Iranun panabas for comment

[xasterix]

Would like to get feedback/comments (and posts of similar samples, if possible) on a double-edged panabas that matches the illustration and features attributed by Warren (2002) to 1840s Iranun weapons. The hilt measures 11in, the blade 20in; it's 31in overall.

The blade is thin and light. Half of the blade (approximately where the spine filework begins) is highly flexible and really sharp. It reminds me of the blades of pre-1900 kampilans. The spine that started tapering near the filework ends very thin (it's thinner than shown in my picture because the perspective is bent a little to the side; the actual spine is even thinner).

This will surely bend if it cuts through hard targets. It's definitely not made to hit any type of armor, nor accomplish any utility task. In contrast, early 1900s-preWW2 samples (the hockey stick-like ones) are tanky, hefty, and have non-flexible blades.

There are signs of later-era repairs and modifications (pins, aluminum bolsters, and silver inlay in the blade holes). The aluminum bolsters are covering up cracks on the wooden hilt. The pins seem to go all the way through the tang.

The blade is laminated, I just haven't been able to etch it properly yet. TIA for your thoughts.

[Rick]

I see what you mean by thin Xas.
If we look at the Iranun kampilan it too had a very thin blade but it seemed to work in practice for them at least against unarmored people.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Rick

I see what you mean by thin Xas.
If we look at the Iranun kampilan it too had a very thin blade but it seemed to work in practice for them at least against unarmored people.

Agreed Rick, both the Iranun kampilan and panabas would deliver deep flesh wounds, probably even crippling injury if struck on certain fleshy body parts. In my tests it can possibly cleave through bone, but the weapon would surely get bent or even chipped as a result.

The nice thing about these flexible blades is that they can be bent back. I'm sure there's a limit as to how many times they can be straightened again though.

[Battara]

I'm confused though - why so thin?

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Battara

I'm confused though - why so thin?

IMHO the reasons for the thin blade are the following:

1. With the right heat treatment, thin blades can become flexible yet retain a hardened edge.

2. Thin blades are light to carry, and nimble when used.

3. Thin blades can easily be sharpened (as compared to thicker blades) to have a 20-30 degree edge angle, allowing them to become super-sharp.

4. Thin and flexible blades are much less likely to chip or crack during battle, since they aren't brittle. Even though they may bend, they can be straightened up again.

5. It's easier to integrate an upper edge to a thin blade. As an additional note- the "teeth" filework on the spine are also very sharp!

I believe the purpose of this panabas type is not to cleave (although it can, under a skilled wielder). It's a very efficient slicer due to the blade build. The same goes for kampilan with thin and flexible blades, notably the Iranun ones.

[kronckew]

It does seem to have a lot of distal taper. Cool sword!