Dagger for Identification

Sajen · 15th February 2022, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

From the craftsmanship and attaching the tang with paper/textile, I'd guess this piece hails from the first half of the 20th century, possibly around WW2.

Hello Kai,

I am with Helleri here, the attachment of the hilt with paper or textile will be a repair.

Regards,
Detlef

A. G. Maisey · 15th February 2022, 08:40 PM

Kai & Detlef, gentlemen, the examples shown by Detlef do indeed have an overall appearance similar to the dagger that is the subject of this thread, however, perhaps you & I look at very different things:- to me this dagger of Jerseyman is very, very different to the examples you have shown.

The examples shown are well known and relatively common:- I have had a number of them over the years, and I think I still might have some, but to my eye, they vary strongly from JM's dagger.

In fact, I have seen custom made knives produced by makers in USA & Australia that resemble JM's dagger more closely than does the typical Sulawesi badik with the Beer Belly.

kai · 15th February 2022, 11:50 PM

G'day Alan,

Perhaps you could be a bit more specific which differences you feel have the strongest impact in your opinion?

Except for the wide fuller already discussed, the other unusual feature would be the choil.

OTOH, the other blades seem to be antique and I posit that this blade might well be younger.

Anyway, the fittings clearly support a Lompobattang origin... Any alternative suggestions?

Regards,
Kai

kai · 16th February 2022, 12:05 AM

Hello Detlef,

Quote:

I am with Helleri here, the attachment of the hilt with paper or textile will be a repair.

Not necessarily a repair; it could also point to an assembly at a period when these were not meant to be functional weapons anymore.

I was just mentioning it as a supporting indicator for a possible later date. (It certainly doesn't exclude a later period than suggested by me.)

Regards,
Kai

Sajen · 16th February 2022, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

Not necessarily a repair; it could also point to an assembly at a period when these were not meant to be functional weapons anymore.

Hello Kai,
They are still made as functional weapons I guess, I've seen 2006 a Bugis wearing a badik, near Makassar.

And I own a fairly recent example, well made but clearly used.

Regards,
Detlef

A. G. Maisey · 16th February 2022, 10:50 PM

Detlef, my first post was #5, what I wrote was this:-

"Yes, it has some characteristics of a badik, & I guess we need to call it a badik, but I've never seen even a photo of a badik that looks like this."

If others think it is a badik, and I cannot give a better name for it, I'm happy to call it badik.

But I'm equally happy to call it a "dagger" or anything else that two or more other people can agree on.

Sajen · 16th February 2022, 11:45 PM

Jep, still would call it badik and I think it's from Sulawesi. Someone will have had his own understandingo of how a badik has to look.

Regards,
Detlef

kai · 20th February 2022, 06:49 PM

Hello Detlef,

Quote:

They are still made as functional weapons I guess, I've seen 2006 a Bugis wearing a badik, near Makassar.

While the function as weapon never got retired, badik had the same function as keris in tanah Jawa. Thus, wearing a badik could have been due to many and possibly multiple reasons. Like for most people still carrying a knife every day nowadays, any possible weapon function is likely the least realized function (if ever)...

I was not implying that this badik got manufactured without any real use in mind. However, whenever the current tang attachment was chosen, I doubt that any heavy use (neither as tool nor as weapon) was intended. This may point to a later date but does not imply that other badik from the same period were not attached with some local sort of cutler's resin.

Regards,
Kai

A. G. Maisey · 21st February 2022, 07:59 AM

Kai, I've noted all your comments, it seems that I have not been particularly clear with my own comments.

I have no issue at all with whatever you or anybody else wishes to call this dagger, I have not offered a different name for it, and I will not offer one, as I have already said, I'll agree with any two people who wish to call it whatever they will. I have no stake in this, I really don't care what this dagger is called.

But the fact remains:- if it is to be called a badik, or perhaps somebody might like to call it a kawali, I have never seen a badik/kawali that looks like this dagger.

That is all I am saying.

No more, no less.

Everybody else can draw lines of similarity if they wish, I do not wish. But I'm not prepared to debate the matter. I'm offering an observation, just that.

However, there is one small matter that I must disagree with.

The badik/kawali does not & did not have the same function for the Bugis people as does & did the keris for the people of Jawa & Bali.

It has & had a similar function.

Am I splitting hairs?

No, not at all, the word "same" does mean the same as the word "similar".

15th February 2022, 08:40 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Kai & Detlef, gentlemen, the examples shown by Detlef do indeed have an overall appearance similar to the dagger that is the subject of this thread, however, perhaps you & I look at very different things:- to me this dagger of Jerseyman is very, very different to the examples you have shown. The examples shown are well known and relatively common:- I have had a number of them over the years, and I think I still might have some, but to my eye, they vary strongly from JM's dagger. In fact, I have seen custom made knives produced by makers in USA & Australia that resemble JM's dagger more closely than does the typical Sulawesi badik with the Beer Belly.

15th February 2022, 11:50 PM	#3
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	G'day Alan, Perhaps you could be a bit more specific which differences you feel have the strongest impact in your opinion? Except for the wide fuller already discussed, the other unusual feature would be the choil. OTOH, the other blades seem to be antique and I posit that this blade might well be younger. Anyway, the fittings clearly support a Lompobattang origin... Any alternative suggestions? Regards, Kai

16th February 2022, 10:50 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Detlef, my first post was #5, what I wrote was this:- "Yes, it has some characteristics of a badik, & I guess we need to call it a badik, but I've never seen even a photo of a badik that looks like this." If others think it is a badik, and I cannot give a better name for it, I'm happy to call it badik. But I'm equally happy to call it a "dagger" or anything else that two or more other people can agree on.

16th February 2022, 11:45 PM	#7
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,165	Jep, still would call it badik and I think it's from Sulawesi. Someone will have had his own understandingo of how a badik has to look. Regards, Detlef

21st February 2022, 07:59 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Kai, I've noted all your comments, it seems that I have not been particularly clear with my own comments. I have no issue at all with whatever you or anybody else wishes to call this dagger, I have not offered a different name for it, and I will not offer one, as I have already said, I'll agree with any two people who wish to call it whatever they will. I have no stake in this, I really don't care what this dagger is called. But the fact remains:- if it is to be called a badik, or perhaps somebody might like to call it a kawali, I have never seen a badik/kawali that looks like this dagger. That is all I am saying. No more, no less. Everybody else can draw lines of similarity if they wish, I do not wish. But I'm not prepared to debate the matter. I'm offering an observation, just that. However, there is one small matter that I must disagree with. The badik/kawali does not & did not have the same function for the Bugis people as does & did the keris for the people of Jawa & Bali. It has & had a similar function. Am I splitting hairs? No, not at all, the word "same" does mean the same as the word "similar".