Help with the Moro Kris/Kalis/Sundang

[Interested Party]

Hi, I've been trying to wrap my head around the kris. I've been following the kris threads of the last few months with interest. Having reread them and Cato hope I am prepped enough to start asking questions and with the forum being slow currently I believe this is a good time to ask.

Here are three recently sold examples of average kris that I thought were interesting for various reasons. This is a comparison overview shot.


What is your first impression of these swords? Age, designed use, overall cultural impression. Do we have a name for these swords yet?




Now here is the ganja shot. Does Cato's system of analyzing the ganja work? Two seem to me to be two piece ganja one I am uncertain about. If we had a name is it still the same? What else do you all see?





Dress. Handles. One is missing a pommel I believe. There are 2 baca baca on each. Would the hilt now change the name of each? What culture would you say each is from? Estimates on the age of handles?



Two examples have the sarong/sampir still. Age/culture? How does this change our perception of these two?





Sorry for any mistakes in terminology. I misplaced my vocabulary cheat sheet, but I really wanted to post these questions.

For the "ideal" should a kris be light and springy like a butcher knife or heavy and deliberate like a cleaver?


Thanks as always for any and all help towards understanding.
-IP

[Interested Party]

White metal handle of the middle example. Sorry for the large size it was resizing oddly for some reason.

[Ian]

Hi IP,

I'm occupied with family issues at the moment and will be for a few days. Your questions deserve considered answers, so I'll get back to you ASAP.

Just a few quick observations. Cato describes the charactristics of blades, specifically the "elephant trunk area," that might be attributed to specific Moro tribal groups. This is probably helpful in identifying the origin of the blade. However, as Xasterix has discussed here on the Forum, within Moro culture the tribal attribution of a kris depends on who the last owner was. This is identified by the "dress" of the kris—that is, by the style of the hilt/pommel, the number and style of the asang asang, and the scabbard features. When a Moro acquires a new kris he usually has it "dressed" to his tastes.

Moros acquire blades in several ways: directly from panday (skilled blacksmiths and custom blade makers), by trade within and outside their respective tribal groups, as a bride price, and in combat. Thus, blades from outside their own tribal group become available to them. For this reason, we see a wide range of kris blades in various forms of "dress." All are legitimate Moro kris, but hybrid blades and dress take their designation based on the tribal group of the last owner (regardless of where the blade originated).

More to come when I have time to sit down and write a detailed response that includes comments on your examples.

[Interested Party]

Originally Posted by Ian

Hi IP,

I'm occupied with family issues at the moment and will be for a few days. Your questions deserve considered answers....


Just a few quick observations. Cato describes the characteristics of blades, specifically the "elephant trunk area," that might be attributed to specific Moro tribal groups....


This is probably helpful in identifying the origin of the blade. However, as Xasterix has discussed here on the Forum, within Moro culture the tribal attribution of a kris depends on who the last owner was. This is identified by the "dress" of the kris—that is, by the style of the hilt/pommel, the number and style of the asang asang, and the scabbard features.


More to come when I have time to sit down and write a detailed response that includes comments on your examples.

Thanks Ian that is very much appreciated. I hope everything is okay at home.

Some issues I hope to clarify in this thread are: Is Cato still considered accurate? It is hard to find other written sources outside of this forum. I have read a good bit of Xastrerix (Ray's) thoughts on the kris, including his most recent article. This helped me to understand Cato better in that some of his examples were hybrids. During my first read of Cato's book this made things confusing. The other larger issues are age and attribution of individual features of a kris and how to classify the whole.

It took a while to figure out a format to ask these questions in. Finally I settled on the above format where I broke it down into overall impression, blade via elephant trunk area and ganja, handle and pommel, and finally sheath. Knowing that each one could be a different age and tribal identity. I would have liked to have broken each category mentioned down into separate posts for the most detail, but I thought the discussion would most likely wander and that the current format would be more effective due to the stream of consciousness nature of the forum. My goal is to collect as much concrete information as possible in one thread with comparative examples of similar kris to help my understanding and others with similar comprehension issues. The kris are all straight though the forward angle of the blade differs and although each has two asang asang I am not convinced on a Sulu attribution for them.

I also hoped Ray could give some insights on performance of each design. I am sad I do not have detailed information on weight and cross section of the individual examples. I would expect the white metal design was not meant for hard use as the rings do not look soldered and would shift in the hand, especially as the wood beneath them shrank.

Once again, many thanks in advance to anyone willing to help in this project.
-IP

[xasterix]

Hullo IP! Thanks for reading my article (and thanks for the referral as well Ian!)

As you may have noticed in my article, the samples were from a particular era (late 1800s-early 1900s), as those were the kalis and kris that I've been most exposed to, and had the privilege of studying. I believe all the samples you presented in this post fall under that era.

