Antique luzon blade need help in identifying

[chmorshuutz]

Originally Posted by bathala

I think that still this thesis should be taken with a grain of salt. As you can see with the templates both minasbad and sundang is in there. He might have not ben thorough or relied on second hand account that might have caused misunderstanding. Still for me I don't think the is a dahong bolo term. Bolo or itak would be sufficient. Besides bolo leaf does no make any sense.

Minsabad, I can understand, but Batangas is not far from Bicol so it's still possible. As for Sundang, it's not surprising, the term sundang is Tagalog as well. It's just that most people associate the term with Visayans and Bicolanos because they use it more frequently in those regions.

[bathala]

Originally Posted by chmorshuutz

Minsabad, I can understand, but Batangas is not far from Bicol so it's still possible. As for Sundang, it's not surprising, the term sundang is Tagalog as well. It's just that most people associate the term with Visayans and Bicolanos because they use it more frequently in those regions.

Maybe not in the realm of impossible. Actually there is a lot of profiles here that can be used for identification but it is still confusing if you look at it straightforward. If we go by this xasterix sword look more like the sundang than the" dahong bolo:

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by bathala

Maybe not in the realm of impossible. Actually there is a lot of profiles here that can be used for identification but it is still confusing if you look at it straightforward. If we go by this xasterix sword look more like the sundang than the" dahong bolo:

Sorry I couldn't see the pic. Your suggestion to salt-ify the document is noted, as I am always open to new and updated information. I guess that I prefer it as just my personal label, as I have no other term to call that particular profile. Thanks for your thoughts.

[bathala]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Sorry I couldn't see the pic. Your suggestion to salt-ify the document is noted, as I am always open to new and updated information. I guess that I prefer it as just my personal label, as I have no other term to call that particular profile. Thanks for your thoughts.

Thank you aswell. I learned too from this discussion. I was wondering about a dagger profile I encountered recently. This these best describe that blade profile. " Punto dyamante!

[algrennathan]

Just my take on this. Yes, his account give us an idea of blade typology or names during his time. But the question is, how accurate is the account? How credible is the author? Who was he? Was this peer reviewed? These questions arise cause the fact that it was only a thesis and not a published work makes this a bit sketchy.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by algrennathan

Just my take on this. Yes, his account give us an idea of blade typology or names during his time. But the question is, how accurate is the account? How credible is the author? Who was he? Was this peer reviewed? These questions arise cause the fact that it was only a thesis and not a published work makes this a bit sketchy.

Hi algrennathan,

I think that you will be searching long and hard to obtain many peer-reviewed/scientific publications that you are seeking. There are some American anthropological papers that are reasonably reputable, but these have problems too. What was observed in use by various ethnic groups were not necessarily of their own manufacture. For example, the account of Fox on the Negrito clans on Mt Pinatubo included various knives and swords that they acquired from Pampangan smiths. Also, the Tinguian in northern Luzon (see Faye Cooper-Cole's account) used some indigenous weapons but also knives and swords from the Ilokanos of Ilocos Norte.

The "name game" of trying to find specific indigenous names for a particular blade is often pretty fruitless because the same item can have many different names, depending on the local culture or preference. You will find many places in our Archives where discussions have highlighted different names for the same item, often with passionate arguments for various preferred names. Often there is no universally accurate descriptor for a particular blade, and to try to tease apart what it may be called among various social groups becomes difficult (even for those within the particular culture). A single blade form can have different names among different groups, and the same name can apply to different blade styles among different groups. When we translate many of the native terms, they often reduce to general descriptors, such as "knife" or "sword" in the original language, which is not very helpful. Consider, for example, itak, punal, sundang, bolo, talibong, espada, daga, etc.

Information on the local naming of blades is often so sparse that we are forced to take what we can get, imperfect as it may be.

[algrennathan]

Exactly. However what I am trying to get at is we don't know who Atienza is. If credible anthropologists already have errors in their work, more so for someone who has no credible background on a certain field. How can we trust such work to be accurate?

Originally Posted by Ian

Hi algrennathan,

I think that you will be searching long and hard to obtain many peer-reviewed/scientific publications that you are seeking. There are some American anthropological papers that are reasonably reputable, but these have problems too. What was observed in use by various ethnic groups were not necessarily of their own manufacture. For example, the account of Fox on the Negrito clans on Mt Pinatubo included various knives and swords that they acquired from Pampangan smiths. Also, the Tinguian in northern Luzon (see Faye Cooper-Cole's account) used some indigenous weapons but also knives and swords from the Ilokanos of Ilocos Norte.

The "name game" of trying to find specific indigenous names for a particular blade is often pretty fruitless because the same item can have many different names, depending on the local culture or preference. You will find many places in our Archives where discussions have highlighted different names for the same item, often with passionate arguments for various preferred names. Often there is no universally accurate descriptor for a particular blade, and to try to tease apart what it may be called among various social groups becomes difficult (even for those within the particular culture). A single blade form can have different names among different groups, and the same name can apply to different blade styles among different groups. When we translate many of the native terms, they often reduce to general descriptors, such as "knife" or "sword" in the original language, which is not very helpful. Consider, for example, itak, punal, sundang, bolo, talibong, espada, daga, etc.

Information on the local naming of blades is often so sparse that we are forced to take what we can get, imperfect as it may be.