Yet Another Moro Kriss

Bill · 22nd July 2007, 04:27 PM

It's almost maddening to try & define age & group for each one of these swords. I think one, over times just forms a general opinion of when & where they originated. These groups each had their own craftmen that had different techniques & skills. Then add in, updated or replaced hilts only a generation later may have stylistic changes; engravings or file modification may be added sometime after origination. I've read a bit about customs & religion of the mountain tribes of Luzon. What one may think would be a major definition can be something quite different from one clan in the same group, not to mention other neighboring groups. As soon as you make a rule to follow, you'll find an example that discounts the theory.

David · 22nd July 2007, 05:03 PM

Jazz, if you own Robert Cato's book Moro Sword you can find examples of the "archaic" form of kris which he would date to the 1700s. I don't personally own one of these so i can't post one, but they tended to be less wide and with less and deeper curves. They were probably used much more as a stabbing weapon than a slashing one, more like their Indonesian keris counterpart. Though you cannot see the full profile of the blade i believe Rick's second posted kris, with the ivory kakatau, would be an example of this type. Note also how the line of the gangya goes pretty much straight across on this blade as opposed to yours or Rick's other example where the line takes a 45 degree turn. This is usually another sign of an earlier blade.
Now that i can see the close-ups i am not sure what it is that you believe is writing (Jawi or otherwise). I think that all the inlay is just design features and not intended as writing.
As for the size of your blade, i own 2 kris which date to not earlier than the late 19thC that have blades under 20". I don't think this is a reliable factor in determining age. It is true that the "archaic" forms are generally smaller blade (around 18"), but certainly blades in this length range were made into the 20thC.

Jazz · 23rd July 2007, 12:10 AM

Thank you guys. very interesting responses.

22nd July 2007, 04:27 PM	#1
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	It's almost maddening to try & define age & group for each one of these swords. I think one, over times just forms a general opinion of when & where they originated. These groups each had their own craftmen that had different techniques & skills. Then add in, updated or replaced hilts only a generation later may have stylistic changes; engravings or file modification may be added sometime after origination. I've read a bit about customs & religion of the mountain tribes of Luzon. What one may think would be a major definition can be something quite different from one clan in the same group, not to mention other neighboring groups. As soon as you make a rule to follow, you'll find an example that discounts the theory.

22nd July 2007, 05:03 PM	#2
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,213	Jazz, if you own Robert Cato's book Moro Sword you can find examples of the "archaic" form of kris which he would date to the 1700s. I don't personally own one of these so i can't post one, but they tended to be less wide and with less and deeper curves. They were probably used much more as a stabbing weapon than a slashing one, more like their Indonesian keris counterpart. Though you cannot see the full profile of the blade i believe Rick's second posted kris, with the ivory kakatau, would be an example of this type. Note also how the line of the gangya goes pretty much straight across on this blade as opposed to yours or Rick's other example where the line takes a 45 degree turn. This is usually another sign of an earlier blade. Now that i can see the close-ups i am not sure what it is that you believe is writing (Jawi or otherwise). I think that all the inlay is just design features and not intended as writing. As for the size of your blade, i own 2 kris which date to not earlier than the late 19thC that have blades under 20". I don't think this is a reliable factor in determining age. It is true that the "archaic" forms are generally smaller blade (around 18"), but certainly blades in this length range were made into the 20thC.

23rd July 2007, 12:10 AM	#3
Jazz Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 44	Thank you guys. very interesting responses.