Super mandau

[VVV]

Hi Lew,

I agree that the scabbard looks quite recent.
But I think that the parang on the link above is more related to this kind of non-documented Iban sword than the one on Artzi's site?
And the hilt form looks more like the rare kind shown in Iban Art pict.135 or Coppens page 73 (far right).

Michael

[Lew]

VVV

My point was that the sword on ebay was recently made so in my opinion it is a copy possibly for sale to the locals. I can't see spending that much money for a recent blade no matter how rare the style. How does one know if a local shop in that area just copied it from a photo in a book?

Lew

[ariel]

Quoting Michael:
"... I think that the parang on the link above is more related to this kind of non-documented Iban sword than the one on Artzi's site?
And the hilt form looks more like the rare kind shown in Iban Art pict.135 or Coppens page 73 (far right)."


Another one of my pseudophilosophical ramblings:
Why do we always try to pigeonhole every weapon into some predefined niche?
"This one is a Niabor, this one is a Jimpul, and that one is undefined or undocumented"

Do not get me wrong: it is important to know a correct name for many reasons, but these swords were made by hand, by illiterate village smiths who never belonged to trade guilds, had no manuals, no strict standards and no ethnographers standing behind their backs and ordering them to increase the angle just a bit to conform to Pic. X on Page Y in book Z.
Of course, every one of them had just a gestalt of what a mandau ( or anyrhing else) should look and just spiced it up from time to time with a crenellation here, a curlicue there and a recurve blade if he had a pariculatly good drink last evening.
The more we look at the swords, the more variability we find even within the same class. Not a miracle: it is an art first and foremost, and real art lets imagination run wild.
I just wonder what real head-hunting Dyaks from the 19th century would call this sword. Probably just "A Sword".

[VVV]

Originally Posted by ariel

Quoting Michael:
"... I think that the parang on the link above is more related to this kind of non-documented Iban sword than the one on Artzi's site?
And the hilt form looks more like the rare kind shown in Iban Art pict.135 or Coppens page 73 (far right)."


Another one of my pseudophilosophical ramblings:
Why do we always try to pigeonhole every weapon into some predefined niche?
"This one is a Niabor, this one is a Jimpul, and that one is undefined or undocumented"

Do not get me wrong: it is important to know a correct name for many reasons, but these swords were made by hand, by illiterate village smiths who never belonged to trade guilds, had no manuals, no strict standards and no ethnographers standing behind their backs and ordering them to increase the angle just a bit to conform to Pic. X on Page Y in book Z.
Of course, every one of them had just a gestalt of what a mandau ( or anyrhing else) should look and just spiced it up from time to time with a crenellation here, a curlicue there and a recurve blade if he had a pariculatly good drink last evening.
The more we look at the swords, the more variability we find even within the same class. Not a miracle: it is an art first and foremost, and real art lets imagination run wild.
I just wonder what real head-hunting Dyaks from the 19th century would call this sword. Probably just "A Sword".

The only reason for using collector terminology, like Jimpul and Niabor, is to be able to explain in one word what you are referring to and save space on this forum.

Non-documented f.i. means that it's not pictured in any of the books.

But I agree that a parang is a parang is a parang...


Michael

[asomotif]

Dear Lew,

A recent copy of this quality seems not likely to me.

But, as soon as they are offering them at a startprice of 0,99 from China I will certainly become very careful

[Bill M]

While I am not an expert in mandau, the buyer is. I think this is not a bad mandau.

[Lew]

[QUOTE=asomotif]Dear Lew,

A recent copy of this quality seems not likely to me.

Asomotif


By recent I mean the last 20 yrs or so. I just can't get by that new shellac look on the scabbard and the ultra new/clean red fabric with the pure white stitching it's screaming newly made at me. I usually have a good eye for detail when it comes to these things. It could be a marriage between an older hilt mid 20th century blade and a newly made scabbard


Lew

[Dajak]

Nice buy Michael it looks like an cross niabor /langai the name for such item I use seadajak sword or parang


Ben

[Mytribalworld]

[QUOTE=LOUIEBLADES]

Originally Posted by asomotif

Dear Lew,

A recent copy of this quality seems not likely to me.

Asomotif


By recent I mean the last 20 yrs or so. I just can't get by that new shellac look on the scabbard and the ultra new/clean red fabric with the pure white stitching it's screaming newly made at me. I usually have a good eye for detail when it comes to these things. It could be a marriage between an older hilt mid 20th century blade and a newly made scabbard


Lew

We should beware only see mandaus with a nice dark patina as really old only.
I have seen some museum collections which contains tribal art pieces with provenance that looks brand new made but where 100 years old!

Arjan.