Some more pics


Ben

Very nice examples Ben,

I noticed that you don't have any examples with the Badouh (kutika) commonly seen on Parang Nabur?
Several of the 19th C examples in Juynboll have this talismanic inlay.
Is this just a coincidence or do you think it's an age indicator?
(Obviously the second example I show has less age than the first.)


Michael

Yes, I see what you mean...

This seems to be when the sword "changed" and the hilt became more bat like...

interesting....in Batangas a bolo is often called a "gulok."

Hi Michael I think it is not an age indicator because not al the seadayaks
are moslim I think whe have to look at the Handle style and blade style and the style off the handguard .
We have 3 different ones wood horn and Brass , don t forget that there also
Manadu's with brass handles .

Could there be flying sea-horse bats? :eek:

(You say tomato, I say potato? :shrug: )

You're right... I am madder than a hatter. But dude, if that's a bat... then I haven't seen one like that since the '60s man... that is one strange looking dude! :rolleyes:

The Philippines (ethnically) are about 90-95% Malay or Malay "mix"... so I ask, is there a possible connection through the people with a Malay sword? Is it possible that they may have had a Parang Nabur? Is it possible that they adopted this sword profile while making the sword their own? No one has come forward with any examples of this profile on any other Philippine sword.

If the issue is that all Parang Naburs come from Malay or Borneo… therefore, if it come out of the Philippines it can no longer be considered to be a Parang Nabur… I have no debate with that. I think I am in the same “vein” with Tom, that if taken at face value, this is a “bat head Parang Nabur.” The real “secret” is what did the locals call this sword? Indeed, it may have been called by a different name… but what should we call it until we discover the true name for this wonderful sword? And why?

Just to add to the hilt here is a remount of a Japanese bayonet that has the same type of hilt and was attributed to the Phillipines

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v9...4/DSCF0874.jpg

what about sonda? why you ask? coz that's the literal translation of the word 'bolo' in Bikolano.

It's a pity that the swords from Philippines aren't as well documented as those from Indonesia and Malaysia. Hopefully someone will continue the work of Cato on Moro Swords and also start to collect information about swords from the rest of the Philippines. Maybe then we could find out what this sword, as well as other Filipino swords, originally were called and in what region they were used.

On what inspired the creators of this sword, as well as what in the Western world among collectors is known as a "Parang Nabur", Tim answered it quite clear in his first comment of this sword:

"Yummy, how old is this. It looks as if there is a lot of European hanger influence. Tim"

This Filipino sword as well as the Borneo "Parang Nabur" and the Malay Regalia swords etc. are most likely all inspired by foreign sabres.
That means that the origin of these swords aren't indigenous Malay.

There are to many problems with trying to trace it to the Borneo variation of the foreign sabre. It's all based on a small mistake by Stone in 1934, that then has been quoted by other authors, museum curators and members of this forum, and suddenly a new term, and reference, is invented that actually never existed among the original users of the sword.

If you want to find out what is the specific inspiration for this local variation, which would be very interesting, I assume the best way would be to study the swords of foreign people visiting this area. Probably Spanish swords would be a good start?

Michael

Maybe the name Parang Nabur comes from the Seadayak parang Niabor
Because in the older days The Iban of the batang Lupar and Saribas in the olden days joined in their large war prahus on pitatical raids along the cost and up certain rivers.
Altough they probably never went out a very great ditance on the sea, by coasting they where able to attack numerous villages round the coast , and they owe their name of SEA DAYAKS to this practice.
The great PIRATICAL FORAYS were orginised by malays , who went for plunder, but they could always induce the Iban to accompany them on the promise that all the heads of the slain should fall to their share.

Don t forget that the Malay must have come to Borneo not lather than the early part off the 15 cht , as Brunei was a large and weahlty town in 1521 .
Probably the Malays came directly from the Malay Peninsula, but most have have mixed largely with the Kadayans, Melanaus and other coastal people.

This all can be read in headhunters from Alfred C Haddon .

So that s why some off these use the parang Nabur too but not whit the muslim indication s like the malay people did.

A picture off An Iban Pirate with an parang Nabur is maybe hard to get but we coul say that the same from the Parang pandat
show me an pic from an Land dayak with an parang pandat.

So till that time we have to believe stone till we can prove that it is not true
he write about the subject.


Junboyll has also some books about the philiphinne weapons

Ben

Hello Ben,

I must have missed these - could you please post the references? Thanks a lot!

