Possible mystery - first clue

[DaveA]

See Gardner, "Keris and other Malay Weapons", plate 58. The drawing shows the parang bengkok (Java) #6 sharp along the hook side. The parang bengkok (Bali) #1 is ambiguous about the edge. Gardner doesn't claim to have actually seen this weapon.

A. Von Z. p98 image 382 (btw, this is the identical drawing from Gardner) describes the back as straight and the edge as "between S-shaped and concave." (I.e., on the hook side) This is in concord with Gardner's illustration, or at least we share the same interpretation. Curiously, Albert says the "blade's tip is curved sharply upwards." If the sharp edge is the curved side, it would seem correct to say that it "curves downwards." Yes? This suggests to me that Albert was working only with Gardner's text (which he cites) and never actually held the sword himself.

Tirri shows us the first real photo I can find in published sources. On p.423-424 there are depictions of three weapons from Bali. Figure 300a is a Teabuna and figure 300 is a Kudi Tranchang, both with a superficial resemblance to our subject weapon which is shown in figure 300b. However, compare the hilts and other features and I think you'll agree our subject weapon seems out of place.

I feel like I once saw a similar hilt on a Laotian or Cambodian weapon, but unfortunately I cannot recall anything more specific.

Best,

Dave A

[spiral]

Isnt there a blade like this in Rawsons work a Burmese dao/dha of some sort?

Also the hilt may not be original & may once of had a bolster/ferrule?

spiral

[spiral]

Originally Posted by spiral

Isnt there a blade like this in Rawsons work a Burmese dao/dha of some sort?

Also the hilt may not be original & may once of had a bolster/ferrule?

spiral

Kabui dancing dao page. 58 & fig. 34 Rawson "The Indian sword."

Doesn't need a ferrule its for dancing..... {from the Kabui tribe, Assam/Burma regions...}

spiral

[A. G. Maisey]

Forget my suggestion for splitting bambu, now we have the complete description the blade geometry militates against that use.

~~~~~~~~

In respect of terminology.

In Jawa and also in Bali there is a hooked knife that we use for cutting grass and pruning bushes.

This knife is called a TELABUNG in Raffles, but I've never heard it called that in either Jawa or Bali, in Jawa it usually gets called a "BENDO", in Bali I've heard several people call it an "ARIT". Both these modern names could be historically incorrect and represent the common generic names used by modern people.

The TELABUNG frequently has the handle fitted into a socket, the example shown in Raffles has a handle that uses a ferrule. Every TELABUNG that I have seen is less than 24 inches overall length, the ones I use in the garden are only about 15 inches in length. The blade has a flat grind and is sharpened on the hooked side of the blade. It is a typical billhook, and is used like one.

Albert van Zonneveld shows a TELABUNG on page 143, but incorrectly names it a TELABUNA. He quotes Raffles as his reference. This is an understandable error, as the print in Raffles is very faint, and could easily be misread.

I do not own a copy of Tirri.

If Tirri names a KUDI TRANCHANG as Balinese he is wrong.

The KUDI is not Balinese, it is Javanese, principally from western Central Jawa, Banyumas and Cilacap. I have never heard the term KUDI TRANCANG used in Jawa.

Raffles shows a knife that we would now call simply a KUDI, and he names this as a KUDI TRANCHANG --- which of course should be KUDI TRANCANG. It is probable that Raffles is the source of the incorrect spelling that is repeated and repeated and repeated, and also the addition of "tranchang"

The word TRANCANG is Javanese and it means a net or a grid made out of wire. I have long thought that Raffles' name of KUDI TRANCHANG was the direct description of a specific KUDI given to him by his indigenous informant. A kudi with heavily veined material would be described as KUDI TRANCANG because the veined material would have the appearance of wire or cable.

Gardner shows a variety of tools and weapons from various locations that he names as KUDI, or KUDIK (kudi and kudik would sound the same to a native English speaker), and PARANG BENGKOK. Gardner is an historically interesting source, but it is as well not to take him too seriously.

Alfred van Zonneveld shows several blade forms that he names as KUDI, and he shows two implements that he names as KUDI TRANCHANG (kudi trancang). One of these is a Balinese pengentas, used in cremation ceremonies. The other is something I have never seen an example of and I do not know a name for it.

As for BENGKOK.
BENGKOK means bent or crooked.
Just that simple.

A PARANG BENGKOK is a bent parang.

Its a description rather than a name. There are any number of S.E. Asian tools/weapons that can be called PARANG BENGKOK.

I have a very intense dislike for this name game business. Every collector I've ever known wants to stick a name on every item that comes into his possession.

Very, very frequently the names that they have to choose from are corruptions of the name provided by the indigenous informant, or the name is not a name at all, but a description, or the name is simply wrong.

Collecting is one thing.

Affixing correct names is something different. It is a very good idea for anybody who wishes to collect S.E.Asian weapons and tools to gain some knowledge of the relevant languages and get hold of a few decent dictionaries.

~~~~~~~

SPIRAL:- I've had a look at the Rawson references you've provided, I cannot see anything that looks like the thing that Dave posted a pic of.

[spiral]

mmm that's strange....

[Ian]

Spiral:

The item to which you refer is Fig. 50 in my version of Rawson which was published in Copenhagen (there are at least two different publishings and they differ somewhat in content). In any case, the Kabui item you refer to has a very different blade and hilt from the one shown by Dave.

I'm surprised that you did not think the ram dao section of Rawson worthy of discussion here. To my eye, the blade form of Dave's sword is closer to some of the Indian/Nepalese ram dao than other examples in his book.

Ian.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

... Gardner is an historically interesting source, but it is as well not to take him too seriously. ...

