IVORY POMMEL MORO KRIS FOR ID PLEASE

[chiefheadknocker]

I recently acquired this moro Kris sword with ivory pommel , when I received it the blade was covered in like dark brown varnish and so removed this carefully to reveal the blade which has a quite scuffed surface , im don't know a great deal about these swords , I would like to more about this sword age etc and how to maybe restore it and the best way to get the light scratches out ,
many thanks
mat

[Battara]

I would place this as possibly from the late 1700s or early 1800s, Sulu region, and is of chieftain class.

If the moderators would move this to the Ethno section where we can continue the discussion.

[Ian]

Agree with Jose that this is probably an early 19th C. Sulu kris. The traditional finish on the blade would be to polish it with very fine sandpaper and then etch the blade to show its pattern. There are many threads here that discuss etching Moro kris, and I would suggest using the search function on this site to obtain a wealth of more information.

Ian.

[CharlesS]

A lovely example of this "archaic" type! Congrats!

[David]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

A lovely example of this "archaic" type! Congrats!

Charles, this is not what i think of when i use the term "archaic" as i thought it was proscribed by Cato. I thought those are the thinner style with the deep winding luks. This blade is clearly a slasher with a wider blade and much more shallow luks and looks more like a transition to the more modern style to me.

[Battara]

David I thought of that, but there aspects of the Ganga and the forte areas that are very early and appear archaic. This blade is either an anomaly or later blade with archaic styles (unheard of so far).

[Rick]

Maybe we might consider this kris as a 'transitional' style.
Do I see activity in the core of this sword?

[CharlesS]

David,

I see your point. The blade is wider than typical with far more shallow luks, but when I look at the whole thing in its entirety it strikes me as archaic, even more so if it etches out to a twistcore. We can surely agree that it is at least early 19th century.

I think Battara may have a good point as well...that it is a variation of the "archaic" form.

I hate getting tied into jargon that is too "rule-making" on these type of issues because it has been my experience that every time we think we have found a line or defining feature, there can be an exception to the rule.

[chiefheadknocker]

Thanks for all your input , this sword is quite small compared with the one it came with ,total length of the blade is 49 cm , I have attached a picture of them together

[Sajen]

Lello Matt,

very nice Sulu kris! But the other one is very interesting as well, can you please post some more pictures?

Regards,
Detlef

[chiefheadknocker]

Hi Detlef , Thanks , ive allways liked the moro Kris swords but cant say I know much about them ,but managed to pick these both up at a local auction , I have posted a few pics of the other sword which is also a little scuffed but no serious rust etc , the top of the handle looks like horn , then copper rings with brass inbetween , and silver decoration , im not sure if I should clean these parts or not ?
regards
mat

[David]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

David,

I see your point. The blade is wider than typical with far more shallow luks, but when I look at the whole thing in its entirety it strikes me as archaic, even more so if it etches out to a twistcore. We can surely agree that it is at least early 19th century.

I think Battara may have a good point as well...that it is a variation of the "archaic" form.

I hate getting tied into jargon that is too "rule-making" on these type of issues because it has been my experience that every time we think we have found a line or defining feature, there can be an exception to the rule.

Yes, i would agree that this kris is probably early 19th century and possibly even a bit earlier. I have never really liked the term "archaic" that Cato used for the even earlier blades, but this blade looks a little later than those and, as i stated already, a transition into a later style of kris blade.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by David

Yes, i would agree that this kris is probably early 19th century and possibly even a bit earlier. I have never really liked the term "archaic" that Cato used for the even earlier blades, but this blade looks a little later than those and, as i stated already, a transition into a later style of kris blade.

I think "transition" may be the perfect word here in indicating where this kriss fits into the Moro spectrum.

[chiefheadknocker]

I have lightly etched the sulu blade , I believe it reveals a twistcore pattern ?

[Ian]

Yes, it does show a twist core pattern. Very nice sword and unusual. The notion that it could be a transition sword between the shorter, slimmer versions of the 18th C, and later, broader-bladed kris, seems plausible to me.
Ian

[CharlesS]

Good looking twistcore! That one might even be worthy of a professional polish.

[chiefheadknocker]

Originally Posted by Ian

Yes, it does show a twist core pattern. Very nice sword and unusual. The notion that it could be a transition sword between the shorter, slimmer versions of the 18th C, and later, broader-bladed kris, seems plausible to me.
Ian

Thanks ian , I thought this must be twist core pattern , before etching it there no visible signs , the sword did come with a scabbard that has been broken but im not sure if its original one for it , it does have some writing on it in ink , I will upload a pic

[CharlesS]

I noticed the Japanese(???) script on the scabbard. I wonder if it was originally a Japanese pick up in WW2?

[CharlesS]

On the second larger kriss I am noticing one uniquely angular luk close to the forte. I don't think that I have ever seen that in combination with more traditional "rounded" luks.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

On the second larger kriss I am noticing one uniquely angular luk close to the forte. I don't think that I have ever seen that in combination with more traditional "rounded" luks.

Hi Charles:

That feature is found sometimes on c. 1900 and later kris, generally the larger and heavier varieties from Mindanao. The one shown here seems to be Maranao in origin if we go by the guide provided by Cato.

Ian.

[shayde78]

I would say Mat did very well at his local auction

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Ian

Hi Charles:

That feature is found sometimes on c. 1900 and later kris, generally the larger and heavier varieties from Mindanao. The one shown here seems to be Maranao in origin if we go by the guide provided by Cato.

Ian.

Ian,

Def agree on the Maranao origins. Thanks for the insight on the "odd" luk. I was aware they were found on later kriss swords, but I am not sure I have even seen that angle luk in combination with more "traditional" ones.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Ian,

Def agree on the Maranao origins. Thanks for the insight on the "odd" luk. I was aware they were found on later kriss swords, but I am not sure I have even seen that angle luk in combination with more "traditional" ones.

Yep, combination of the single sharp terminus and smoothly waved luk are found on some Mindanao kris of that period.

[Ian]

Charles,

Here is Figure 47 from Cato's book Moro Swords. Another example of what we have been talking about is shown on the far right. Again, this appears to be a Maranao kris of about the same vintage as the one above that we have discussed. By way of contrast, in the same figure a wavy-bladed Sulu kris shows a smoother luk in the same place. The other examples I recall have been Mindanao kris also.

There is a further example—also Maranao—on Erik's Edge web site, but it is currently for sale and I will not say anything further (per Forum policy).

Ian.


.

[David]

All my collection is still in boxes, but my very first kris, the one that began my obsession with blades from this region the eventually migrated to Indonesian keris, has this feature of a sharp luk right near the base. I would date it to around the turn to the 20th Century.