Gold & Ivory Gunong

Amuk Murugul · 19th February 2014, 01:46 AM

Hullo everybody!

David,
My apologies. I did not wish to murky the waters.
When I first saw your photos, it triggered some memory at the back of my mind. So I searched through my archives until I found the right pictures and posted them. I thought they may be somehow useful.
I have since looked through my archives for notes on the item:
It was presented to me some years ago as a 19thC, 20K-gold and silver Keris Soenda with bone pommel. I doubted the 20K, it looked much lower. 19thC? Perhaps early 20thC. Bone pommel? More like marine ivory. Having said all that, however, I loved the craftsmanship!
Sadly, it's been gathering dust since, as I have not been able to attend to it.
Maybe it's time for me to dust and do some research on it.

Best,

David · 19th February 2014, 04:53 AM

No worries Amuk. It's a good comparison piece to the one i've presented.

Here is the story presented to me and perhaps you can see why i am skeptical. This gentleman wants to return this gunong to the Iolani Palace in Hawaii because he believes it was taken from there in 1942 and once belonged to the King of Hawaii, a gift from the king of Burma when King David Kalakaua visited there in 1881. His story is rather detailed, but i suspect someone was telling tales to someone along the way.

"My father was given this dagger by an Air Force General in 1955 under the
condition it that it could never be sold or traded it could only be given back
to the Air Force General who gave it to him.
The general told my father that during world war II while he was stationed in
Hawaii, he traded a jeep for the dagger. (I'm assuming it was a military jeep)
The man who traded the dagger to the general was in charge of developing and
installing the water injection systems for the P-38 Thunderbolts engines in
Honolulu. The water injection gave a significant power upgrade the P-38's which
allowed them to take on the Japanese zero's more effectively. This is the
person who took the dagger from the palace or wherever the palace collection
was being stored in about 1942.
The Air Force General told my father the dagger was a gift from the King of
Burma for the King of Hawaii.
In doing my own research I found that King David Kalakaua did travel to Burma
in 1881 and would assume that is when the King of Burma gave the dagger to him.
I'm not certain why he would give him a Filipino dagger and not a Burmese
dagger. The only thing I can guess is it was something the Hawaiian King had
seen on display and may have admired or commented about it to the King of Burma who then gave it to him."

To me, and it seems there is some agreement, stylistically this gunong couldn't be any older than early 20th century. AFAIK the hilt style with the nail and filigree work and the more bulbous pommel piece all point to this. I would also question why the King of Burma would gift a Filippino dagger to a King from Hawaii instead of an item from his own culture.

David · 19th February 2014, 06:03 PM

So my bottom line question here is does anyone think this gunong could possibly be as old as 1881? I don't, but i am always open to new information.

Robert · 19th February 2014, 07:39 PM

Hello Dave, I am going to have to agree with Jose on the age of both these pieces and say that your example was made in the 1930's. Often stories have a tendency of getting slightly exaggerated

especially when a little horse trading is going on. Case in point, when one has a dagger that they are trying to trade for a jeep.
Here is another example of one of these highly decorated gunong's and a comparison photo of all three hilts. Sorry for the poor picture quality of the complete piece.

Best,
Robert

spiral · 19th February 2014, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert

Case in point, when one has a dagger that they are trying to trade for a jeep.

An excellent & well observed point!

Spiral

VANDOO · 19th February 2014, 09:27 PM

I DOUBT THIS FANCY FORM GOES BACK AS FAR AS THE 1800'S AND PROBABLY STARTED IN THE MID TO LATER 1900'S . THATS JUST MY OPINION ,BUT THE OLDER ONES I HAVE SEEN WERE PLAIN COMPARED TO THESE EXAMPLES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN OLDER TIMES THIS DAGGER HELD NO PRESTEIGE AND WAS OFTEN WORN AS A CONCELED WEAPON OFTEN ILLEGALLY. WHEN DID THESE BECOME A FASHON ITEM WORN TO BE SHOWN AND IN LARGER SIZES. THE GOLD ONES I HAVE PERSONALLY HANDLED APPEARED TO BE GOLD PLATED WHICH IS A TECKNIQUE I DON'T BELEAVE TO HAVE BEEN COMMON IN THE PHILIPPINES IN EARLIER TIMES.
THE PATINA ON THE IVORY IS ANOTHER CLUE WHEN IVORY IS HANDLED AND GETS THE OIL AND GRIME ON IT, IT TURNS ORANGE ANYTHING CARRIED AND WORN SINCE THE 1800'S WOULD SURELY HAVE A DARKER ORANGE PATINA. NOT CONCLUSIVE BUT MY 2 CENTS WORTH. I DO LIKE THESE THOUGH AS THEY ARE PRETTY SHARP LOOKING.

David · 19th February 2014, 11:00 PM

Thank you gentlemen, for your frank assessment. As previously stated, it was exactly what i expected to hear, but hopeful the numerous in concert opinions on the age approximate age of this piece will satisfy the owner that the story he was told of it's origins was embellished at someplace in the chain of the telling.