Regards,
Kai

Katalog des Ethnographischen Reichsmuseums, vol. XX: PHILIPPINEN.
JUYNBOLL, H.H.,
Bookseller: Antiquarianbooksellers GEMILANG
(BREDEVOORT, 0, Netherlands) [Convert Currency]
Quantity: 1 Shipping within Netherlands:
US$ 5.12 (EUR 4.00)
[Rates & Speeds]
Book Description: philippines ethnographica anthropology museum collection reichsmuseum leyden katalog collection. Leiden, Brill, 1928. Large 8 , original wraps. (xviii), 168pp. Numerous ills. on 12 fine plates o.o.t., indexes, registers. Important catalogue describing the Philippine-art collection of the Leyden Ethnogr. Museum. Plates depicting a.o.: basket-work, weavings, arms & armour, woodcarvings, bronze implements, household pieces, dress. Unopened copy, good. One of the rarest issues in the series (tog. 23 vols. publ.). Bookseller Inventory # 9616


Hi Kai von der Molukken ist da auch was von Juynboll auch in deutsch

Ben

Kai,

I have Juynboll's book on Philippines but unfortunately it only covers the weapons in the Leiden museum. This means that most of them are from Sulu, Mindanao (a lot of Bagobo) and some from North Luzon. And only a handful of swords collected in the region around Manila. No blades from South Luzon and the Visayas.
It's quite thin compared to f.i. Borneo and unfortunately not as useful. :(

Ben,

I have the second edition of Stone's book and in the beginning you can read about him and his life.
Stone was clearly a remarkable man and his work was of high value when he published it and it still is today.
But unlike Haddon, who based his book on his expedition to Borneo in 1898-1899, Stone actually never visited the island.
His descriptions of f.i. Borneo weapons are based on the litterature that is listed in the end of the book. This means that he only had a small percentage of all the information we have today about Borneo weapons to base his book on. And no Internet!
To list all weapons in all times is an impressive task and I find it very surprising that there are so few errors in his work based on the above.

On the Parang Nabur he writes the source of his description openly for the readers to double check.
Which I have quoted so everybody can make their own opinion and contribute to the discussion.

In f.i. Leiden there are 25+ "Parang Nabur" with credible collection notes and collected in SE Borneo.
None that has been collected in NW Borneo!
Of course there is a bias because North Borneo was British and the rest was Dutch at that time. But there are also weapons in the huge Leiden collection, like the Niabor, collected in Sarawak.
Also don't you find it strange that there are no references to this sword in f.i. Shelford, Evans, Brooke etc. where you can find all the other weapons of the inhabitants of the old British part of Borneo?
Why don't we see it in any of the Iban books that has been published after Stone?
I find it quite probable that the authors of those has tried really hard to find this "Sea-Dayak sword" as described in Stone. But it seems as if all of them failed for a reason...

Why?

I think the only conclusion must be that the weapon wasn't in use in that region?

So Ben here is the "Parang Nabur" challenge:

There are 25+ "Parang Nabur" from SE Borneo with collection notes in Leiden alone.
Show me 5 "Parang Nabur" (only 20% of the amount in Juynboll) with proper scientific collection notes originating from Sarawak and a proven age of at least 100 years (no new tourist copies).
If so you will be the new owner of my 114 cm "Parang Nabur". :)
If you can't do it who can? ;)

Michael

Hey Spunjer... how about Parang Sonda? :rolleyes:

(or is that a double positive? :D :D :D )

just start already to make a package Saribas where the pirate s are is north borneo

there is north sarawak dutch say north borneo for them

and north borneo that is british borneo british south borneo is dutch north borneo

so did get the stuf that is in leiden taken from dutch or english people

Don t forget that we are talking about 1850 and not the late 1900

Look at the pic off an iban warrior from 1959
look at the weapon he have

Ben

Hi Michael
Another pic 2 ibans have these weapons
does it make this an seadayak sword or a weapon that seadayaks sometimes use


Ben

Thanks for the interesting pictures.

It's hard to see the weapons but to me it looks like the regular Iban Pedang (the sword that resembles the Piso Podang that we have discussed several times before)?
It's not the sword we discussed.

And don't try to confuse us with North and South. ;)
The specified region is Sarawak, where you find the Sea Dayaks.

Please try harder.

Michael

Hi Michael take a look in the book ling rothpage 135

Yes, that's the quote I posted before and the source of Stone???

