What is the origen of Tibetan style Aceh blade forms?

[RhysMichael]

Originally Posted by josh stout

Is there any evidence that people consider the straight-backed saber older or more traditional than the Indian influenced sabers?
Josh

I have no idea on this one and yes Utami as our man on the ground overthere may have a better answer. I have not heard from him in a while but I have his e-mail on my computer at home and will send him a message trying to get him to peek in here. One thing to note the Indian influence may actually pre-date the Chinese influence.

It would also be great if Albert saw this I would love to know his take on it.

Originally Posted by kai

However, in the case of Aceh (or rather northern Sumatra including Aceh, Gayo, Alas, and several Batak groups) there are no such close links and we have to acknowledge that this is pure speculation at best. To illustrate this point, I could as well speculate that these blades originated in Sumatra, got introduced to China and spread from there.

We have to realize that sea trade routes connecting just about every island and coastal town from East Asia to Southeast Asia (and possibly beyond) are really old and probably predate the first sophisticated cultures with "international" influence like the Dong Son (originating from the northern Vietnam/Yunnan/Guangdong triangle - nothing to do with ethnic Han ). Thus, it would be more reasonable to assume that even bronze age cultures already had some knowledge about the main weapons of other ethnic groups rather assuming they were living in ignorance of each other until the days of any surviving chronicles.

I don't think any of us are ready to stand on the table and yell that this is the origin of the panjang yet. You are right that there is not enough evidence for it to be anything but speculation. Still thats often how things start, with speculation. And yes it could be the Indonesians introduced it to the Chinese. It could have been from earlier Buddhist or Hindu influece from India (Some references say Indian influence was found there as early as the 1st century AD and again according to Ethnic Groups of Insular Southeast Asia vol 1, Human Relations Area Files Press, New Haven,1972, pp. 15ff. at p.16: "Chinese sources dating from as early as 500 AD contain references to the Kingdom of Poli in North Sumatra, within the present bounds of Aceh, which apparently was ruled by Buddhists of Indian extraction." ) but there are no common Indian forms to this sword that I know of (of course what I know on Indian swords might fill a thimble). The common trade routes cause a big problem trying to trace things thats for sure. But others have documented Chinese influence on clothing and architecture in Aceh. If the panjang or a similar sword can be found to have been around much earlier that any examples I know of then it would strengthen the idea. The hairpin folding could be another clue of common ancestry or it could be related to the pattern welding seen on say ladieng or even an aberrrancy caused by a single smith or family of smiths. I've only seen a few bronze age swords. Does anyone know of any that vaguely resemble a panjang ? Its a good point thoughthat there may well be similarities between bronze age weapons. I'd be surprised if they did not know about the weapons of thier neighbors.

This all could be "convergent evolution", parrallel development or whatever else its called. It wouldn't be the first time similar sword forms had evolved independantly of each other. As I said a long way still from proof or anything definative, but certainly worth gathering more information if we can.

[RhysMichael]

OK this got me looking for a Buddhist connection between Aceh and Tibet and I found this.
From THE MYSTICAL WORLD OF INDONESIA, Allen Sievers, the John Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore and London, 1974
"Shri Vijaja on Sumatra was a centre of Buddhist
learning, attracting students from China and India, exporting texts
and exerting an influence on Tibet. "

Shri Vijaja (Shri Vijaya) was also prominent as a trading partner with China from the 7th cent. until it was conquered by the Javanese.

Still all very circumstantail and not proof of anything I know

[josh stout]

So far we seem to have three hypotheses.

First, the blade type may be descended from straight bladed Asian swords going back to the Bronze Age. This would be true in China and Tibet, but would need some archeology to support this in Aceh.

Second, the blade might have come through Chinese traders, possibly as part of the spread of Buddhism. This would date to the 12th or 13th centuries when the blade type was also spread to Japan. Buddhist iconography in the region and accounts of trade rutes with China make this plausible.

Third, the blade type may have been developed endogenously and simply represent the fact that there are only so many ways to make a sword.

These hypotheses are only verifiable through actually finding swords of the appropriate age. Even then, it would be difficult to tell if a bronze sword had a particular look due to a regional commonality of design or through a coincidence due to design constraints. Still, a parsimonious interpretation of a straight bronze sword would be that it was related to the similar swords in the area. So that would be the most conclusive finding. A 13th century depiction would help, but would not rule out the possibility of a still earlier origin. If there were an archeological record, a transition from one sword type to another would be diagnostic.

A recent endogenous origin should be the null hypothesis, but it is also the most difficult to verify. No matter how many recent examples are found, it does not preclude an earlier origin.

Now for some questions about less conclusive evidence: What is the name of these swords? I think they are called piso panjang or long knife. Is there a shorter version? Could there have once been one? The utility knives found throughout China, Mongolia, and Tibet as well as the tanto of Japan all look like short versions of the piso panjang. The knife blade form is just as old as the saber version if not older.

So yes, I am wildly speculating, but I think it is still in the region where the ideas are at least theoretically verifiable, even if practically they never are.
Josh

[RhysMichael]

Originally Posted by josh stout

Now for some questions about less conclusive evidence: What is the name of these swords? I think they are called piso panjang or long knife. Is there a shorter version? Could there have once been one? The utility knives found throughout China, Mongolia, and Tibet as well as the tanto of Japan all look like short versions of the piso panjang. The knife blade form is just as old as the saber version if not older.

So yes, I am wildly speculating, but I think it is still in the region where the ideas are at least theoretically verifiable, even if practically they never are.
Josh

Good Questions and I can only contribute a bit to the answers. I am sure others can add more

The names vary a great deal, as Kai pointed out there are a great many ethnic groups ( Aceh, Gayo, Alas, Batak, Tamiang, Aneuk Jamee, Kluet, Simeulue to name a few) in this area and most have a name for this sword. Sikin Panjang is the most common seen in western liturature on these swords. Sikin Panjang translates to Long Sikin or sometimes long knife. Sikin is sometimes spelled Sekin or Sikim or Sikkin. Panjang is sometimes spelled pandjang. But it is also called a Peudeung panjang, Thikin Panjang, Andar , Naru, Narumo, Gloepak Sikin, Gluepak Sikin, Loedjoe Aceh (Atjeh) and one dutch sorce had them listed as Sikin aus Gajo Luos. There may be others I do not know of. There is a shorter version of this sword called a Sikin Alang ( Loejoe Alang , Ludjoe or Ludju Alang). A similar blade shape is seen on a couple of knives from the area the sikin lapan sagu ( luju lapan sagi, piso lapan sagi, loedjoe lapan sagi) and the Lopah Petawaran ( Tombolata, Tordjong ).

As a side note glancing through Von Zonneveld's boot there are similar blades on 2 of the Balato's on page 29. this could be from the Aceh association with the Nias or not .

A good overview of Ancient Aceh acheological sites can be found here
http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs%5CAce...nielperret.pdf

[josh stout]

Thanks for the link. What a fascinating and largely unknown history Aceh has. The archeological work to date is preliminary at best, but it still shows wide ranging active trading activity. For this discussion it seems that the 13th C contact with China would be the place to focus as most of the earlier artifacts seem to be associated with South Indian/Sri Lankan sources. I don't think Indian swords ever had this form. But the influences seem so wide ranging including Persian and even a possible Roman artifact that without much more archeological work I don't think this question will be answered.
Josh