![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,277
|
![]() Quote:
thank you very much for comment and your thoughts about this both swords. Let me explain my own thoughts. All what I know I've learned at this place, sadly is not much written about South Luzon and Visayan swords. Robert has posted in this thread: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=inaso an interesting sword with a handle which has some similar features (not peened through tang, no ferrule) and our ex-(?)member Bangkaya has written: "It does resemble the inaso (aso=dog) hilt of Bicol, but if it was from Bicol the tang would normally be peened at the end. Bikolano swords also almost always has a ferrule made of metal." and furthermore: "Figural hilts are common with faces of dogs, monkeys, people, etc. and even the dragon hilt varieties found on some modern sansibars. The blade itself is unique, but any sort of blade shape can be made to order by any panday for the original owner". This would explain (when it is a Waray sword) that the blade isn't chiseled ground, a feature normally found by Visayan swords. On the other hand, not all Bicol swords has a peened through tang, look for example here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=bicol , a other interesting sword from Robert which seemed to be from Bicol also. Regarding the not existent ferrule: so maybe really a Waray sword or a later Bicol sword? The second sword seems to my eyes indeed a Bicol sword, the inaso handle is in my eyes typical as well as the blade profile. Would be very interesting to read also the thoughts of other members which are familiar with swords from Luzon and the Visayans. Regards, Detlef Last edited by Sajen; 12th July 2014 at 04:44 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,310
|
![]()
I agree with Ian. One difference is that in Bicolano pieces the tang goes all the way through the hilt like typical Luzon pieces do. In Visayan pieces I've noticed that the tang does not protrude through the hilt.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,277
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Regards, Detlef |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,310
|
![]()
Yes I would say the second one is Bicolano as far as I understand.
The minisbad in the link that belonged to VVV is also Biconalo as well. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,277
|
![]() Quote:
Regards, Detlef |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,310
|
![]()
For now I'd say the first sword is Visayan.....
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,277
|
![]() Quote:
have a look to post #16 in this thread: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=bicol The shown sword has a very similar blade shape and the tang isn't peened through the hilt. And look also to the scabbard. When the first sword would orginate from the Visayas wouldn't be the blade chiseled at the edge? Regards, Detlef |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|