A very, very old Moro kris

[kai]

Thanks for posting the digital X-ray pics, Ian!

I believe the pictures show that this is not a flat tang, nor a square tang.

Actually, I'm inclined to believe that this tang is close to square (with some tapering along its length) since the tilted pics (30°/60°) appear to show a slightly thicker tang than in orthogonal orientation (0°/90°).

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

If I were a gambling man --- which I'm not --- I think I might back the rectangular horse.

[A. G. Maisey]

Here is another one in as found condition.

I've had it about 60 years, never felt the urge to restore.

The lines on the gandar are lengths of steel wire, exist on both sides.


Overall length 23.75" blade length 18.12"

[Ian]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Here is another one in as found condition.

I've had it about 60 years, never felt the urge to restore.

The lines on the gandar are lengths of steel wire, exist on both sides...

Alan, Thank you for showing another wonderful example of this early form of Moro kris! The similarities with the Bugis keris shown at the top of this thread are again obvious. Yours also shows a prominent gap between the blade and gangya, just below the elephant trunk area. Again, the greneng appear heavily worn down and the long end of the gangya seems to be bent over, perhaps shortening its overall length.

Is it apparent whether the pommel had a "crest" in its earlier life, or do you think it was made the way it is now?

[A. G. Maisey]

Ian, there is no visible indication that would lead me to an opinion that the hilt ever looked any different to the way it looks now.

A very well known authority on Moro weaponry did voice the opinion to me many years ago that this keris is a very old one.

[Ian]

Alan, I have sent you a PM message.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by kai

Thanks for posting the digital X-ray pics, Ian!


Actually, I'm inclined to believe that this tang is close to square (with some tapering along its length) since the tilted pics (30°/60°) appear to show a slightly thicker tang than in orthogonal orientation (0°/90°).

Regards,
Kai

Kai, the apparent diameters are a little misleading because of the different degrees to which I cropped the pictures (and thus the magnification is slightly different). Eyeballing the pictures shown is misleading because of this.

That is why it is necessary to reference the measured diameter of the tang to some other measurement (such as the width of the silver hilt at that point). When I standardize for the slight differences in magnification resulting from the differences in cropping, the diameters come out to within a fraction of a millimeter of each other. The only view which is slightly narrower than the others is the 90º one. Alan may be correct in thinking that the the tang is slightly flattened, but it is unlikely to be rectangular according to the measurements I made.

A CT scan would answer the question definitively.