The Tourist Item/Souvenier in arms antiquities

[Battara]

Yeah I would place tourist, or at least low quality, as that of not being well made to be not very functional, although there are pieces that are now only jewelry made of expensive materials, but would not qualify as functional.

[kahnjar1]

What I should also have mentioned in my previous post, is that while in Dubai recently, I saw several quality Khanjars of the sort shown by Ibrahiim, for sale at very high prices, in the tourist shop at the Burg Kalifa. These could only have been aimed at the tourist market as the locals would not shop there.
Stu

[corrado26]

When I showed fotos of this koummya some time ago it was instantly and doubtlessly judged as a tourist item. However it is made in a very good quality with an unusual size - both attributes oppose to the opinion of beeing a tourist item. So what is it really?
corrado26

[William Fox]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

What I should also have mentioned in my previous post, is that while in Dubai recently, I saw several quality Khanjars of the sort shown by Ibrahiim, for sale at very high prices, in the tourist shop at the Burg Kalifa. These could only have been aimed at the tourist market as the locals would not shop there.
Stu

Not necessarily. There are plenty of locals who browse at the Burj Khalifa, and they are sometimes the worst suckers for paying too much for things: too much money and took little knowledge.

[mross]

The "for those who travel" category is a deep dark swamp. The easiest is if the item in question was completely made for tourists. Where it gets dicey; what about a cheap blade shaped piece of metal put in an old original handle? Conversely how about an original blade placed in a cheap handle. Both of these could be done by a desperate owner to make a few bucks, or by a con man trying to make a few bucks.

[Bob A]

I have a recently-made barong which has an elegantly shaped scabbard, a thick well-shaped blade which has been stained to look similar to older examples, and a hilt which is moderately ornamental. It is both obviously new and also fully functional as a weapon.

It is obvious that effort was made to present as a quality piece, yet not overdone in ornament.

It is my feeling that it is of a higher quality - and cost - to be a tourist wall-hanger. Beyond that, I understand that such things are still carried by people of the culture. I'd say that as it is functional, culturally appropriate, and fully functional, it is a legitimate ethnological weapon, and I value it as such.[IMG]http://[/IMG]

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Hard to know where to start with this one... Locals don't usually shop in the souks of Oman for a Khanjar. How they buy a weapon is often done direct with the Khanjar maker. They don't often just buy a complete Khanjar but will look to match what they may already have to make an upgrade... so they could buy threequarters of a khanjar and have the workshop complete the upgrade with a part they want to be included...usually an old hilt worked onto a new scabbard. The entire Khanjar is interchangeable.

On The Omani Khanjar I spread the different sources around and enjoy the souk ...its great fun and the atmosphere is superb...Sometimes there is a bargain and a decent Khanjar presents itself. (Locals actually may purchase there for a cheaper weapon as a gift for a foreign visitor) There are some good quality accoutrements in souks thus its well worth having a look..and the Aladdin's cave syndrome is quite fun. Souks are quite likely to have a top class Khanjar shop somewhere in there so the whole story can change! My workshop is hidden away down a back lane miles from anywhere and that is normal here. People join whats up sites where anyone can load a Khanjar for sale...and where it is easy to see what is available ...There are always new threequarter complete Khanjars on those Like the one here....

[ariel]

My 2 cents worth is that there are as many collections as there are collectors.
Some collect beautiful and rich examples. Other are attracted to simple examples with a whiff of blood. Some collect works of modern masters, other demand irrefutable proof of 17 century. Some want strict classic authenticity, other spend months to acquire an unusual example mixing several traditions. I am sure that somewhere in Australia or Kazakhstan there is a sword lover who collects stamps with the images of swords.

The disappointment arrives when we are sold ( often fraudulently) not what we were intended to collect.

Other than that, I gladly join Chairman Mao: Let the thousand flowers bloom!