I look at all the details at the base of the blade, particularly the elephant trunk and the 'katik' or notched guard. Then there are secondary considerations... for example, Sulu kalis usually have slightly smaller blades than their Mindanao counterparts; Maguindanao blades have an outline at the elephant's "mouth," Maguindanao and Maranao battle blades have raised spines at the middle, etc.

If I were to label your sample-blades from left to right as A, B, C.

A is a bit blurry, so I can't give an ID. Meanwhile, B is likely Maranao. C is likely Maguindanao.

The dress of A is Sulu; the scabbard, kakatua and proportions to the hilt, the way the asang-asang are attached to the hilt, the ferrule- all Sulu in my eyes. I believe the dress is as old as the blade, or at least belongs to the same era.

The dress of B is also Maranao- but if what I'm guessing is correct (that the material used is aluminum), then it's of WW2 or postwar make.

The dress of C is Maguindanao. I believe the hilt wrap may have been "upgraded" at a later time. The hilt wrap looks like brass wire-wrap with interspersed brass bands. The asang-asang is also brass, possibly upgraded the same time as the hilt.

With regard to performance.

Among the hilts, here's what I observed:

-All hilts traditionally have a wood core; sometimes the pommel and grip are made as one piece, sometimes they're separate. I favor those made as one piece with hemp or rattan wrap- something like C's, but in its "original" version, and not the upgraded one. The brass or silver wires are a literal pain once they fray. There's a reason why the simple hilts were attached to battle blades- because they were the most functional and least likely to break.

-If the pommel is ivory, the hilt comes in 2 pieces. Regardless how well the ivory pommel part is attached, if the hilt suffers a lot of stress (prolonged and repeated use), the middle part (grip) will eventually break. Ivory is usually "heavy" and I'm guessing the physics of having something modular at the end of the hilt results in significant strain on the wooden grip.

-If the pommel is light metal, the hilt will last longer than an ivory-pommel one, although not as comfortable and resilient as wooden pommels.

Among the blades, here's what I observed:

-Not all kris and kalis blades are made equal. Some are too soft, and the edge might misalign easily. Some are too rigid, and the edge might crack because of the brittle-ness. Heat treatments vary. I personally prefer a balance between the two.

-Blades with little to no lamination cracks perform better overall. It's difficult to find a twistcore blade which retains its edge after repeated stress, but such samples exist.

-There are exceedingly rare kris/kalis blades with exceptional heat treatment that perform like in the stories. I've tested one such blade- repeated strikes on dry bamboo, with no damage at all on the edge, very minimal bends after 5 straight minutes of sustained, repeated abuse. A modern smith couldn't believe its performance, and attributed it to the exceptional heat treatment and edge geometry.

Hope this helps!

[Interested Party]

Originally Posted by xasterix

I look at all the details at the base of the blade, particularly the elephant trunk and the 'katik' or notched guard. Then there are secondary considerations... for example, Sulu kalis usually have slightly smaller blades than their Mindanao counterparts; Maguindanao blades have an outline at the elephant's "mouth," Maguindanao and Maranao battle blades have raised spines at the middle, etc.

A is a bit blurry, so I can't give an ID. Meanwhile, B is likely Maranao. C is likely Maguindanao.

The dress of A is Sulu; the scabbard, kakatua and proportions to the hilt, the way the asang-asang are attached to the hilt, the ferrule- all Sulu in my eyes. I believe the dress is as old as the blade, or at least belongs to the same era.

-Not all kris and kalis blades are made equal. Some are too soft, and the edge might misalign easily. Some are too rigid, and the edge might crack because of the brittle-ness. Heat treatments vary. I personally prefer a balance between the two.

Hope this helps!

Thank you for responding! Sorry I took so long to reply. I had to process the answer for a bit.

So two asang-asang do not guarantee a Sulu connection?

I attached a better picture of A.

Do you re-heat treat your blades? Or just find out how they are treated by cut testing? When the edge rolls do you use a finishing steel to realign the edge or grind it true again with a stone?

[Interested Party]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Maguindanao blades have an outline at the elephant's "mouth," Maguindanao and Maranao battle blades have raised spines at the middle, etc.

Hope this helps!

Thank you again for your responses. Could I ask some follow up questions for clarification?

What is the outline at the elephant's mouth?

Secondly. If the blade of "A" is thin, light, and springy like a butchers knife. Lenticular in cross section. without a distinct raised spine and described in post #7 as "For the blade itself- I would posit Mindanao (Maranao or Maguindanao); if I'm correct in this, then it's a hybrid piece, Mindanao blade with a Sulu dress." What would it be for? Without a raised spine is this a dress piece or could it be for quick slicing movements rather than heavy chopping blows?

"After sharpening, I use a honing steel to align the edges. IF it's a full wavy kris, I use the honing steel for everything (sharpening + honing). Sometimes I strop with leather as well." I have been experimenting with a honing steel this summer on softer chopping blades. Particularly on a small right-handed talibong the size of a large work knife. If you are stropping the blade with leather, should I take that to mean that you are getting your blades razor sharp or almost before cutting tests?