19th February 2014, 07:39 PM	#4
Robert EAAF Staff Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Centerville, Kansas Posts: 2,196	Hello Dave, I am going to have to agree with Jose on the age of both these pieces and say that your example was made in the 1930's. Often stories have a tendency of getting slightly exaggerated especially when a little horse trading is going on. Case in point, when one has a dagger that they are trying to trade for a jeep. Here is another example of one of these highly decorated gunong's and a comparison photo of all three hilts. Sorry for the poor picture quality of the complete piece. Best, Robert Attached Images Last edited by Robert; 19th February 2014 at 08:00 PM.

19th February 2014, 09:27 PM	#6
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	I DOUBT THIS FANCY FORM GOES BACK AS FAR AS THE 1800'S AND PROBABLY STARTED IN THE MID TO LATER 1900'S . THATS JUST MY OPINION ,BUT THE OLDER ONES I HAVE SEEN WERE PLAIN COMPARED TO THESE EXAMPLES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN OLDER TIMES THIS DAGGER HELD NO PRESTEIGE AND WAS OFTEN WORN AS A CONCELED WEAPON OFTEN ILLEGALLY. WHEN DID THESE BECOME A FASHON ITEM WORN TO BE SHOWN AND IN LARGER SIZES. THE GOLD ONES I HAVE PERSONALLY HANDLED APPEARED TO BE GOLD PLATED WHICH IS A TECKNIQUE I DON'T BELEAVE TO HAVE BEEN COMMON IN THE PHILIPPINES IN EARLIER TIMES. THE PATINA ON THE IVORY IS ANOTHER CLUE WHEN IVORY IS HANDLED AND GETS THE OIL AND GRIME ON IT, IT TURNS ORANGE ANYTHING CARRIED AND WORN SINCE THE 1800'S WOULD SURELY HAVE A DARKER ORANGE PATINA. NOT CONCLUSIVE BUT MY 2 CENTS WORTH. I DO LIKE THESE THOUGH AS THEY ARE PRETTY SHARP LOOKING. Last edited by VANDOO; 19th February 2014 at 10:32 PM.

19th February 2014, 01:46 AM	#1
Amuk Murugul Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben Posts: 472	Hullo everybody! David, My apologies. I did not wish to murky the waters. When I first saw your photos, it triggered some memory at the back of my mind. So I searched through my archives until I found the right pictures and posted them. I thought they may be somehow useful. I have since looked through my archives for notes on the item: It was presented to me some years ago as a 19thC, 20K-gold and silver Keris Soenda with bone pommel. I doubted the 20K, it looked much lower. 19thC? Perhaps early 20thC. Bone pommel? More like marine ivory. Having said all that, however, I loved the craftsmanship! Sadly, it's been gathering dust since, as I have not been able to attend to it. Maybe it's time for me to dust and do some research on it. Best,

19th February 2014, 04:53 AM	#2
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	No worries Amuk. It's a good comparison piece to the one i've presented. Here is the story presented to me and perhaps you can see why i am skeptical. This gentleman wants to return this gunong to the Iolani Palace in Hawaii because he believes it was taken from there in 1942 and once belonged to the King of Hawaii, a gift from the king of Burma when King David Kalakaua visited there in 1881. His story is rather detailed, but i suspect someone was telling tales to someone along the way. "My father was given this dagger by an Air Force General in 1955 under the condition it that it could never be sold or traded it could only be given back to the Air Force General who gave it to him. The general told my father that during world war II while he was stationed in Hawaii, he traded a jeep for the dagger. (I'm assuming it was a military jeep) The man who traded the dagger to the general was in charge of developing and installing the water injection systems for the P-38 Thunderbolts engines in Honolulu. The water injection gave a significant power upgrade the P-38's which allowed them to take on the Japanese zero's more effectively. This is the person who took the dagger from the palace or wherever the palace collection was being stored in about 1942. The Air Force General told my father the dagger was a gift from the King of Burma for the King of Hawaii. In doing my own research I found that King David Kalakaua did travel to Burma in 1881 and would assume that is when the King of Burma gave the dagger to him. I'm not certain why he would give him a Filipino dagger and not a Burmese dagger. The only thing I can guess is it was something the Hawaiian King had seen on display and may have admired or commented about it to the King of Burma who then gave it to him." To me, and it seems there is some agreement, stylistically this gunong couldn't be any older than early 20th century. AFAIK the hilt style with the nail and filigree work and the more bulbous pommel piece all point to this. I would also question why the King of Burma would gift a Filippino dagger to a King from Hawaii instead of an item from his own culture.

19th February 2014, 06:03 PM	#3
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	So my bottom line question here is does anyone think this gunong could possibly be as old as 1881? I don't, but i am always open to new information.

19th February 2014, 11:00 PM	#7
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	Thank you gentlemen, for your frank assessment. As previously stated, it was exactly what i expected to hear, but hopeful the numerous in concert opinions on the age approximate age of this piece will satisfy the owner that the story he was told of it's origins was embellished at someplace in the chain of the telling.