View Single Post
Old 11th September 2008, 03:57 PM   #15
Henk
Member
 
Henk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,172
Default

Yes Norman, that's probably the collection period of this one. This Rencong is made arround that period for sure. Earlier? Maybe.

I don't think this is an off piece. I cann't say the inlay is sloppily done. The blade suffered, and in my opinion cleaned in a way that did some damage to the inlay.
About the hilt it is very good possible that the ivory used was insufficient, but the shape of the hilt is good and it has the bulb on one side. The side worn on the belly is the flat side. I can imagine that that was more convenient when the weapen was worn in the belt.

The shape of the blade isn't weird in my opnion. It is definitely the shape of a rencong or even a sewar blade and it shows a duru seuke. Not a proper one, I do agree with you, but I think it is due the suffering of the blade. Maybe a good close up of that part couldd tell us something. The missing of the taku rungiet as the ferrule features is in my opinion also not an important direction. True, most rencong do have these features, but a lot don't. Or like we say here in Holland, exceptions do confirm the rules.

I think you should look through the suffering of this weapon.

I only will agree with you to give this rencong the status of a ceremonial dagger for weddings if the inlay is translated with the words: Poor fellow, go back home. If you enter, there is no way of return!

And for the jokers, proof that you can read this language.......
Henk is offline   Reply With Quote