Moro / Borneo hybrid ?

Royston · 10th August 2008, 03:13 PM

Another oddity from my collection.

This one has puzzled me for a long time and I hope that someone will come up with an explanation as to what it is.
I have never seen this seemingly Barong / Parang Nabor combination before.

The hilt looks real and has some age. The blade looks as though it has been there for a long time, see the photo showing the blade / hilt point of attachement.
I am not convinced that the blade is as old as the hilt.
The scabbard is definitely a lot more recent.

I am looking for an opinion as the whether it is a known weapon, a hybrid or something that someone " Threw" together on a wet Sunday afternoon.
( Do I hear the word Souvenir ?

)

As usual, all comments welcome.

Regards
Royston

Battara · 10th August 2008, 07:39 PM

I see what you mean - looks like an Indonesian blade with a form of Yakan barong hilt.

Interesting.

Another possibility is Borneo where there are Moros also and lots of mixing as well......

Dajak · 11th August 2008, 08:48 AM

This is the blade off the langai tingal

Is it possible to take off the Handle ???

Ben

VVV · 11th August 2008, 10:30 AM

Interesting one of a kind sword.
NW Borneo seems a probable origin based on the different influences.
What is strange is that except Iban/Sea Dayak (Langgai Tinggang blade) and Moro (Barong hilt) it also has (Borneo) Malay motifs on the blade?
So 3 different ethnic groups merged in one sword!

A wild guess would be that it belonged to an Iban Dayak who went on raids together with Moros and then later converted to Islam (which made him change the hilt and add the motifs to his blade)

Michael

Royston · 11th August 2008, 03:03 PM

Thanks Gentlemen, this has given me something to work on.

Ben, the handle is firmly fixed, it would need hard hammer blows to get it off. I think I will leave it as it is.

VVV
A wild guess would be that it belonged to an Iban Dayak who went on raids together with Moros and then later converted to Islam (which made him change the hilt and add the motifs to his blade)

Michael, Amazing powers of deduction.
Er, can you tell me what his name was ?

thanks again

Royston

Rick · 11th August 2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Royston

A wild guess would be that it belonged to an Iban Dayak who went on raids together with Moros and then later converted to Islam (which made him change the hilt and add the motifs to his blade)

Michael, Amazing powers of deduction.
Er, can you tell me what his name was ?

thanks again

Royston

Umm, before or after he converted ??

Seriously though; heating the blade may render it removable from the hilt .

P.Abrera · 11th August 2008, 05:01 PM

What leads/clues are we looking for if the handle can be removed?

VANDOO · 11th August 2008, 06:24 PM

SEVERAL YEARS AGO I BOUGHT A COLLECTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE SWORDS. THERE WAS ONE SWORD REFERED TO AS A GAYONG THAT HAD A MANDAU STYLE HANDLE. YOUR SWORD REMINDS ME OF THE EXAMPLES IN THAT COLLECTION WHICH WAS COLLECTED IN 1944 THRU 1946 IN MINDANAO.
SEARCH IN THE OLD FORUMS UNDER TOPICS , "VANDOO'S MORO PIECES" (GAYONG) IS THE DAYAK LIKE SWORD, POSTED 6-20-2002 BY RICK, UNFORTUNATELY THE PICTURES ON SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS IN THE COLLECTION ARE GONE BUT THE INFORMATION IS STILL THERE AND THE PICTURES OF THE GAYONG ARE STILL THERE. YOUR SWORD MAY HAVE SIMULAR ORGINS TO THE ONES IN THIS COLLECTION. A VERY NICE SWORD.

AS TO REMOVING THE HANDLE THE ONLY THING THAT COULD BE LEARNED FROM THAT IS IF THE BLADE IS OLDER OR NEWER THAN THE HANDLE. THE BLADE LOOKS VERY CLEAN AND IF THE TANG IS AS CLEAN I WOULD SUSPECT THE BLADE AND FITTINGS WERE MADE AT THE SAME TIME. THE ITEMS IN MY COLLECTION MENTIONED ABOVE DO NOT SHOW MUCH WEAR AND MOST OF THEM NEVER SAW ANY USE AND THE BLADES WERE MADE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE FITTINGS. THE MANDAU HANDLE DOSEN'T SHOW MUCH USE BUT WAS NOT MADE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE BLADE AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. MOST OF THE ITEMS IN THE COLLECTION DUE TO THE PROVENANCE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE ANY LATER THAN 1946 AND WERE PROBABLY MADE A BIT BEFORE THAT, BUT ARE LIKE NEW AS THEY WERE STORED VERY WELL.

kino · 12th August 2008, 01:58 AM

Yakan..yes, but not necessarily a Barung, maybe orginally it could have been mounted on a................................

