Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd July 2007, 08:05 AM   #1
Jazz
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44
Default

sorry guys, I was in a rush. Here's the continuation:

Also, another telltale sign would be the ukkil decorations on the handle.



Going back to this kriss's age: my assertion of it being from the 1700's were based on the size of the sword, which is 'diminutive' compared to the later ones; and more importantly, the rare transitional pommel style which is a cross between the 'ancient' type cockatoo and the more 'modern' type which tends to have a longer beak and flared out plume, albeit narrower in total width.










to be continued...
Jazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 08:06 AM   #2
Jazz
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44
Default

continuation:


It's possible that the handle is not original to the blade, but I would dare say that's highly unlikely. Another evidence that this was an older sword is how the length of the handle is smaller than the more 'recent' krisses. Yes, there's a possibility that it could be a boy's kriss, but one must remember that people a few hundred years ago were slightly smaller than their present day counterpart, not unlike us compared to our predessesor in this country a century or so ago.



Now here's the best part: the inlays on the blade. I have seen some of the more common designs and patterns in this forum, but I can't find a single pattern similar to the one on this kriss. I'm preplexed as to what it signify, half guessing that perhaps it represents the scales of a snake.







But what's throwing me off are what's on the tip of these inlays. Please note that it's not in mirror image on both sides, a common trait with decorative inlays, rather it's two different designs altogether.










I'm not really familiar with the native writings of that era, but i'm half guessing it's either jawi, and if it is, it's someone's name (original owner? sword's name?), OR some type of symbol related to the beliefs of the culture at that time. Another curve ball is the fact that if the blade represent a snake in motion, and the inlays are scale, then why would the handle represent a bird's head, as we now take for granted? As far as I'm concerned, there are no mythological creature of this type in Moroland, a half snake/half bird creature. This is where I would like to hear everyone's opinion. From what I've seen and read from previous posts, there seems to be no shortage of intelligent members in this forum. Perhaps, by posting this here, it could be analyze or even identified by the house experts. I would really appreciate on whatever else comments that any of you can add.



Otherwise, I think that it's a real neat sword, far cry from the replica and cheap swords that I ever own. Although this kriss is much lighter, I'm just amazed at the balance of this deadly weapon, still sharp from all these centuries. I realize that this is not really my field of expertise, so whatever I've written are purely my opinion, but nevertheless, I hope I haven't offended anyone with my writing. Thank you for reading my first post.
Jazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd July 2007, 09:31 AM   #3
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   #4
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   #5
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   #6
Rick
Vikingsword Staff
 
Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,339
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   #7
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 23rd July 2007, 12:49 AM   #8
kai
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
Default

Quote:
It's possible that the handle is not original to the blade, but I would dare say that's highly unlikely. Another evidence that this was an older sword is how the length of the handle is smaller than the more 'recent' krisses.
The pommel is genuine and has some age but it's next to impossible to verify wether it's original. Smaller pommels were utilised into the 20th c. AFAIK, so they don't help much with dating a piece. Some Sulu (and Indonesian) kris seem to have small hilts (with narrow grips apparently intended for small hands) - including later examples.

Regards,
Kai

Last edited by kai; 23rd July 2007 at 01:06 AM.
kai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2007, 04:27 AM   #9
Jazz
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 44
Default

Bill, it appears as if the pommels on our kriss is identical; as a matter of fact, it is! what's your humble opinion in regards to the age of your kriss? I would be interested to know if you don't mind.

Kai, very interesting observation. Yes, smaller pommels has been utilized in the 20th century, and by no means I'm inferring that it's an earlier century monopoly, it's just that this certain style somehow are more common with the earlier krisses. As far as the Maranao bulge: this kriss is interesting in that it's angled enough to be mistaken as Sulu, but yet the small bulge (see picture above) kinda threw it off, hence my theory that this is an earlier form of a Maranao bulge, IMHO...

Please keep the comments coming guys. This is indeed a very interesting topic.
Jazz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd July 2007, 08:12 AM   #10
kai
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,255
Default

Quote:
Bill, it appears as if the pommels on our kriss is identical; as a matter of fact, it is!
Just quite - there are subtle differences in both!

Quote:
As far as the Maranao bulge: this kriss is interesting in that it's angled enough to be mistaken as Sulu, but yet the small bulge (see picture above) kinda threw it off, hence my theory that this is an earlier form of a Maranao bulge, IMHO...
It seems to be the other way round: the angled mouth/beak makes it Sulu - (regardless wether there is a bulge or not: it seems that the Maranao modified an already existing design). However, like in all things Moro, there will be probably exceptions...

Regards,
Kai
kai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2007, 05:33 PM   #11
Battara
EAAF Staff
 
Battara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,280
Default

I'm with Kai on this - this is a Sulu blade.

Also the inlay I agree is probably snake scales, but near the top is not jawi but okir decoration - very common on these in this way.

A very nice piece. Shame some of the inlay is coming out.

On the "elephant" I have seen the exact same thing on those of early 20th century pieces (I even had one once).

As far as the pommels are concerned, it is the very small ones that seem to be older in general.
Battara is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 08:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, 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.