It's obviously an alternative spelling of the Iban parang aka Niabor, Njabor or Nyabor.
The genuine and old war sword of the Sea-Dayak (see Shelford etc.).
Maybe you could share a picture of it for this thread as a reference because, as you know, I don't have one myself yet?

Michael

http://old.blades.free.fr/swords/day...ayak_intro.htm


Over here you can look at the parang niabor I think they make an langueage
mistake

Here they talk about parang pedang but is an parang nabur but look it proves that the dayaks also used it

Yes,

In a way it's another language semi-mistake.
This is once again the Iban (parang) Pedang.
Described as having cross guard, not D-guard, and hollow at the hilt etc.
It seems that because Ling Roth puts parang in front of all the names earlier known from other sources it get's confusing.

Can we agree that it's all based on a misunderstanding by Stone, because of what Ling Roth wrote and that Ling Roth didn't show pictures of the swords he describes?

Michael

Hi Michael yes the problem is that if someone make s a mistake it will show
up in the later books The weapon as he discribes is an parang niabor with the rings and handle
and you can also hold it with 2 hands

Henry ling roth is talking german handle swords this could be the nabur

the parang pedang is an borneo sword and not an pirate sword

The problem with the pirates is that they not easy to talk with and the moment you see them you sail away or you never can tell what happend

And that we don t have pics people carrying them ling roth discribe the parang pandat as an seadayak sword and this could be true because landdayak have an different type

Ben

Hi Ben,

It seems as if you agree that the Parang Nabur as described in Stone is wrong?
He misunderstood Ling Roth's description of the Sea Dayak (parang) Niabor and put the "corrupted" name on another kind of sword from another region of Borneo?

Michael

Hi Michael yes he discribes the sword that I show the pics off we now that one as piso podang with the bataks see the pics

The parang pedang is an total different sword you have 2 by yourself
the one I have date before 1820 and one that you have too

Ben

So where do we decide this comes from?
 

PI? Borneo?

Michael, we are a bit alike.....

And this one also?
 

Parang Nabur?

Hi Bill,

Nice swords. I think you will find all the views of the forumites in this thread to form your own opinion on this debated issue.

Michael

Hi Bill,

Great swords!!! :) (Let me know if you get tired of them) ;)

If these blades come from the PI (which I am inclined to believe they do), it seems that we can not come to a consensus on a name. I am not sure that we have agreed that they come from the PI.

If you look around a bit… rightly or wrongly, this sword “type”… in fact these very swords are universally referred to as being a Parang Nabur. It would seem to me, that no matter what we decide here, the label of Parang Nabur will still be out there for some time to come… even if a more correct name is found and applied.


Best regards,

Wayne

Hey there..

It seems I have a sword very much like this... This is the first time in 30 years I've seen a photo of another.
Can anybody give me idea how much it would sell for?

I wish I had the scabbard!

thanks!

I was very happy to find this thread.. it looks like I have somthing similiar.

where can I get more information?

How old?
uses? Ceremonial?
worth?

thanks

Comiso90,

Forum rules do not allow us to ask prices on this Forum. Since you are new, it will be forgiven and understood.

Tried to PM you with some info, but you are not enabled to receive. Suggest that you privately email or PM people who have swords like this for more information.

Indeed, no great sin to have asked, as the established members know just to not answer, but please read the posting rules and guidelines at the top of the forum.

Mark
Vikingsword Staff

sorry... didnt realize..

I'm just happy to find people that recognize it!

Nabor or Visayan Bolo
 

Erik Farrow lead me to this site so I could get more info and replies from some experts in this field. Pictures of my fathers sword are attached. Comments and contact will be appreciated.

Thanks,
Dan.

Philippine sword...
 

Erik Farrow advised me on this sword that my dad has had since the early 60's. He says it has been incorrectly labeled as being from Sea Dayak. He also lead me to this site so I could get some comments from the experts. Any info. you can share with me is very much appreciated. I nor my dad are big collectors, however he was given this sword by an employer when he was very young and he's had it displayed on our wall at home. Also I'm not sure if I have been adding the photos correctly. Can anyone help?

Thank you,
Dan

Seems as though I could attach photos.
 

Here are a few more.

Hello Dan,

Yours is a very nice variation of the same Luzon swords as in this thread.
You can find all the information we have on it at the moment here and also in this thread.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...?t=1792&page=3

If you ever get tired of it... ;)

Michael