Barong Classification

[Federico]

Ok, I hate to be a naysayer here, but particularly the classification between Samal and Tausug barong, just does not hold up when you start to study period pics. Bob Cato lists both styles as variations of barong, but doesnt draw a tribal distinction. Part of the reason for this, is if you do a large survey of period pictures, you will find many period pics in which you will have a group of Tausug wearing both styles of barong, or a group of Samal, etc.... Of note are plates 70 and 71 of D. Encinas book "Moros as seen in Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago", featuring the Sultan of Sulu and his retainers (all Tausug). Also, one will see the "Tausug Crest" (according to this classification scheme) often on barong that have a "Samal" (again according to this scheme) scabbard and vice versa. Now if this was rare occurances, they could be seen as exceptions (possible swaps in scabbards, taste of owner, etc...), but the frequency is quite high. I did not see Banati listed as a pommel material, and at least in my experience this is the most common even amongst Jungayan, and then there generally are no spacers, so that would be in contradiction to the classification of Jungayan as mostly having spacers. I have also seen a high incidence of solid puntos on both middle and fighting barong, so I would be hesitant to say most have interspersed puntos. Finally there are a few of variations left out, such the no metal punto barong with only jute wrap, horn ferrule variations, horse hoof pommels, ball pommels, naga pommels, etc....

[Spunjer]

federico,
glad you could chime in. you forgot to mention the boto shaped pommels so, since you appear to be the primary authority on moro weapons, would it be safe to suggest that we should just forget about the classification? with your vast knowledge on this matter, how do you suggest i approach this? i'm really just trying to create a very elementary, general guideline. ultimately, what i'm trying to do is, i'm just trying to learn more about what measely collection i have, and at the least would like to know where it specifically came from. as i've stated, i've used cato's book and this specific thread as my referrence:
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000562.html

please fred, don't leave us hanging like this. whenever you get the time, it would be great if you can add pictures and stuff, maybe elaborate even more, then this thread would definitely be archive material...

ron

[Ian]

Hi Spunjer:

How would you classify this particular shandigan barung according to the scheme you have outlined?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7312694597

Ian.

[themorningstar]

Originally Posted by Spunjer

federico,
glad you could chime in. you forgot to mention the boto shaped pommels so, since you appear to be the primary authority on moro weapons, would it be safe to suggest that we should just forget about the classification? with your vast knowledge on this matter, how do you suggest i approach this? i'm really just trying to create a very elementary, general guideline. ultimately, what i'm trying to do is, i'm just trying to learn more about what measely collection i have, and at the least would like to know where it specifically came from. as i've stated, i've used cato's book and this specific thread as my referrence:
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000562.html

please fred, don't leave us hanging like this. whenever you get the time, it would be great if you can add pictures and stuff, maybe elaborate even more, then this thread would definitely be archive material...

ron

primary authority???

[tom hyle]

This is similar to what we're discussing with seme; there appear to be two definably different styles. defining them as different by their feature is like part A, then comes B; defining whether it is age/time, ethnicity, social status, personal taste, preferred fighting style, or what that makes for the difference; a whole 'nother, vaguer, more difficult it seems, and thankfully seperable can of worms.

[Spunjer]

ian,
good question. i was discussing that particular barong with a fellow forumite offline. it appears to be a post -1930 type based on the statement below:

Spunjer
Quote:
...these "general guidelines" basically applies to the earlier barungs (pre-1930's) and not to barungs from WWII or later. The more contemporary barongs from WWII and later are almost too similar to distinguish between the different Sulu tribes.


thanks zel. forgot to add that very important piece of info...

based on our discussion, the punto appearance was mentioned; somehow it looks newer. also the hilt is missing the sheen found on older ones; but then again it could be the picture. what's your opinion on it?

btw, here's another one that i would like to hear everyone's comment:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEDW%3AIT&rd=1
samal battle barong???
i will add some closeups as soon as possible...

