Interesting Kris for comments

[Bill]

Originally Posted by David

I didn't know this. Do ALL of the earliest "18thC"s have round tangs for sure, or is this an assumption. I don't own any of these "archaic" style kris so i don't know from my own experience. I am also not sure that calling them "18thC" kris is in our best interest since i think some of these are probably a little older than that.
I know we have been around this block before, but i do find it difficult to accept these "archaic" kris as Bugis since the blade form doesn't really resemble the bugis style of keris very much. I am also confused as to why you can't believe that these keris could possible be a "starter edition".

I have 2 "18thC". Neither one,have I removed the hilt. One I'm sure has a keris sized round tang. The other, I can get a cleaning pick in between the blade & hilt & it appears to have a robust oval tang. Federico has posted one with a robust round tang & Lee has posted one with a retangular one. Strikes me that someone else once posted one with a retangular tang or at least confirmed it once. Only use "18thC" because Cato did, I think they are quite a bit older then that. There is enough variation to suggest many smiths made them for a extended period of time. That's the main problem in Philippine origin. They copied the style but never perfected it, don't think they would lose the knowledge. RSword: Didn't you once have a Bugis keris with the same pattern of the kris you sold me?

[David]

Originally Posted by Bill

They copied the style but never perfected it, don't think they would lose the knowledge.

Why do you think they lost the knowledge? IMO they chose not to perfect the style of the "archaic" stabbing blade. Rather they moved on to develop it into a larger, broader slashing weapon which they believed (as do i) to be a more effective fighting tool. Given the choice in battle i would certainly choose the larger slashing blade in an instant.
Hi Rick. I have to agree with Kai. It is not the level of execution in the chiselling, but the style in which the work is done which leads me to believe this is not Moro work. The Moro were certainly capable of fine quality chiselling. Also as Kai points out, this is not the twisted core that we are familar with seeing in some Moro keris. The constuction of this keris looks the same as in pamored Indo/Malay varieties.

[RSWORD]

Thanks for the clarification of what you guys are seeing in the style of work at the forte. I still recall seeing Moro blades of similar construct. I am hoping some of the Moro guys will chime in. It is an interesting piece all around. I still want to point out that this blade has a central core of mechanical damascus, you can see the lines on each side, with the edges welded on. This seems more Moro in nature. Do you often find keris with a central plate with the edges welded on? Bill, I have had a few Bugis keris over the years and I don't remember a pattern exactly like this one. As I recall, they did tend to have a nice pattern down the central portion of the blade, and as I recall somewhat similar to the blade in question, but the big difference was that it was not a central core with edges welded on. It was a single blade, not of tripartite construction. Now, the handle doesn't seem terribly Moro on this piece but the scabbard to my eye looks more Moro than Malay. So, it seems to have characteristics of several cultures so is it a type of missing link? I don't know.

[David]

Originally Posted by RSWORD

Thanks for the clarification of what you guys are seeing in the style of work at the forte. I still recall seeing Moro blades of similar construct.

Rick, just for further clarification it is not the construct we are pointing out, but very particular stylistic differences in that construct. In other words, all the parts would be the same, it is just the way in which it is executed that is different. This blade has a very specific Indo style to the "elephant head", the tikel alis, the gonjo, the sogokan and greneng. I have also seen all of these features on Moro kris, but never execute in this very Indo manner before. You might be right about the twisted core, but there is clearly pamor at the edges as well (look by the greneng above the gonjo). I can't recall ever seeing that on a Moro keris, though one might exist out there. But the fact that all of these very Indo styles exist on a single blade leads me to believe that it was made by an Indonesian hand.

[Bill]

David: I think the forms of warfare varied quite a bit from Sulawesi & Moroland. As I already posted, Bill M's kris is unusual in the staight blade & x-over tip. I'm sure their must be keris that have a simular tip, but I can't recall any. The Moro were certainly capabal of fine chissel and file work but the question is when? Keep in mind, Bugis had 3 distinct groups: royalty, warriors, workers & slaves. Above all they were most successfull because of the mixture of farmers/miners & the warriors to protect them from being invaded, pre western period. The smiths for the most part made tools. All men carried a keris & there was likely a lot of average keris makers. I suspect the warrior class had smiths that catered to their needs. The construction method not being of your concern to origin, I agree. While Ricks old sword has a twisted core & is the only one I have; I do have several Philippine kris with a sandwiched core, as well, a sandwiched pamored Bugis keris. As far as the features you describe as Indonesian workmanship, I'm kind of at a loss, as those are the features of the "18thC" with the exception that the sogokan out-line is for a straight blade. As I have stated before, my opinion is that the "18thC" was for dispatching wounded men & removing their heads; Bill M's sword seems to be moving towards a slashing sword, more of a primary weapon.

