Some Philippines kris from my collection

kai · 17th June 2010, 08:44 AM

Hello Carlos,

Thanks for posting your latest acquisitions!

I'm with Jose - the blades scream for a good cleaning, polishing, and etching job to bring out their true beauty. Could you post close-ups of the gangya area taken from directly above, please?

Do all pieces have a seperate gangya - can't see that from the pics?

What's the length of the blades?

Regards,
Kai

carlos · 17th June 2010, 09:08 AM

The kris with ivory pommel has a blade with 20,5 inc, the kris with complete cockatoa pommel has 21 inc and the kris with rattan restored has 21.5inc (blade).
I have take new picture.
thanks for the information.
carlos

Dimasalang · 17th June 2010, 08:00 PM

Sweet collection Carlos!
I need to learn how to weave.

tom hyle · 25th June 2010, 12:08 PM

The one in the middle appears to be iras ganga (no seperate ganga; "not a true kris") Are we sure it's sheath is new/innappropriate? I think it may be penninsular Malay, actually (rather than Mindinao Malay=Moro). Nice silver inlay on it, yes?

tom hyle · 25th June 2010, 12:11 PM

Nice, true cockatoo handles (not the "fully developed cockatoo" that seems to me to actually represent a plant). Especially the ivory one, which is IMHO actually the full development of the cockatoo handle, or close to it. The raised cheeks are especially a definitive feature.

Battara · 25th June 2010, 07:03 PM

Tom you may have a point when it comes to the scabbard of the middle one, being possibly Malay.

However I would still say that the piece is Moro, and the missing ganga may be hidden since this is done sometimes and not well lit.

I also disagree with you on the development of the cheeks being a recent development (if I understand you) since full cheeks also go with older pieces on say mid-1800s without the tail flare.

tom hyle · 25th June 2010, 07:27 PM

I didn't say they are a recent development I said they are an aspect what I consider the full development, ie the most complex true expression of the type. The crest and beak crest are sometimes seen with them; these are not speci.fically neccessarily what I mean by plant features. The "fully develooped cockatoo" that I think is actually a plant/blended of plant features is the type where the cross-section is round, the butt is flatt with a keel, and viewed from the rear (not the top) closely resembles the flared bolster on a sikkin. Which type to me resembles a true cockatoo as seen here little or not at all.

17th June 2010, 09:08 AM	#2
carlos Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 755	The kris with ivory pommel has a blade with 20,5 inc, the kris with complete cockatoa pommel has 21 inc and the kris with rattan restored has 21.5inc (blade). I have take new picture. thanks for the information. carlos Attached Images

25th June 2010, 12:11 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Nice, true cockatoo handles (not the "fully developed cockatoo" that seems to me to actually represent a plant). Especially the ivory one, which is IMHO actually the full development of the cockatoo handle, or close to it. The raised cheeks are especially a definitive feature. Last edited by tom hyle; 25th June 2010 at 12:15 PM. Reason: limtting my grandiosity as to help people handle the truth

17th June 2010, 08:44 AM	#1
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	Hello Carlos, Thanks for posting your latest acquisitions! I'm with Jose - the blades scream for a good cleaning, polishing, and etching job to bring out their true beauty. Could you post close-ups of the gangya area taken from directly above, please? Do all pieces have a seperate gangya - can't see that from the pics? What's the length of the blades? Regards, Kai

17th June 2010, 08:00 PM	#3
Dimasalang Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 264	Sweet collection Carlos! I need to learn how to weave.

25th June 2010, 12:08 PM	#4
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	The one in the middle appears to be iras ganga (no seperate ganga; "not a true kris") Are we sure it's sheath is new/innappropriate? I think it may be penninsular Malay, actually (rather than Mindinao Malay=Moro). Nice silver inlay on it, yes?

25th June 2010, 07:03 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,310	Tom you may have a point when it comes to the scabbard of the middle one, being possibly Malay. However I would still say that the piece is Moro, and the missing ganga may be hidden since this is done sometimes and not well lit. I also disagree with you on the development of the cheeks being a recent development (if I understand you) since full cheeks also go with older pieces on say mid-1800s without the tail flare.

25th June 2010, 07:27 PM	#7
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	I didn't say they are a recent development I said they are an aspect what I consider the full development, ie the most complex true expression of the type. The crest and beak crest are sometimes seen with them; these are not speci.fically neccessarily what I mean by plant features. The "fully develooped cockatoo" that I think is actually a plant/blended of plant features is the type where the cross-section is round, the butt is flatt with a keel, and viewed from the rear (not the top) closely resembles the flared bolster on a sikkin. Which type to me resembles a true cockatoo as seen here little or not at all.