Some Philippines kris from my collection

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.

Amuk Murugul · 25th June 2010, 08:39 PM

Hullo everybody,

It appears to me:
- that all three have a separate section at the base of the blade.
- the top blade is the oldest; c. mid-1800's.
- the two top blades follow the 'classic' protocol.
- the cockatoo on the top blade is the practical variant of the classical form.
- the other two cockatoos are what is usually referred to as the 'stylised Mindanaw' form.
- the top two pieces come from northern Kalimantan while the third one is a Mindanaw blade.

Best,

Battara · 25th June 2010, 09:03 PM

Amuk I am in agreement.

Tom, I see better your arguement and agree in that these forms are made of plant motifs, ie., "okir". Malay, Indonesian, and Moro okir though different from each other, are made of plant elements to create a symbolic whole.

tom hyle · 26th June 2010, 04:55 AM

I do not see any indication of a seperate ganga on the kris in question. Can you explain your position? I see what looks like a faked line defined chiefly or entirely by the ends of the chevron inlays all being in a line. Iras ganga kris sundang usually have a faked line of some sort.......I don't see this line continuing out across the long rear arm of the ganga, where there are no inlays.

tom hyle · 26th June 2010, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Amuk I am in agreement.

Tom, I see better your arguement and agree in that these forms are made of plant motifs, ie., "okir". Malay, Indonesian, and Moro okir though different from each other, are made of plant elements to create a symbolic whole.

In Europe is such a tradition too; I've a "Green Man" idol made of leaves, and an iron ram's head made of leaves to use for a pommel some day.............

Maurice · 16th July 2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amuk Murugul

- the top two pieces come from northern Kalimantan while the third one is a Mindanaw blade.

Why are the two top pieces coming from Northern Kalimantan?
I can't see the points what makes them typically Kalimantan.......except for the ratan windings, but I think the moro's did have these windings also...

Kind Regards,
Maurice

kai · 17th July 2010, 03:21 AM

I also don't see any features hinting at a Bornean origin.

IMHO the 2 upper pieces have typical Sulu blades.

The third seems to be Maranao.

Regards,
Kai

25th June 2010, 12:11 PM	#2
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

25th June 2010, 08:39 PM	#5
Amuk Murugul Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben Posts: 473	Observation Comment :) Hullo everybody, It appears to me: - that all three have a separate section at the base of the blade. - the top blade is the oldest; c. mid-1800's. - the two top blades follow the 'classic' protocol. - the cockatoo on the top blade is the practical variant of the classical form. - the other two cockatoos are what is usually referred to as the 'stylised Mindanaw' form. - the top two pieces come from northern Kalimantan while the third one is a Mindanaw blade. Best, Last edited by Amuk Murugul; 25th June 2010 at 08:53 PM.

25th June 2010, 12:08 PM	#1
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	#3
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	#4
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.

25th June 2010, 09:03 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,310	Amuk I am in agreement. Tom, I see better your arguement and agree in that these forms are made of plant motifs, ie., "okir". Malay, Indonesian, and Moro okir though different from each other, are made of plant elements to create a symbolic whole.

26th June 2010, 04:55 AM	#7
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	I do not see any indication of a seperate ganga on the kris in question. Can you explain your position? I see what looks like a faked line defined chiefly or entirely by the ends of the chevron inlays all being in a line. Iras ganga kris sundang usually have a faked line of some sort.......I don't see this line continuing out across the long rear arm of the ganga, where there are no inlays.

17th July 2010, 03:21 AM	#10
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	I also don't see any features hinting at a Bornean origin. IMHO the 2 upper pieces have typical Sulu blades. The third seems to be Maranao. Regards, Kai