... I have a very intense dislike for this name game business. Every collector I've ever known wants to stick a name on every item that comes into his possession.

Very, very frequently the names that they have to choose from are corruptions of the name provided by the indigenous informant, or the name is not a name at all, but a description, or the name is simply wrong.

Collecting is one thing.

Affixing correct names is something different. It is a very good idea for anybody who wishes to collect S.E.Asian weapons and tools to gain some knowledge of the relevant languages and get hold of a few decent dictionaries.

Alan, I agree completely with your comments! The same can be said for the naming of Filipino weapons, Burmese, Thai, etc. Our Western culture seems to crave a specific name for each identifiable item, and we want to catalog and classify these items as precisely as possible. This is not necessarily a bad thing but it can certainly lead to a false sense of knowledge and specificity when, as you say, we authoritatively pronounce something as being called a "bent knife."

However, without some attempt at classifying and sub-classifying our interesting collections, we are left with heaps of bolos, punales, parang, kris, pisau, dha, dao, etc. that are each heterogeneous in form and function. We do need a way to be able to talk with each other about the subtle differences. Not all of us can be immersed in the respective cultures and fluent in the languages of our interests. So we borrow from people who sound like they know what they are talking about, have maybe done some academic-looking research, and have published in a language that we understand.

I don't have an answer to this dilemma other than to read widely, and to visit here and other fora to try to sift out the wheat from the chaff. I am certain of one thing, however, and that is collectors are more numerous and better connected than ever before because of the internet and fora such as this one. Hopefully this is a good thing.

Ian.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Ian, you're right:- there needs to be a common language, and if that common language includes words from a foreign language, it probably doesn't matter.

Provided that collectors as a whole recognise that the names they use for these ethnographic things are their own names, not necessarily the names that are used in the societies of origin of the things so named.

With keris its a pretty similar thing. When Ensiklopedi (second edition) came out many people commented that a lot of the names used for various things included in the work were very puzzling and probably incorrect, but the book did provide terms of reference that everybody could use to communicate.

I personally like the idea of naming weaponry with an alpha-numeric system. Maybe a latter day Stone will do that some day.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Re the Kabui dao.

My Rawson is a 1969, ARCO, New York edition.

Plate 36 has the Kabui dao shown, but it is nothing like Dave's thing.

[Jim McDougall]

While I do not have anything to add to the topic here, as arms from these categories are far outside my usual fields of study, I just wanted to say how impressive this thread is!

Though the initial post began with a somewhat negatively postured query, the responses and discussion has proven extremely informative for those of us not particularly well versed in these arms. Most impressive to me are the detailed and well texted posts complete with cited references and notes to comparative examples .
Above all, even conflicting observations or errors are pointed out with completely gentlemanly discourse and response, thus constructively enhancing the discourse rather than distracting it.

It is wonderful to see interaction with great knowledge and expertise being shared here, and a textbook example of what our forums are intended to be.

Thank you so much gentlemen,
Jim

[Ian]

Dave:

That pommel is really not a typical feature for mainland SE Asian weapons. While there are occasional blades that resemble a ram dao (which your example also resembles IMO), the hilts on mainland SE Asian examples are quite different from yours and more closely resemble either those seen on ram dao from India/Nepal or hilts seen on dha/daab of that region. From memory, all that I've seen had a metal bolster or ferrule adjacent to the blade.

There is an old thread started by Oriental-Arms concerning two "bird swords" that were possibly dha and showed elongated and pointed hilts (See: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2324). Those are the only two wooden hilts on dha-like swords that I can recall coming anywhere close to the elongated form on your sword.

It's hard to know what that elongated "cone" pommel on your hilt might represent, but it is quite different from the "lotus bud" depicted commonly on the pommels of dha/daab and which is an important Buddhist emblem.

Ian.

[DaveA]

Ian, the pommel resembles more closely an uncircumcised penis than a flower, but for me that is no clue.

Alan, we've discussed nomenclature before and I concur with your view. My interest is far less in what this sword is called and more in its regional and ethnic origin and function.

The idea that this sword might be related to a Naga Kabui weapon used for dancing was the first to occur to me when I saw it for sale. Please see the pictures attached - two depict my Kabui dao and the third is a dancer with a substantially smaller Kabui dao. My Kabui dao is a two-handed weapon of roughly the same size and even greater heft as the mystery sword we are discussing. The overall length is 25 1/2 inches with a 16 inch blade. Also, the Kabui dao is sharp on the curved edge, not the straight edge like our mystery sword.

I consider Assam as fertile hunting ground for identification of weapons that don't seem to fit the surrounding regions very well. Consider: The Kabui are one of the Naga tribes who reside in the area around Manipur. The dominant sub-tribe is called "Rongmei". In Manipur, "Zemes" and "Liangmais" together were recognised as "Kacha Naga", while the "Rongmei" and "Npuimei" as "Kabui".In the Brahmaputra valley and nearby are found other tribes such as the Kuki, Kachar, and Khasi. [See references below]

Much blending and cultural interchange has occurred since British occupation, but they retain distinct identities. The Kuki tribe is known to decorate their weapon blades with copper and brass and this may have, for example, influenced the decoration of my Kabui Dao.

This has led me to the idea that Assam deserves more attention; there is scant information available regarding edged weapons of the region.

References
P.R.T. Gordon, The Khasis. Available from Project Gutenberg

Rongmei Naga, Wikipedia

[Sajen]

The here shown blade is a pole arm from Tonkin area owned by my friend, 19th century. The edge is on the same side like the mystery sword from Dave. We think that Daves blade is a similar pole arm blade with a later handle. Please note the reddish lacquer on the handle from Daves chopper, something what is typical for this region. My friend still search for the picture in his large storage.

Detlef