My Maguindanao Kris

[kai]

I have a trick to check if it's really separate gangya...I aim a heat gun around 4 inches above the line. After around 15 seconds at 400 Celsius setting, the galgal should start to melt, and if it's a 2-part kris, you'll see a telltale sign from the line. Either liquefied black ooze, or in other cases smoke (for those that only had minimal adhesive placed).

There's always the risk of melting the adhesive at the hilt with this tactic, that's why I keep it at 15 seconds tops (usually it takes 30-70 seconds for the hilt's adhesive to wear off in my experience).

Ray raises a really interesting point here though: Most Moro kris - even those with a near perfect fit that hardly leaves any visible line - do seem to have been additionally secured by galgal (natural resin mix). This is not traditionally done in any Indonesian keris culture that I'm aware of - not sure about Malay keris sundang though?

In worn, old blades, resin and nowadays often epoxy have been utilized to fill gaps that developed by material loss and can't be readily improved during blade maintenance/restoration.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Milandro,

Your blade does strike me as certain 20th century blade: the waves are quite pointy and the base features with no apparent wear; also stylistically the thick gandik side does look quite modern (at a high level of craftsmanship for any later period though!).

If I had to guess, I'd expect this to be an engraved "separation" line rather than real: The bold line (of consistent width and wide even for worn blades) and an invisible line at the distal greneng is a bit much to swallow, I'm afraid. As already pointed out, this is not a definite time indicator though.

All fittings are typical for what got exported from Mindanao during the late 20th and early 21st centuries (often via Davao or Manila); presumably mostly Maranao work. They did this restoration/upgrading with whatever pieces became available: Certain antiques, vintage, more recent and apparently also new blades. The wooden pommel looks pretty good - while I tend towards a modern origin, I can't rule out a fully refurbished older piece from the pics. I understand that quite some of these pieces were for local use and not only export.

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

Your blade does strike me as certain 20th century blade: the waves are quite pointy and the base features with no apparent wear; also stylistically the thick gandik side does look quite modern (at a high level of craftsmanship for any later period though!).

If I had to guess, I'd expect this to be an engraved "separation" line rather than real: The bold line (of consistent width and wide even for worn blades) and an invisible line at the distal greneng is a bit much to swallow, I'm afraid. As already pointed out, this is not a definite time indicator though.

All fittings are typical for what got exported from Mindanao during the late 20th and early 21st centuries (often via Davao or Manila); presumably mostly Maranao work. They did this restoration/upgrading with whatever pieces became available: Certain antiques, vintage, more recent and apparently also new blades. The wooden pommel looks pretty good - while I tend towards a modern origin, I can't rule out a fully refurbished older piece from the pics. I understand that quite some of these pieces were for local use and not only export.

Have to agree with all points Kai mentioned. I think the sharp luks are the giveaway.
Also newer blades can be laminated and very substantial, see this piece from my own collection, blade is laminated, the kris is 73cm long and quite heavy with 890 gram.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...highlight=kris

Regards,
Detlef

[milandro]

I won't try to detach the hilt or anything else on my kris.

This is a 20th century blade, well , so be it. I just don't think this was made yesterday (in fact it was in the previous owner possession for over 50 years and the person wasn't a dealer and I know him to be a reliable person) and regardless of its age , I like it.


Having said this, I would show some of the pictures of Moro krises (only/ the Ganja for the purpose of this discussion over ganjas and age), which seem to have some age to it and no obvious separation.

I am not saying that my blade is therefore older, I am just showing what I've talked about and which was part of my research on such swords.

The first and last picture look like the the ganjas are made of different metals compared to the rest of the blade BUT the separation (not just a line) is invisible, at least , to me, the other two don't have it or have just a vestigial separation while looking like krises of some age.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by milandro

I won't try to detach the hilt or anything else on my kris.

I can understand it and I wouldn't do it as well.

Originally Posted by milandro

This is a 20th century blade, well , so be it.

Nothing wrong by this, it's a nice kris and very collectable.

Originally Posted by milandro

Having said this, I would show some of the pictures of Moro krises (only/ the Ganja for the purpose of this discussion over ganjas and age), which seem to have some age to it and no obvious separation.

I am sure that the first and last one has a separate ganja, it's just a perfect fit. Also the second example will have a separate ganja, it's just difficult to seen. By the third example I am unsure.

Regards,
Detlef

[werecow]

It's very thin, but I can see a definite line of separation on the third one (and the first and second as well) on my monitor.

[David]

Originally Posted by milandro

Having said this, I would show some of the pictures of Moro krises (only/ the Ganja for the purpose of this discussion over ganjas and age), which seem to have some age to it and no obvious separation.

I am not saying that my blade is therefore older, I am just showing what I've talked about and which was part of my research on such swords.

The first and last picture look like the the ganjas are made of different metals compared to the rest of the blade BUT the separation (not just a line) is invisible, at least , to me, the other two don't have it or have just a vestigial separation while looking like krises of some age.

Milandro, while you will indeed sometimes find an actual gap of separation on old Indonesian kris, i must say that i have rarely, if ever, seen a Moro kris where there is physical separation of the gangya causing a space between the blade and gangya. I would say that on a well made Moro kris you will not see any space between these parts. This may be because the blade and gangya are held together by the asang-asang or it may be because the size of the parts on these larger blades makes the warping of the steel less prevalent. Or perhaps a bot of both. So showing these older keris and speculating that the lines are merely incised into the steel rather than there being a separate gangya does not really provide any evidence of anything in particular IMO.
That said i would say that at least two of these examples are deftly separate gangya and the other two most probably are.
I agree with other statements made about the somewhat pointy luk and the newer looking fittings on your originally shown kris. This is indeed a nicely made sword and indeed worthy of collection. I hate making full assessments without having the weapon in hand, but if push can to shove i would place your kris as post WWII. No, it isn't new. But remember that 50 years ago is 1973. So i don't doubt that your friend could have had this kris that long and it still be a post WWII item.

[kai]

Hello Milandro,

I'm with David and the others here: All your examples with a high likelihood of having a separate katik/gangya with #3 being the only one leaving room for some doubt.

As mentioned, Moro kris in good shape often have a hardly visible separation line. Those with an engraved line are actually often way too obvious! OTOH, those with separate piece hardly exhibit more than the example in Albert's post (#14) - the line then usually showing uneven corrosion/loss.

Regards,
Kai