Indonesian pedang for identification

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

Good one! (Let me know... )

I'm fairly sure this one is from Sulawesi. Would be good to see the blade stained - this might help to narrow things down.

Hello Kai,

Thank you for comment! Sulawesi was my guess as well but wasn't very sure since never have seen a similar one before. But the cross section with the very prominent spine I only know from very old Sulawesi blades.
An etch would need a good polish before and I still have a lot of blade polish jobs in front....

Will let you know in case......

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

This sort of broad, general weaponry is a bit outside my knowledge base, so what I'm putting up for consideration cannot be taken as any sort of expert opinion, only general knowledge based on experience.

There is a Batak sword like this that has a hollow grind --- ie, concave blade face --- it has a name something like rudos, or rodos or similar. Over the years I've had several, and quality and detail varies a lot.

This style of bifurcated hilt is usually associated with Sumatra, lots of stylistic variations, but in other places, including Sulawesi it is somewhere between rare and non-existent.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

There is a Batak sword like this that has a hollow grind --- ie, concave blade face --- it has a name something like rudos, or rodos or similar. Over the years I've had several, and quality and detail varies a lot.

This style of bifurcated hilt is usually associated with Sumatra, lots of stylistic variations, but in other places, including Sulawesi it is somewhere between rare and non-existent.

Hello Alan,

I think you mean the so called rudus (a search here will show some examples), there are similarities but also a lot of differents. It's also called cojang see for example here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=rudus
I will take a picture from this one side by side with my cojang for comparison.
The hilt was the reason that I was unsure about the Sulawesi origin since I never before have seen such a hilt by a Sulawesi sword.

Regards,
Detlef

[Gustav]

To me it also looks like a Sulawesi blade, perhaps traded.

Do we see something similar in van Zonneveld's book, p. 137, picture 575 (a sword from Tanimbar)?

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Gustav, that 575 picture is very similar.

A rudus Detlef? Just looked it up, seems its got a plethora of names, actually there is Javanese thing that has a blade like this too, but all the hilts I've seen on the Jawa ones are different to the hilt on this one.

Thing is this:- these blades don't just stay in one place, they move all over the entire region. I often feel that attaching a geographic location as point of manufacture is a little bit silly. Maybe the idea of "collected in" is a better way to describe things, or for stuff bought well outside the region where there are reliable examples from somewhere or other it could be "attributed to".

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes Gustav, that 575 picture is very similar.

Agreed!

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

A rudus Detlef? Just looked it up, seems its got a plethora of names, actually there is Javanese thing that has a blade like this too, but all the hilts I've seen on the Jawa ones are different to the hilt on this one.

Have a look to van Zonneveld's book on page 115 and for co jang at page 40.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Thing is this:- these blades don't just stay in one place, they move all over the entire region. I often feel that attaching a geographic location as point of manufacture is a little bit silly. Maybe the idea of "collected in" is a better way to describe things, or for stuff bought well outside the region where there are reliable examples from somewhere or other it could be "attributed to".

Agree again with you Alan!

Regards,
Detlef

[kai]

Hello Alan,

Thing is this:- these blades don't just stay in one place, they move all over the entire region. I often feel that attaching a geographic location as point of manufacture is a little bit silly. Maybe the idea of "collected in" is a better way to describe things, or for stuff bought well outside the region where there are reliable examples from somewhere or other it could be "attributed to".

It is certainly advisable to be cautious with narrowing down the origin of pieces, especially if there are indications of mixed heritage.

It is well-known that blades or complete pieces got traded all over maritime SE Asia or got gifted between rulers. A good example may be the Aceh sikin panjang observed by Schmeltz in Banjarmasin.

However, whenever it seems possible to specifically place the blade and the hilt (as well as possibly any extant scabbard) to the same originating culture (and to reasonably exclude any other contenders), it seems a moot point not to address a piece as belonging to a given place/culture/period. (If component parts of any example can be attributed to different origins, it also seems preferable to discuss each in detail.)

In my humble opinion, neither the blade nor the hilt of this sword are from Sumatra. Both fit well with examples I believe to be indigenuous to Sulawesi. If pressed, I'd posit this could be from the SE areas; more research (and data from this blade) will be needed to corroborate this notion though.

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, as I wrote in my original post:-

This sort of broad, general weaponry is a bit outside my knowledge base, so what I'm putting up for consideration cannot be taken as any sort of expert opinion, only general knowledge based on experience.

There is a Batak sword like this that has a hollow grind --- ie, concave blade face --- it has a name something like rudos, or rodos or similar. Over the years I've had several, and quality and detail varies a lot.

This style of bifurcated hilt is usually associated with Sumatra, lots of stylistic variations, but in other places, including Sulawesi it is somewhere between rare and non-existent.

Forgive me.