Collecting weapons is a form of insanity because there is no practical use of these pieces of iron/carbon alloys hanging on our walls. Collecting abject replicas and cheap imitations is as logical ( or illogical) as Fiegel’s quest of getting only wootz blades with “two kirks and a rose”.

Choose what tickles your fancy and go for it! What makes you a true collector is not what objects you acquire, but what do you want to learn from them.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Bob A

I have a recently-made barong which has an elegantly shaped scabbard, a thick well-shaped blade which has been stained to look similar to older examples, and a hilt which is moderately ornamental. It is both obviously new and also fully functional as a weapon.

It is obvious that effort was made to present as a quality piece, yet not overdone in ornament.

It is my feeling that it is of a higher quality - and cost - to be a tourist wall-hanger. Beyond that, I understand that such things are still carried by people of the culture. I'd say that as it is functional, culturally appropriate, and fully functional, it is a legitimate ethnological weapon, and I value it as such.[IMG]http://[/IMG]

Greetings. I am currently a student of BangsaMoro culture and weapons; I see you have here what we call as a 'ba-wrong' from Tugaya; that's a place in Mindanao that produces tourist items.

While I cannot ascertain the functionality of your piece, I'd like to list down the faults that I can see on face value of your piece:

1. The aesthetics are all wrong. That's the main problem with Maranao-made weapons. While the barung is used by a number of Moro tribes even until now, each tribe has somewhat customized the barung to fit their functional needs, thus the nuances in design (e.g. the modern Yakan barung is built like a bushcraft blade to suit the needs of the Yakan's peaceful existence; the modern Sama barung is light-bladed and has a hilt made of Santol wood for easier transpo, the modern Tausug barung is heavy, well-built, and still combat-oriented, etc). However, the Maranaons, to begin with, never customized the barung for functional use. If you try to research on period pieces of the Maranaons, they are very, very rarely shown with weapons, and when they do, they don't carry the barung. That already says a lot- that the Maranaons don't view barung as a functional weapon enough to have customized it to fit their needs.

2. The ukkil is wrong. Sorry I can't explain this in detail, but in summary, each tribe imprints its ukkil on their adopted barung design. When it comes to the Tugaya-made weapons, they attempted to copy antique weapons from other tribes, YET they used the Maranao ukkil. This is just wrong.

3. Some of the design modifications are outrageous. When you've viewed enough antique and modern BangsaMoro weapons, you'll realize that the Tugaya-made weapons are over-the-top. They're like peacocks.

4. Functionality. The only way to test for a barung's functionality is by checking if it's been heat-treated. According to several sources, the Tugaya-made barungs are NOT heat-treated. This makes them wall-hangers.

5. Lack of provenance. There's no such thing as an antique Maranao barung; according to historical documents, the Maranaons preferred to use ranged arms- guns and lantaka (cannons)- to defend their territory. They're not like the other tribes that glory in hand-to-hand combat. Without provenance, the Maranao barung is just...a modern counterfeit. A glorified attempt at reproduction.

I hope you'll view my criticism constructively; I know you may have spent a significant investment on your Maranao "ba-wrong", but well I guess it's much better if you buy barungs from other tribes (whether antique or modern) as they embody the true essence of BangsaMoro weapons.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Greetings. I am currently a student of BangsaMoro culture and weapons; I see you have here what we call as a 'ba-wrong' from Tugaya; that's a place in Mindanao that produces tourist items.

While I cannot ascertain the functionality of your piece, I'd like to list down the faults that I can see on face value of your piece:

1. The aesthetics are all wrong. That's the main problem with Maranao-made weapons. While the barung is used by a number of Moro tribes even until now, each tribe has somewhat customized the barung to fit their functional needs, thus the nuances in design (e.g. the modern Yakan barung is built like a bushcraft blade to suit the needs of the Yakan's peaceful existence; the modern Sama barung is light-bladed and has a hilt made of Santol wood for easier transpo, the modern Tausug barung is heavy, well-built, and still combat-oriented, etc). However, the Maranaons, to begin with, never customized the barung for functional use. If you try to research on period pieces of the Maranaons, they are very, very rarely shown with weapons, and when they do, they don't carry the barung. That already says a lot- that the Maranaons don't view barung as a functional weapon enough to have customized it to fit their needs.

