Identification of an indonesian dagger

Bill M · 2nd July 2006, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nechesh

There is little question that the sheath is recent work, though the hilt obviously has some age to it, but it clearly looks like Indonesian work to me. I have never seen a European blade with this type of pamor work.....and why would Mr. Maisey, a man with half a century (sorry Alan, not trying to make you feel old

) of experience and exposure to Indonesian weaponry so clearly identify this weapon by name(s) if he wasn't familar with it? It is obviously something he is familiar with.

I agree with David and Alan. I have a tombak from Alan that is very smiliar in blade construction though the recent dress is more like a command baton. Personally, I trust Alan's description as being correct.

Henk · 2nd July 2006, 09:50 AM

Gentlemen,

I agree also with the members who agree with Alan. Although the remark has been made that it could be a rehilted european bayonet and that it was my first thought to, but the forging pattern doesn't match with a european manufactured bayonet. I've seen them in musea all over Europe but the steel is not forged in the way of mine example. Looking to the forging patterns I'm rather convinced it is a pamor blade.

kronckew · 2nd July 2006, 12:12 PM

saw this one while looking thru http://old.blades.free.fr/other_malay/batakdagger.htm , under 'other edged weapons'

sumatra, batak, cruciform or triangular blade?

Ki Jayamalelo · 3rd July 2006, 07:28 PM

Hello Henk,

you talk about "forging pattern" of your "dagger" but you must think this is an old bayonet of the 18 cent. This has been the first steps producing modern steel like cast steel. I think it was first Benjamin Huntsman who made the first crucible steel in 1742 in England. This dagger could be even older and could be in use by the British Troops in the time (1815) of Governor Raffles. For learning on manufacture of iron and steel the net has many information.

KJ

Rick · 3rd July 2006, 07:58 PM

I must ask ; why would the English wish to use crucible steel in a bayonet of all things when they had fine non crucible steel that was most likely easier to work , cheaper and tougher ?

I have in my hands right now a late 17th/early 18th century backsword blade English which is not crucible steel . If you melt an ingot of crucible steel for casting will it still retain any pattern or will it become homogenus ?

Tim Simmons · 3rd July 2006, 08:10 PM

I do not think this has anything to do with European/British steel or bayonet and blade forms. I think it has its origins in the spears from Indo/Persia and other Asian influences on Indonesia.

nechesh · 3rd July 2006, 09:24 PM

Hey Henk, is the hilt easily removable like on a keris. It might be educational to have a look at the tang.

Battara · 4th July 2006, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

I do not think this has anything to do with European/British steel or bayonet and blade forms. I think it has its origins in the spears from Indo/Persia and other Asian influences on Indonesia.

I'm inclined to agree with you Tim. Many India spearheads are like this. Trade perhaps? Not unheard of in this region.

3rd July 2006, 07:58 PM	#5
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	All Well and Fine ... But I must ask ; why would the English wish to use crucible steel in a bayonet of all things when they had fine non crucible steel that was most likely easier to work , cheaper and tougher ? I have in my hands right now a late 17th/early 18th century backsword blade English which is not crucible steel . If you melt an ingot of crucible steel for casting will it still retain any pattern or will it become homogenus ? Last edited by Rick; 3rd July 2006 at 08:13 PM.

2nd July 2006, 09:50 AM	#2
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Gentlemen, I agree also with the members who agree with Alan. Although the remark has been made that it could be a rehilted european bayonet and that it was my first thought to, but the forging pattern doesn't match with a european manufactured bayonet. I've seen them in musea all over Europe but the steel is not forged in the way of mine example. Looking to the forging patterns I'm rather convinced it is a pamor blade.

2nd July 2006, 12:12 PM	#3
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,224	saw this one while looking thru http://old.blades.free.fr/other_malay/batakdagger.htm , under 'other edged weapons' sumatra, batak, cruciform or triangular blade?

3rd July 2006, 07:28 PM	#4
Ki Jayamalelo Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 18	Hello Henk, you talk about "forging pattern" of your "dagger" but you must think this is an old bayonet of the 18 cent. This has been the first steps producing modern steel like cast steel. I think it was first Benjamin Huntsman who made the first crucible steel in 1742 in England. This dagger could be even older and could be in use by the British Troops in the time (1815) of Governor Raffles. For learning on manufacture of iron and steel the net has many information. KJ

3rd July 2006, 08:10 PM	#6
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,855	I do not think this has anything to do with European/British steel or bayonet and blade forms. I think it has its origins in the spears from Indo/Persia and other Asian influences on Indonesia.

3rd July 2006, 09:24 PM	#7
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Hey Henk, is the hilt easily removable like on a keris. It might be educational to have a look at the tang.