VVV · 12th August 2008, 09:24 AM

Thanks for posting the Pira Kino. It's good to be reminded about that not everything always has to be "by the book".

I had a look at the old post of Gayong and strange Moro weapons etc.
Is there any possibility to republish those pictures again on the forum, PLEASE?
A Gayang in Sabah is like a mandau/ilang but with a flat blade.
They were also produced on Borneo but not with the kind of blade shape like the one posted in the old thread.

On removing the handle there could of course be a commercial reason as well...

Michael

Battara · 13th August 2008, 02:20 AM

Thanks Kino, I plain forgot......

Dajak · 13th August 2008, 06:43 AM

Langai tingal is an Iban sword so blade is Iban

But to see if it is old need to be the Handle off

If the Handle is off I can see if it is old style or newly made
that s why I ask can the handle off .

Ben

Royston · 13th August 2008, 12:10 PM

Ben,

I will be back home soon and I will attempt to take the handle off. I'll let you know the outcome.

Royston

Royston · 14th August 2008, 04:03 PM

Ben

So far I have had no success getting the hilt off. I tried with a hot air gun on the blade near to the hilt and gentle tapping. Anyone got any better ideas?

I am now getting even more confused with the Borneo swords. The only real difference I can see between the first one that Ben calls a Langgai Tinggal and the Parang Nabur that is shown here is the Krowit.
Is this correct ?

I have looked through several of the old threads on this subject and still cannot differentiate between Langgai Tinggal, Jimpal and Parang Naibor.

Can anyone enlighten me further.

Regards
Royston

Battara · 15th August 2008, 07:09 PM

I have been told that this is Filipino, Batangas.

Nice upper rank piece - best of this I have seen with all that silver...

VVV · 16th August 2008, 09:12 AM

Here is a good summary of Shelford's classification of Dayak parang based on his research in Sarawak.
http://old.blades.free.fr/swords/day...ayak_intro.htm
There are however some mistakes in the tribe column but otherwise it's good to use for separating the different dayak parang.
The, so called, Parang Nabur sword of Stone's is an error based on a misreading of a description of a (Parang) Nyabor. That's the reason why neither that sword, nor the kampilan (also an error in Stone's as it's not a dayak sword), is among the swords in Shelford's classification.
Yours is from Philippines, not Borneo, as Jose brought up. And a top piece!

Michael

PS If you want more information on this it's all in the forum archives.

Battara · 16th August 2008, 05:58 PM

VVV, actually there may be a type of kampilan that was used by Illanum migrants in Borneo, also shown in Zonneveld.

VVV · 16th August 2008, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

VVV, actually there may be a type of kampilan that was used by Illanum migrants in Borneo, also shown in Zonneveld.

Of course there was. I have never doubted that the kampilan was used, and produced, in Borneo, Sulawesi and Timor among the Illanum migrants. There are a lot of evidence for that. But none for the kampilan being a Sea Dayak sword. Illanums are neither Sea Dayaks nor any other kind of Dayaks.
Shelford specifically classifies the Dayak parang in Sarawak. Not for instance the Moro swords or swords from other ethnic groups.

Michael

Maurice · 16th August 2008, 07:44 PM

Is there a good book which tells more about the Illanums? I find very little about them in the books I have, but I am very interested to learn more about them.

Regards,
Maurice

Battara · 17th August 2008, 03:52 AM

VVV, I now understand your point better - focus on the Sea Dayaks. Is it possible that they got kampilans from the Illanums?

Maurice, Illanums are a Moro tribe also known as the Maranao. At one time they ruled the seas as well as the northern part of Mindanao.

VVV · 17th August 2008, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

VVV, I now understand your point better - focus on the Sea Dayaks. Is it possible that they got kampilans from the Illanums?
[snip]

I have never seen pictures, or seen any other evidence, of that the kampilan ever was used by the Sea Dayaks. I assume that Stone mixed up the Illanums with the Sea Dayaks as both of them were pirates and sometimes sailed together. You have to remember that Stone never visited Borneo and his book is a summary of other books and articles at that time. Most often they didn't have a lot of pictures so that's why it was easy to mix up weapons based on written descriptions only. So you have to check his sources if something sounds strange in his descriptions or classifications.

Michael

Dajak · 17th August 2008, 09:35 AM

The same for the kampilan as we now it has no evidence that the type that Stone suggest come from the philipine .

The story goes that this type has indonesian origen and found in Celebes or Timor .

And don't forget even Shelford s is not complete he forgot to mention the parang sankit .