2. The ukkil is wrong. Sorry I can't explain this in detail, but in summary, each tribe imprints its ukkil on their adopted barung design. When it comes to the Tugaya-made weapons, they attempted to copy antique weapons from other tribes, YET they used the Maranao ukkil. This is just wrong.

3. Some of the design modifications are outrageous. When you've viewed enough antique and modern BangsaMoro weapons, you'll realize that the Tugaya-made weapons are over-the-top. They're like peacocks.

4. Functionality. The only way to test for a barung's functionality is by checking if it's been heat-treated. According to several sources, the Tugaya-made barungs are NOT heat-treated. This makes them wall-hangers.

5. Lack of provenance. There's no such thing as an antique Maranao barung; according to historical documents, the Maranaons preferred to use ranged arms- guns and lantaka (cannons)- to defend their territory. They're not like the other tribes that glory in hand-to-hand combat. Without provenance, the Maranao barung is just...a modern counterfeit. A glorified attempt at reproduction.

I hope you'll view my criticism constructively; I know you may have spent a significant investment on your Maranao "ba-wrong", but well I guess it's much better if you buy barungs from other tribes (whether antique or modern) as they embody the true essence of BangsaMoro weapons.

This is an excellent itemization of a 'tourist' grade item vs. the authentic form and I do hope it is viewed as constructive as intended. That was the goal of this thread. Extremely interesting background here!
Bob, I think your attitude toward recognizing this piece as ethnographic even though modern is perfect.

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Greetings. I am currently a student of BangsaMoro culture and weapons; I see you have here what we call as a 'ba-wrong' from Tugaya; that's a place in Mindanao that produces tourist items.

While I cannot ascertain the functionality of your piece, I'd like to list down the faults that I can see on face value of your piece:

1. The aesthetics are all wrong. That's the main problem with Maranao-made weapons. While the barung is used by a number of Moro tribes even until now, each tribe has somewhat customized the barung to fit their functional needs, thus the nuances in design (e.g. the modern Yakan barung is built like a bushcraft blade to suit the needs of the Yakan's peaceful existence; the modern Sama barung is light-bladed and has a hilt made of Santol wood for easier transpo, the modern Tausug barung is heavy, well-built, and still combat-oriented, etc). However, the Maranaons, to begin with, never customized the barung for functional use. If you try to research on period pieces of the Maranaons, they are very, very rarely shown with weapons, and when they do, they don't carry the barung. That already says a lot- that the Maranaons don't view barung as a functional weapon enough to have customized it to fit their needs.

First, thank you for your response.
Sadly, I seem unable to locate the shipping information for this item, which I thought I had in a safe place. I cannot say whether it came from Maranao. Can you tell me the grounds for your attribution? Anything specific, or just the overall impression?

Regarding actual local use, is there any likelihood that a blade of this type would be used at all, locally, or would it be avoided? It seems to be somewhat blade-heavy, but it seemed to me to be functional as a weapon.

2. The ukkil is wrong. Sorry I can't explain this in detail, but in summary, each tribe imprints its ukkil on their adopted barung design. When it comes to the Tugaya-made weapons, they attempted to copy antique weapons from other tribes, YET they used the Maranao ukkil. This is just wrong.

Please describe ukkil as applied to barongs; I'm unfamiliar with the term, and (obviously) not all that familiar with barongs, or barights. Pictures would be appreciated, if you can provide.

3. Some of the design modifications are outrageous. When you've viewed enough antique and modern BangsaMoro weapons, you'll realize that the Tugaya-made weapons are over-the-top. They're like peacocks.

While mine seems reasonably decorated, I'm not in a position to judge "over-the-top." If you could be more specific regarding ornamentation, I'd be pleased to learn more. Again, if you could provide graphic information, it would be useful to many.