[Ian]

Hi Spunjer:

I put this one up for a couple of reasons. One of those is identifying when the shandigan style of barung arose. I have not seen more than a couple that I would confidently date to the 19th C. or earlier. Are most examples that we see today mainly a modern revival of an older and rare form?

As you say, this one could be post-1930 or has some post-1930 elements, but it's hard to say without direct inspection. It may be earlier 20th C. The punto, in particular, looks fairly recent.

Speaking of this punto, one thing missing from your previous discussions is mention of the Muslims living in the southern half of Palawan. The Palawano muslims are related to the Tausug and Samal, but they have some "local" features to their weapons in terms of decoration to the hilt and scabbard. One of the features that I have observed is the use of triangular designs, similar to the "nicks" seen on the punto of this barung. Similar designs are seen on some of the recently made barung scababrds from northern Borneo. You may have seen some Palawano pieces when you visited Mr Ven.

How do the Palawano weapons fit into your overall classification?

Ian.

[tom hyle]

I think the round hollow grind as such, especially applied to the flats of a blade, as with shandigan barong, and often on a variety of other sword types (I've seen kukuri, of course, pedang sabet/parang nabur, and Japanese "commoner" swords, as well as the contemporary (to us) CAS Iberia and I forget their big competitor's name work, and that of their smaller contemporaries) first came into coastal Asia plus India (India first? from Europe?) perhaps starting in the mid 19th, hitting some sort of pinnacle in the south before wwII, and coming in up north (PI) mostly after wwwII. Japan seems to cover almost the whole timeframe, as do kukuri?).
As to the finish on old Moro wood sword dress: I've seen it on nice old prewwII stuff be pretty much bare dry wood that had once been oiled or lightly waxed or else a thick, built-up high-gloss clear lacquer type substance; again we have two very different styles.......
Does some sort of flow of technological and cultural influence seem to sweep along the southern edge of the Himalayas?..........random thought...........

[Spunjer]

ian,
again, for clarification, the compilation was based on the two sources given above. this is not mine to take credit for; i'm merely rehashing what's already been written, kinda like cliff notes. i haven't read any threads, past or present, that challenges what the authors wrote and discussed, therefore i would assume that the majority agrees to what's being stated. if there are new findings and would like to share the information, that is great; this is what this thread is for. i'd like to be content knowing i have a neat looking leaf shaped sword with wooden handles and wooden scabbard, but unfortunately (or fortunately, however you wanna look at it) i respect it too much and i think it would be a travesty to not learn more about it.

as for where the palawano barong fits in according to the original post; well, it doesn't because those sources quoted only explains, and again i would like to emphasize, the general differences between the tausug, samal and yakan barongs.

i'm sure volumes can be written about the barong in general, as i'm sure there are variants within those tribes that we haven't seen before. maybe one day, a book or two will be written about it, and that goes for all pilipino weapons. that would be nice...

tom,
not trying to ignore you or anything, i just need to clarify these things. as for your thoughts, it is something to think about.

themorningstar,
you have pm!

[Spunjer]

here's the barong i was talking about...

[Federico]

Originally Posted by Spunjer

federico,
glad you could chime in. you forgot to mention the boto shaped pommels so, since you appear to be the primary authority on moro weapons, would it be safe to suggest that we should just forget about the classification? with your vast knowledge on this matter, how do you suggest i approach this? i'm really just trying to create a very elementary, general guideline. ultimately, what i'm trying to do is, i'm just trying to learn more about what measely collection i have, and at the least would like to know where it specifically came from. as i've stated, i've used cato's book and this specific thread as my referrence:
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000562.html

please fred, don't leave us hanging like this. whenever you get the time, it would be great if you can add pictures and stuff, maybe elaborate even more, then this thread would definitely be archive material...

ron

Ok...I am far from an authority on anything, let alone Moro Swords, just another hobbiest. However, this topic came up way back when before Mabagani joined the forum, and he was the one who pointed out to me that such pictures occur. I cant remember which reference he said to look at, and he would have far better knowledge about more common places to find these pics as he originally pointed it out to me, and has a far greater knowledge of reference material. Unfortunately all my good pics arent scanned, so I dont have a way of posting them online, and can only cite page numbers.