Ben

Battara · 17th August 2008, 07:03 PM

So then the other sources that Zonneveld used are also wrong and the kampilan is strictly a Moro weapon - is this right? (just trying to understand)

VVV · 17th August 2008, 08:51 PM

Shelford says he doesn't deal with the kampilan in his article as it's strictly an Illanum weapon.
Foy I think also describes it as an Illanum weapon but I am not 100% sure as I don't have it at the moment.
Forman (is Solc as Forman was only the designer of the book) is full of mistakes so he is not in the same league as the other sources.
Hein's examples are collected by Sonne among the Sun-Dayaks (=Dusun, related to Illanums).
He later writes, based on Foy, that they might originally come from the Philippines.
So to me it seems that Stone is the only one of van Zonneveld's sources that attributes it to the Sea Dayaks.
But Albert now and then follow this forum so maybe he would like to bring in new information on this?

Michael

10th August 2008, 03:13 PM	#1
Royston Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Poole England Posts: 441	Moro / Borneo hybrid ? Another oddity from my collection. This one has puzzled me for a long time and I hope that someone will come up with an explanation as to what it is. I have never seen this seemingly Barong / Parang Nabor combination before. The hilt looks real and has some age. The blade looks as though it has been there for a long time, see the photo showing the blade / hilt point of attachement. I am not convinced that the blade is as old as the hilt. The scabbard is definitely a lot more recent. I am looking for an opinion as the whether it is a known weapon, a hybrid or something that someone " Threw" together on a wet Sunday afternoon. ( Do I hear the word Souvenir ? ) As usual, all comments welcome. Regards Royston Attached Images

11th August 2008, 06:24 PM	#8
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	SEVERAL YEARS AGO I BOUGHT A COLLECTION OF VARIOUS PHILIPPINE SWORDS. THERE WAS ONE SWORD REFERED TO AS A GAYONG THAT HAD A MANDAU STYLE HANDLE. YOUR SWORD REMINDS ME OF THE EXAMPLES IN THAT COLLECTION WHICH WAS COLLECTED IN 1944 THRU 1946 IN MINDANAO. SEARCH IN THE OLD FORUMS UNDER TOPICS , "VANDOO'S MORO PIECES" (GAYONG) IS THE DAYAK LIKE SWORD, POSTED 6-20-2002 BY RICK, UNFORTUNATELY THE PICTURES ON SOME OF THE OTHER ITEMS IN THE COLLECTION ARE GONE BUT THE INFORMATION IS STILL THERE AND THE PICTURES OF THE GAYONG ARE STILL THERE. YOUR SWORD MAY HAVE SIMULAR ORGINS TO THE ONES IN THIS COLLECTION. A VERY NICE SWORD. AS TO REMOVING THE HANDLE THE ONLY THING THAT COULD BE LEARNED FROM THAT IS IF THE BLADE IS OLDER OR NEWER THAN THE HANDLE. THE BLADE LOOKS VERY CLEAN AND IF THE TANG IS AS CLEAN I WOULD SUSPECT THE BLADE AND FITTINGS WERE MADE AT THE SAME TIME. THE ITEMS IN MY COLLECTION MENTIONED ABOVE DO NOT SHOW MUCH WEAR AND MOST OF THEM NEVER SAW ANY USE AND THE BLADES WERE MADE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE FITTINGS. THE MANDAU HANDLE DOSEN'T SHOW MUCH USE BUT WAS NOT MADE AT THE SAME TIME AS THE BLADE AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. MOST OF THE ITEMS IN THE COLLECTION DUE TO THE PROVENANCE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE ANY LATER THAN 1946 AND WERE PROBABLY MADE A BIT BEFORE THAT, BUT ARE LIKE NEW AS THEY WERE STORED VERY WELL. Last edited by VANDOO; 11th August 2008 at 06:44 PM.

12th August 2008, 01:58 AM	#9
kino Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 973	Yakan..yes, but not necessarily a Barung, maybe orginally it could have been mounted on a................................ Attached Images

14th August 2008, 04:03 PM	#14
Royston Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Poole England Posts: 441	NEW PHOTOS AND QUESTION ON THIS ONE Ben So far I have had no success getting the hilt off. I tried with a hot air gun on the blade near to the hilt and gentle tapping. Anyone got any better ideas? I am now getting even more confused with the Borneo swords. The only real difference I can see between the first one that Ben calls a Langgai Tinggal and the Parang Nabur that is shown here is the Krowit. Is this correct ? I have looked through several of the old threads on this subject and still cannot differentiate between Langgai Tinggal, Jimpal and Parang Naibor. Can anyone enlighten me further. Regards Royston Attached Images

10th August 2008, 07:39 PM	#2
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	I see what you mean - looks like an Indonesian blade with a form of Yakan barong hilt. Interesting. Another possibility is Borneo where there are Moros also and lots of mixing as well......

