests a round tang IMHO.

Images have been rotated for ease of viewing the changes associated with rotation of the sword.

0º rotation (horizontal)
Attachment 236904


30º rotation
Attachment 236905


60º rotation
Attachment 236906


90º rotation (vertical)
Attachment 236907

Hi Ian,

Great pictures! But I am not really sure if the tang is indeed round.

Regards,
Detlef

I agree. There really is only one way to be sure. ;)

David and Detlef,

Geometry tells us that the only cross-section that produces a uniform width when viewed from several angles is a circle (or a circular object with many small facets). I believe the pictures show that this is not a flat tang, nor a square tang.

I would like to put it through a computerized tomography (CT) scanner, but those are expensive pieces of equipment found only in hospitals and radiology clinics and are not readily accessible. A CT scan would definitively answer if the tang was round in cross-section.

Thanks for posting the digital X-ray pics, Ian!

Actually, I'm inclined to believe that this tang is close to square (with some tapering along its length) since the tilted pics (30°/60°) appear to show a slightly thicker tang than in orthogonal orientation (0°/90°).

Regards,
Kai

If I were a gambling man --- which I'm not --- I think I might back the rectangular horse.

Here is another one in as found condition.

I've had it about 60 years, never felt the urge to restore.

The lines on the gandar are lengths of steel wire, exist on both sides.


Overall length 23.75" blade length 18.12"

Kai, the apparent diameters are a little misleading because of the different degrees to which I cropped the pictures (and thus the magnification is slightly different). Eyeballing the pictures shown is misleading because of this.

That is why it is necessary to reference the measured diameter of the tang to some other measurement (such as the width of the silver hilt at that point). When I standardize for the slight differences in magnification resulting from the differences in cropping, the diameters come out to within a fraction of a millimeter of each other. The only view which is slightly narrower than the others is the 90º one. Alan may be correct in thinking that the the tang is slightly flattened, but it is unlikely to be rectangular according to the measurements I made.

A CT scan would answer the question definitively.

Alan, Thank you for showing another wonderful example of this early form of Moro kris! The similarities with the Bugis keris shown at the top of this thread are again obvious. Yours also shows a prominent gap between the blade and gangya, just below the elephant trunk area. Again, the greneng appear heavily worn down and the long end of the gangya seems to be bent over, perhaps shortening its overall length.

Is it apparent whether the pommel had a "crest" in its earlier life, or do you think it was made the way it is now?

Ian, there is no visible indication that would lead me to an opinion that the hilt ever looked any different to the way it looks now.

A very well known authority on Moro weaponry did voice the opinion to me many years ago that this keris is a very old one.

Alan, I have sent you a PM message.

Took me longer than expected to get them, but here's pics of Federico's round-tanged kris.
It does in fact have the gap.

Leif, thank you so much for those pictures. There is a lot of similarity with the example I posted at the top of this thread. Again, there seems to be a strong Bugis influence, and the "bulge" below the mouth is present as well as the gap between the blade and gangya in that area. Obviously another very old example. Am I seeing some flattening of the left side of the tang in the third picture? Do you a measurement for the length of the tang?


Thanks to Federico for allowing his sword to be presented here.

Hello Ian,

I think that's just a trick of the pictures. Let's just say that these photos were not taken in a studio.
I don't have tang measures, but could probably get them in the future.

Thanks,
Leif