Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VVV
On page 59 a resembling one from the Philippines, as Battara mentioned earlier, is commented
I don't really see why Per's and Cato's necessarily should be imported swords from Timor? Or maybe I misunderstood Bill?
I also think it's quite obvious that it's a kampilan and have considered van Z's classifying it as a "klewang" as one of the, surprisingly few, minor errors in his book. Unless you want to classify all kampilans as belonging to the klewang-category?
Michael
|
I agree, it really should be considered a kampilan. My edition of Cato shows it pg. 53, fig 33. It does not appear to be typical of Mindanao kampilans but as we see, there is always exceptions. The blade construction still is problematic for Mindanao being the place of origin.