11th August 2008, 08:48 AM	#3
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	This is the blade off the langai tingal Is it possible to take off the Handle ??? Ben

11th August 2008, 10:30 AM	#4
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Interesting one of a kind sword. NW Borneo seems a probable origin based on the different influences. What is strange is that except Iban/Sea Dayak (Langgai Tinggang blade) and Moro (Barong hilt) it also has (Borneo) Malay motifs on the blade? So 3 different ethnic groups merged in one sword! A wild guess would be that it belonged to an Iban Dayak who went on raids together with Moros and then later converted to Islam (which made him change the hilt and add the motifs to his blade) Michael

11th August 2008, 03:03 PM	#5
Royston Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Poole England Posts: 441	Thanks Gentlemen, this has given me something to work on. Ben, the handle is firmly fixed, it would need hard hammer blows to get it off. I think I will leave it as it is. VVV A wild guess would be that it belonged to an Iban Dayak who went on raids together with Moros and then later converted to Islam (which made him change the hilt and add the motifs to his blade) Michael, Amazing powers of deduction. Er, can you tell me what his name was ? thanks again Royston

11th August 2008, 05:01 PM	#7
P.Abrera Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 20	What leads/clues are we looking for if the handle can be removed?

12th August 2008, 09:24 AM	#10
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Thanks for posting the Pira Kino. It's good to be reminded about that not everything always has to be "by the book". I had a look at the old post of Gayong and strange Moro weapons etc. Is there any possibility to republish those pictures again on the forum, PLEASE? A Gayang in Sabah is like a mandau/ilang but with a flat blade. They were also produced on Borneo but not with the kind of blade shape like the one posted in the old thread. On removing the handle there could of course be a commercial reason as well... Michael

13th August 2008, 02:20 AM	#11
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	Thanks Kino, I plain forgot......

13th August 2008, 06:43 AM	#12
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	Langai tingal is an Iban sword so blade is Iban But to see if it is old need to be the Handle off If the Handle is off I can see if it is old style or newly made that s why I ask can the handle off . Ben

13th August 2008, 12:10 PM	#13
Royston Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Poole England Posts: 441	Ben, I will be back home soon and I will attempt to take the handle off. I'll let you know the outcome. Royston

15th August 2008, 07:09 PM	#15
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	I have been told that this is Filipino, Batangas. Nice upper rank piece - best of this I have seen with all that silver...

16th August 2008, 09:12 AM	#16
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Here is a good summary of Shelford's classification of Dayak parang based on his research in Sarawak. http://old.blades.free.fr/swords/day...ayak_intro.htm There are however some mistakes in the tribe column but otherwise it's good to use for separating the different dayak parang. The, so called, Parang Nabur sword of Stone's is an error based on a misreading of a description of a (Parang) Nyabor. That's the reason why neither that sword, nor the kampilan (also an error in Stone's as it's not a dayak sword), is among the swords in Shelford's classification. Yours is from Philippines, not Borneo, as Jose brought up. And a top piece! Michael PS If you want more information on this it's all in the forum archives.

16th August 2008, 05:58 PM	#17
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	VVV, actually there may be a type of kampilan that was used by Illanum migrants in Borneo, also shown in Zonneveld.

16th August 2008, 07:44 PM	#19
Maurice Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,324	Is there a good book which tells more about the Illanums? I find very little about them in the books I have, but I am very interested to learn more about them. Regards, Maurice

17th August 2008, 03:52 AM	#20
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	VVV, I now understand your point better - focus on the Sea Dayaks. Is it possible that they got kampilans from the Illanums? Maurice, Illanums are a Moro tribe also known as the Maranao. At one time they ruled the seas as well as the northern part of Mindanao.

17th August 2008, 09:35 AM	#22
Dajak Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 951	The same for the kampilan as we now it has no evidence that the type that Stone suggest come from the philipine . The story goes that this type has indonesian origen and found in Celebes or Timor . And don't forget even Shelford s is not complete he forgot to mention the parang sankit . Ben

17th August 2008, 07:03 PM	#23
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	So then the other sources that Zonneveld used are also wrong and the kampilan is strictly a Moro weapon - is this right? (just trying to understand)

17th August 2008, 08:51 PM	#24
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Shelford says he doesn't deal with the kampilan in his article as it's strictly an Illanum weapon. Foy I think also describes it as an Illanum weapon but I am not 100% sure as I don't have it at the moment. Forman (is Solc as Forman was only the designer of the book) is full of mistakes so he is not in the same league as the other sources. Hein's examples are collected by Sonne among the Sun-Dayaks (=Dusun, related to Illanums). He later writes, based on Foy, that they might originally come from the Philippines. So to me it seems that Stone is the only one of van Zonneveld's sources that attributes it to the Sea Dayaks. But Albert now and then follow this forum so maybe he would like to bring in new information on this? Michael