4. Functionality. The only way to test for a barung's functionality is by checking if it's been heat-treated. According to several sources, the Tugaya-made barungs are NOT heat-treated. This makes them wall-hangers.

How might I check for heat-treatment? What level of functionality, or lack thereof, would one find in a blade that is not so treated?

5. Lack of provenance. There's no such thing as an antique Maranao barung; according to historical documents, the Maranaons preferred to use ranged arms- guns and lantaka (cannons)- to defend their territory. They're not like the other tribes that glory in hand-to-hand combat. Without provenance, the Maranao barung is just...a modern counterfeit. A glorified attempt at reproduction.

I gather that your feeling is that a barong made by the wrong group wears its falsehood on its face, so to speak. So the Maranaons would never carry a barong themselves, nor would anyone else in the Phillippines ever use one made by these folk?

I hope you'll view my criticism constructively; I know you may have spent a significant investment on your Maranao "ba-wrong", but well I guess it's much better if you buy barungs from other tribes (whether antique or modern) as they embody the true essence of BangsaMoro weapons.

I accept your criticism for its undoubted value, though it seems pretty comprehensively negative. Can you toss me a bit of sugar-coating next time?

Really, though, I'd be very interested in whatever you can make available by way of photos, drawings etc in order to educate my eye. Sadly, a field trip to Mindanao is not in the cards for me.

Any comment you might provide regarding current usage and carry of these weapons would also be enlightening.

[mross]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Greetings. I am currently a student of BangsaMoro culture and weapons; I see you have here what we call as a 'ba-wrong' from Tugaya; that's a place in Mindanao that produces tourist items.

While I cannot ascertain the functionality of your piece, I'd like to list down the faults that I can see on face value of your piece:

1. The aesthetics are all wrong. That's the main problem with Maranao-made weapons. While the barung is used by a number of Moro tribes even until now, each tribe has somewhat customized the barung to fit their functional needs, thus the nuances in design (e.g. the modern Yakan barung is built like a bushcraft blade to suit the needs of the Yakan's peaceful existence; the modern Sama barung is light-bladed and has a hilt made of Santol wood for easier transpo, the modern Tausug barung is heavy, well-built, and still combat-oriented, etc). However, the Maranaons, to begin with, never customized the barung for functional use. If you try to research on period pieces of the Maranaons, they are very, very rarely shown with weapons, and when they do, they don't carry the barung. That already says a lot- that the Maranaons don't view barung as a functional weapon enough to have customized it to fit their needs.

2. The ukkil is wrong. Sorry I can't explain this in detail, but in summary, each tribe imprints its ukkil on their adopted barung design. When it comes to the Tugaya-made weapons, they attempted to copy antique weapons from other tribes, YET they used the Maranao ukkil. This is just wrong.

3. Some of the design modifications are outrageous. When you've viewed enough antique and modern BangsaMoro weapons, you'll realize that the Tugaya-made weapons are over-the-top. They're like peacocks.

4. Functionality. The only way to test for a barung's functionality is by checking if it's been heat-treated. According to several sources, the Tugaya-made barungs are NOT heat-treated. This makes them wall-hangers.

5. Lack of provenance. There's no such thing as an antique Maranao barung; according to historical documents, the Maranaons preferred to use ranged arms- guns and lantaka (cannons)- to defend their territory. They're not like the other tribes that glory in hand-to-hand combat. Without provenance, the Maranao barung is just...a modern counterfeit. A glorified attempt at reproduction.

I hope you'll view my criticism constructively; I know you may have spent a significant investment on your Maranao "ba-wrong", but well I guess it's much better if you buy barungs from other tribes (whether antique or modern) as they embody the true essence of BangsaMoro weapons.

This is the type of information that is very useful. It is also the type of insight that the Cato book lacked.(Which is why I take that book with a grain of salt). Xasterix I know you said you are just a student but have you considered doing a white paper on identification?