[kai]

Hello Bill,

David: I think the forms of warfare varied quite a bit from Sulawesi & Moroland.

Different between them? Please explain!

As I have stated before, my opinion is that the "18thC" was for dispatching wounded men & removing their heads;

I don't see how the latter is supposed to have worked - seems akward if you're used to blades of the klewang family (Kampilan, Mandau, etc.) and Panabas.

Bill M's sword seems to be moving towards a slashing sword, more of a primary weapon.

I believe that you can stab just fine with it and with a 17.5" blade it doesn't seem to be a primary battlefield/raiding party weapon either.

Regards,
Kai

[Bill]

[QUOTE=kai]Hello Bill,


"Different between them? Please explain!"
Bugis used blowguns with poisoned darts until firearms. They practised definitive warfare, always removing the head. As experianced tool makers it seems logical they would develop a blade that would dispatch & behead. I've posted a blade in the past where one of the one curve shows continuous use. The Moro charged their opponents.

"I don't see how the latter is supposed to have worked - seems akward if you're used to blades of the klewang family (Kampilan, Mandau, etc.) and Panabas."
How did the Bugis finish off a man dazed by a poison dart and remove their head? I've posted in the past a referance by early Portuguese that described the Burgis warrior as carrying a sword just for that task; although there is no description of the sword itself.

"I believe that you can stab just fine with it and with a 17.5" blade it doesn't seem to be a primary battlefield/raiding party weapon either."
I agree Bill M's sword would not be the primary battlefield/raiding party weapon of the typical warrior. Again we get into the when and where. Clearly the sword is no longer just a stabbing weapon as the keris is. It seems the older the "18thC" the less defined the point. The center example Lew posts is what I believe the "18thC" is morphing into, a slashing sword. I have a feeling that Bill M's sword is older then you think. One needs to concentrate on the blade & disregard the fittings and scabbard. It would be interesting to know what type of tang it has.

[David]

Originally Posted by Bill

As far as the features you describe as Indonesian workmanship, I'm kind of at a loss, as those are the features of the "18thC" with the exception that the sogokan out-line is for a straight blade. As I have stated before, my opinion is that the "18thC" was for dispatching wounded men & removing their heads;

I do see what you mean here Bill. I went back to Cato a took another look at the features of the "archaic" kris. The sogokan do seem similar to Bill's example, though i still think the "elephant head" looks closer to an Indo sekar kecang than to anything Moro. I still have yet to see a Moro kris with this type of pamor....but isn't it your theory that these "archaic" kris are of Indonesian origin. I'm not sure why you are arguing my assessment then since it tends to prove your argument.
As for these archaic keris having the specific purpose you describe, you lose me there. First off, weren't these "archaic" kris collected from a Moro provenence (regardless of their actual origin)? Did the Moro use blowguns and then dispatch their enemies and take their heads? Or are you saying that these "archaic" kris were actually used by the Bugis for their style of warfare, but somehow all ended up in the Philippines where they were collected?
Anyway, i do not see these early kris as being designed to be very effective for removing heads. Take a good look at the Dayak mandau for a blade that is well designed for that purpose.

[kai]

Hello Rick,

I still want to point out that this blade has a central core of mechanical damascus, you can see the lines on each side, with the edges welded on. This seems more Moro in nature. Do you often find keris with a central plate with the edges welded on? Bill, I have had a few Bugis keris over the years and I don't remember a pattern exactly like this one. As I recall, they did tend to have a nice pattern down the central portion of the blade, and as I recall somewhat similar to the blade in question, but the big difference was that it was not a central core with edges welded on. It was a single blade, not of tripartite construction.

I'm pretty sure this kris/keris sundang is of 3-layered construction (San Mai) as are almost all Moro kris and keris...

This pamor pattern is common on keris Bugis - of course, the "random" types are more numerous.

Now, the handle doesn't seem terribly Moro on this piece but the scabbard to my eye looks more Moro than Malay. So, it seems to have characteristics of several cultures so is it a type of missing link?

I'd stipulate that the scabbard isn't typical for Malay keris sundang. The brass coils seem to be off and may possibly have been added more recently. Bill, any provenance for this piece?

I don't think the blade - much less the fittings - are old enough to be even close to a missing link. Much more likely that the blade travelled a bit through the archipelago before ending up with Bill. BTW, I don't want to sound too critical: I do like this piece!

Regards,
Kai