Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd July 2007, 09:31 AM   #1
Flavio
Member
 
Flavio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Italia
Posts: 1,243
Default

Hi Jazz, first of all welcome to the forum Second let me say that i'm completly ignorant on moro arms, but I love them and I'm trying to learn more about them If I remember right Cato, in his book, says that the older blade are characterized by a line of separation from gangya and blade that is almost horizontal. In the other hand late 19th century and early 20th century blades shows a line with a degree of 45°, like yours. More, even if the blade rapresents the naga (with beautiful scales on your piece) it's not unusual to find serpetine blades with cacatooa handle. Anyway I will be happy to find such a nice kris also for twice the price you have paid !!!
Flavio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 01:56 PM   #2
Bill
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 327
Default

Hi Jazz & Welcome. I agree with all the comments made so far. I'd guess your sword is between 100 & 125 years old. If you etch it, I wouldn't be surprised if a nice "marble" pattern didn't come out. These swords were made by a lot of different groups & specifically for ones preference. Some are so large & heavy, I wonder how effectively they were used. There has been discussion in the past about the smaller kakatua, smaller then yours. While some think it's a sign of age (& I agree, most are older), I think it is Indonesian. Nice sword & one I'm sure most of us would want in our collections.
Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 03:02 PM   #3
Jazz
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44
Default

Thanks for everyone's welcome! That was my first guess, that it's a late 1800 sword, when I saw it the first time, but there's something about the way it handles. Also I forgot to mention that the length of just the blade itself is 19", smaller that the typical krisses that was common during the revolutionary/phil-am war and later era, when these swords were more flamboyant and bigger.
As far as what you mentioned Bill, in regards to the smaller cockatoo pommels; that's exactly what I was trying to say, that the smaller ones (smaller that what I have) are truly archaic, perhaps late 1600's/early 1700's, and at some point there has to be a transitional period and I am assuming that this type of cockatoo pommel are the missing link. That is just my opinion , though. And yes, I have etched this, and a few 'marbled pattern' appeared, but I've decided to leave it as it is, since I don't really see the point of the pattern over-riding the inlay pattern. Btw, can you tell me more about the inlay? The Indonesian angle is a possibility as well, but I really don't have any provenanced example to compare it with.
As far as what you mentioned, Battara, the handle wrap is old, and again, I would assume it's original to the sword rather that a rewrapped in the later period.

Quote:
but the profile of this blade is nothing like the "archaic" kris from the 1700s.
David, could you please explain what an archaic kriss profile would be? I would like to compare this with what I have. Thank you in advance.

Quote:
This looks like a late 19th/early 20th C kris with an even more recent hilt.
Ian, I was under the impression that later hilts were bigger and more flamboyant, therefore I would respectfully disagree that the smaller ones are recent.

Again, thank you for everyone's assessment, More comments would be truly appreciated.
Jazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 03:45 PM   #4
Rick
Vikingsword Staff
 
Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,288
Smile Kakatuas

I've always been intrigued by the stylistic differences in these pommels.
I believe the wood one shown may be from a Mindanao tribe.
Welcome Jazz .
Attached Images
  
Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 04:27 PM   #5
Bill
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 327
Default

It's almost maddening to try & define age & group for each one of these swords. I think one, over times just forms a general opinion of when & where they originated. These groups each had their own craftmen that had different techniques & skills. Then add in, updated or replaced hilts only a generation later may have stylistic changes; engravings or file modification may be added sometime after origination. I've read a bit about customs & religion of the mountain tribes of Luzon. What one may think would be a major definition can be something quite different from one clan in the same group, not to mention other neighboring groups. As soon as you make a rule to follow, you'll find an example that discounts the theory.
Bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 05:03 PM   #6
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,103
Default

Jazz, if you own Robert Cato's book Moro Sword you can find examples of the "archaic" form of kris which he would date to the 1700s. I don't personally own one of these so i can't post one, but they tended to be less wide and with less and deeper curves. They were probably used much more as a stabbing weapon than a slashing one, more like their Indonesian keris counterpart. Though you cannot see the full profile of the blade i believe Rick's second posted kris, with the ivory kakatau, would be an example of this type. Note also how the line of the gangya goes pretty much straight across on this blade as opposed to yours or Rick's other example where the line takes a 45 degree turn. This is usually another sign of an earlier blade.
Now that i can see the close-ups i am not sure what it is that you believe is writing (Jawi or otherwise). I think that all the inlay is just design features and not intended as writing.
As for the size of your blade, i own 2 kris which date to not earlier than the late 19thC that have blades under 20". I don't think this is a reliable factor in determining age. It is true that the "archaic" forms are generally smaller blade (around 18"), but certainly blades in this length range were made into the 20thC.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2007, 12:10 AM   #7
Jazz
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44
Default

Thank you guys. very interesting responses.
Jazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.