Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cannonmn
I notice that the blade of yours, shown in your excellent picture gallery, appears to be all one-piece.
|
I'm pretty sure that a slight reetching will proove Kai Wee's kris to have a separate gangya. However, that's a mere guess - the single close-up doesn't offer enough details to judge.
Quote:
|
A comment Nechesh(?) made about mine had to do with one-piece vs. having a separage "gangya" which term I did not understand. Another post seemed to clear it up with a pic of a kris blade with a separate "top piece" close to the handle which appears to be welded or sweated on. I guess this is the gangya?
|
Yup, that's it (a separate piece of steel tightly fitted to the rest of the blade). Like Nechesh, I also seem to imagine a separate gangya for your piece:
But we definitely need an etching to decide either way!
BTW, the other kris with Naga inlay which Ron linked to has a fairly obvious separate gangya.
Quote:
|
Can I get a clarification from someone on the significance of the separate vs. one-piece blade issue? Where the issue seems to have been left, as I recall, on the other thread, was that a one-piece blade indicates post-1930 manufacture. But your pre-1909 one-piece blade seems inconsistent with that demarcation, so what's the real answer here?
|
No, the rule of thumb is the other way around: kris with separate gangya will usually be pre-1930 (but there are exceptions!). Please have a look at this recent thread:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2394
Regards,
Kai