One thing you will note, is modern Tausug barong have many of the "Samal" traits, such as the up-turned scabbard tip, rounded shoulder, etc... My own suspicion, for what its worth as an opinion of a non-expert, has been what if the style denotes age (eg. changing tastes over time) versus tribal distinction given the photographic trends I have encountered in my own journey through the dark. Bob Cato notes the hallmark of a post WWII scabbard is the center ridge on the scabbard. Flat panelled scabbards, by that reasoning (barring of course exceptions), would generally be pre-WWII, but then how pre-WWII would be something to judge on the look of the whole sword/scabbard, and even then its just a guess. Anyways, sometimes I wonder if we are too picky trying to classify things one way or the other.

[Spunjer]

One thing you will note, is modern Tausug barong have many of the "Samal" traits, such as the up-turned scabbard tip, rounded shoulder, etc... My own suspicion, for what its worth as an opinion of a non-expert, has been what if the style denotes age (eg. changing tastes over time) versus tribal distinction...

federico,
as it was noted above, theoretically, post 1930's (why 1930? i don't know...) barongs are so similar that it is hard to distinginguish tribal distinction. are you just talking about the tagub part then? but there has to be a point in time where each of the tribes has their own distict style in both the blade and the tagub.

Anyways, sometimes I wonder if we are too picky trying to classify things one way or the other.

well, i guess that's part of being a collector in my case anyway. it's the curiosity in most of us to know every single detail and history of what we have on hand. in my case, if at all possible, i'd like to know the panday's name that made the barong i have. then it goes on and on... yeah, it would've been fine to know what a barong is, or what country it came from, but when someone mentioned that there are certain identifying traits as to the actual origin of this certain sword, it peaks our interests. also, i think it would be a disservice to the actual tribe that purposely left their distinct signature on something they revered so much and later on to be referred to as the other tribes' esp. in the philippines...

[Federico]

Originally Posted by Spunjer

federico,
as it was noted above, theoretically, post 1930's (why 1930? i don't know...) barongs are so similar that it is hard to distinginguish tribal distinction. are you just talking about the tagub part then? but there has to be a point in time where each of the tribes has their own distict style in both the blade and the tagub.

At least to my eye, the crest of a modern barong is very similar to the "Samal" style. If you filled in all the piercing, you would essentially have the modern crest that comes from the cockatua back vs butt plane as noted in Bob's book. Also notice the rectangular beak on modern barong. Another trait in common. So more than just the tagub is in common. I have a couple of ivory barong that may be from the 30s, but hard to tell, the features are extremely similar between the two styles. Both strike me as Tausug due to the lavishness of the pieces (particularly the use of swaasa for the punto on one, typical Tausug silver braiding on both, and Tausug chase work on the other). Anyways, one reason the 30s date pops up is the Hutchings article, and as well as Kriegers work, both written late 20s early 30s. I believe its the Hutchings article (Id have to go through it again) that points out modern kris lack the separable gangya. One thing Ill note as well, I find more newer pictures (20s and 30s) in which the "Samal" style barong is seen being worn vs. older pictures. Also, the Samal style Ive encountered have had far bigger blades (approaching more modern sizes) than the "Tausug" style. Anyways if the Samal style is the Samal style, why did the Tausug drop their own style of barong and then solely take up making barong in the Samal style. Again, going back to Kiefer, the power relation doesnt make sense. Then again someone like MorningStar could shed light on the matter. Then what do we mean by Samal? If we want to sub-divide further, are we talking Balangingi Samal, Samal Bajau (well this term gets thrown out in some older books), the Jama Mapun Samal, etc... Anyways, sorry about the nonsensical order of this post, real tired and just trying to type quick before work.

[zamboanga]

spunjer,


you could throw in the type of sampil fabric used in the scabbard. tho it is not available in each and every old barong...

[Spunjer]

zamboanga,
glad you brought that up. could you be so kind enuff as to differentiate those? i have one and the fabric feels like felt, and it is solid red. any significance???