I am old, I am tired, and I am sick to my guts as what I personally see as a rather ill-informed and unrealistic expectation that everything in the field of S.E. Asian material culture can be labelled and classified using information that is so incomplete and erroneous as to be laughable.

It would please me greatly if collectors and students in our particular field of study would cease the patently unrealistic and adopt a more measured approach.

In places where we can get half a dozen different names for the same object by going to half a dozen different houses a few kilometers apart, how wise is it to be too definite about anything?

We all know that material objects --- not just weapons, but all sorts of manufactured items --- move all over the region and have done so for more than a 1000 years.

Yes, it is in the nature of man to want to label things, but it would perhaps be more acceptable if we used attributions, or references, for instance :-

"A gizmo, collected 1995 Kaba-Kaba, Bali, Indonesia, location of origin:- attributed to Karanganyar, Jawa Tengah, circa 1893 (after Sutrisno)"

with this type of approach we say where we acquired the thing, we say where we think it might be from, we say what period we think it might be from, and we give the reference for our label:- Sutrisno.

There is a very nice little quote that I think is attributed to Lao Tzu:-

"The wise seem confused, knowing the imperfection of their understanding"

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Gustav

To me it also looks like a Sulawesi blade, perhaps traded.

Do we see something similar in van Zonneveld's book, p. 137, picture 575 (a sword from Tanimbar)?

Hello Gustav,

A very good hint and information. The sword on page 137 look indeed very similar.

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

Here the promised comparison with a co jang from my collection. Please excuse the quality but I think that the different is visible.

[A. G. Maisey]

Detlef, I can see a massive difference in quality, and a difference in hilt style, but in overall blade style I can see no real difference at all. Over many years I've had a number of these things, all with the same overall blade style, but with a very wide range of qualities. I think I've only ever had one that was of similar quality to the better one in your comparison picture, most of what I've had has been just "household tool" stuff, nothing special at all, but a couple of those very ordinary pieces were very definitely from Northern Sumatera.

Maybe the rudus or cojang name is a quality designation as well as just an identifier, maybe the same object but of a lower quality has a different name.

I believe I was the first person in the field of edge weapons to coin the term "The Name Game" I've been using it for more than 50 years, and I don't think I ever heard anybody use it before me. Every time I see a situation where we try to define S.E. Asian objects --- not just weapons, but objects --- by using names that we do not understand, that same phrase runs through my mind.

Kai,, your comment:-

While Sumatra is famous for its bifurcated horn hilts, this type is none of those.

it is a regrettable fact of life that not every hilt was made by the same person, living in the same place, at the same time, and from the same material.

If we live outside of a society, and in a different period, the best we can access is a tiny sample of total production of anything. Tiny samples of anything are useless for the purpose of forming supportable opinions. We might be able to hypothesise upon the basis of small, isolated samples, but in the case of tools, or weapons, where most people make their own hilts and scabbards, and only follow a general overall pattern --- if they follow any pattern at all --- how is it possible to acknowledge that an overall pattern applies to a particular location, but because of detail it cannot possibly be from that location?

Not everything in this world fits into its own nice, neat, little box, particularly so in the region that we are now concerned with.

[kai]

Hello Gustav,

Do we see something similar in van Zonneveld's book, p. 137, picture 575 (a sword from Tanimbar)?

Thanks, yes, this seems like a decent match! (Both hilts, from Detlef and me, are less curved though.)

It is well known that blades got exported from eastern Sulawesi and Buton in considerable numbers; there may be a good chance that this hilt also originated there.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

The hilt was the reason that I was unsure about the Sulawesi origin since I never before have seen such a hilt by a Sulawesi sword.

Remind me to post a pic of a sword with similar hilt - probably need to take pics first...

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

Remind me to post a pic of a sword with similar hilt - probably need to take pics first...

Hereby done!

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

Thanks for the reminder!

Here's a pic (courtesy of mandaukudi).

BTW, the belt with toggle seems to be Dayak - old but possibly added later (may well indicate an ensemble that traveled to another culture and experienced continued use).

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Thank you Kai! Indeed very similar blade shape and handle style.

Regards,
Detlef

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

Thank you for comment! Sulawesi was my guess as well but wasn't very sure since never have seen a similar one before.

You're welcome! While Sumatra is famous for its bifurcated horn hilts, this type is none of those.

There are quite some bifurcated pommel types from Sulawesi, too (cp. Sumara); the more simple ones like this are quite rare though.

But the cross section with the very prominent spine I only know from very old Sulawesi blades.

Certainly antique IMHO. Anything before the 19th c. would need some more data to convince me...

An etch would need a good polish before and I still have a lot of blade polish jobs

I'd hesitate to give this blade a polish; a cleaning and a quick exploratory etch may do and look better than after a full polish.

Will let you know in case......

Thanks!


Regards,
Kai