|
29th April 2014, 04:44 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,230
|
Interesting Philippine Sundang for comment
Here is an interesting massive Sundang that I just acquired; as you can see, there is a lot going on in the blade. The handle is in bad disrepair.
|
29th April 2014, 05:37 AM | #2 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 327
|
Quote:
|
|
29th April 2014, 06:17 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,230
|
Thanks Dave, I thought it could be post WW2, but it is of pretty good quality; are the inlays silver ? It is a distinctive blade; any way of knowing who made it ?
It would be great seeing yours, intact.Any chance ? |
29th April 2014, 11:45 AM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,770
|
Hello Drac2k,
yes, agree with Dave, a post WWII blade of nice quality, the sharp luks indicate it as later blade. If the inlays are from silver you only can test byself with silver test or let it test by a jeweler. Like Dave said there is a dealer who sell time by time nice handles but maybe you can grind it down to a form like this one from my own collection: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12825 Handle wrapping can be done easily, the biggest concern will be the missing asang-asang. Regards, Detlef |
29th April 2014, 01:17 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,247
|
In original auction listing it was going as part of the William Herbert McGinty collection. Collected between the late 1800's and early 1900's, in storage since 1930's.
I don't thrust auction descriptions much, and it looks like quite later then early 1900's kris to me also, yet could we expect a separate Ganja on a post WWII example? It seems to be evident that pointy luks appeared already around 1900: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...aranao+sundang Last edited by Gustav; 29th April 2014 at 02:46 PM. |
29th April 2014, 01:45 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,247
|
Related blades of some interest:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...0940#post70940 http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=naga+kris |
29th April 2014, 11:01 PM | #7 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,254
|
Hello Gustav,
Quote:
I agree that auction listings have to be taken with a lump of salt. However, this kris is of very decent quality and, even with only the pics to go by, I'd suggest a pre-1930 origin. As you already mentioned, there are more examples that are pretty much in line with this example, especially if we assume that "early 1900's" is not meant very strictly... Regards, Kai |
|
29th April 2014, 10:32 PM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,254
|
Congrats, a very good bargain you got there!
Quote:
I don't think we'll be able to pin down the panday who crafted this blade - it's probably more like a recognizable style which was in fashion during an extended period and possibly crafted by a number of (possibly unrelated) bladesmiths. At least there are varying qualities if you compare several similar pieces. I'm fairly convinced that the inlay is silver. If it tarnishes like silver a while after polishing, you probably won't need to test it. Brass inlay is more difficult to work with and this is quality work done for a customer who could afford to pay for silver. I believe that Detlef's sugggestion to recarve the remaining pommel is certainly worth a try. Get Jose to do some metal bands for the gripping area if you like to restore the original appearance as much as possible. Are you going to etch the blade? I believe it could be worth it! Regards, Kai |
|
30th April 2014, 03:10 AM | #9 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 327
|
Quote:
|
|
30th April 2014, 04:48 AM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,230
|
Great blade and great handle ! Thanks for the info.After reading all of the threads, I could go either way, but now I'm leaning towards the 1930's theory ; either way, I'm happy with the kris .
|
30th April 2014, 06:56 AM | #11 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben
Posts: 460
|
Additional Info
redundancy
Last edited by Amuk Murugul; 30th April 2014 at 07:12 AM. Reason: redundancy |
|
|