Identification of an indonesian dagger
 

Bought recently this dagger. The triangular blade is forged, probably a pamor blade. At the base a very small mark that looks like a N and an A. The wooden scabbard is covered with silver. Ivory hilt and copper hilt knob.
Any comments are very welcome.

The decorative pommel cap reminds me of Indian jewelery. I will post an example.

I know there is a great deal of Indian influence in Indonesia so the metalwork on this bangle might also be typical in Indonesia. An area of artifacts I have not spent time observing. Even so the similarity is quite striking.

It looks like a rehilted bayonet blade?
I have seen a rehilted bayonet in Madurese dress before, like a Keris.

Michael

In Central Jawa this blade form is known as a "sangkuh"; in East Jawa it is known as "buntut mimi".

The silver work in the pommel cap is similar to some work currently being done in Kota Gede.

Some of this type of silver work is also still being done in the southern Philippines. I agree with the bayonet observation.

Tim,

Thanks for your pictures of the indian jewelry. It has similarities indeed. I think you can find this in the whole area. India, Philipines and Indonesia.

Michael and Battara,

It was my first thought too when I saw the blade. A rehilted bayonet. But bayonets are as far as I know of plain steel and smooth. This blade is hand forged.

AG Maisey,

Thanks for naming this dagger. I looked in my books and found in Stone on page 538: SANGU A Central Indian spear made entirely of steel. It has a long triangular or quadrangular head.

You speak of "sangkuh" in Central Java and "buntut mimi" in East Java. Did those spearheads came from India to Java or where these spearheads made by empu's after their Indian brother's and mounted as a tombak?

Looks like Tim was right then with his Indian shot.

In Jawa I have never seen them mounted as spearheads. They are usually mounted in dress that is reminiscent of a command baton. I have seen one in very old dress that was mounted as a keris.I do not believe they have ever been mounted as a tombak in Jawa.

I do not think there is any Indian connection with the Javanese pieces. They have always reminded me of an old European bayonet pattern, and this may have been their origin, but I have not seen or owned any that were of European manufacture. All I have handled have been of Indonesian manufacture.

Would it be possible for you to provide clear close-ups of the metal scabbard cover. Do you know if this is silver, silver plate, or an alloy, such as mamas?

Hey Alan, do you have any idea as to the purpose of these blades. Was it meant as a functional weapon or was it more ceremonial ritualistic. I suppose that on the practical side that triangular blade would leave a pretty nasty hole. :eek: But is also reminds me of a phurpa which is strictly a ritual weapon.

Alan,

Thanks for your clear explanation. The blade has that triangular European bayonet pattern. As I wrote before it was my first thought. It is very likely that this is the origin indeed.

I made some pictures of the scabbard. I hope it will do.
I don't think it is pure silver used for the scabbard. It has a copper smell, so i supose it is silver plated or an alloy.

The question of Nechesh is a nice one too. Being dressed as a command baton it would be purely ceremonial, but if i look at the blade it isn't so ceremonial at all and will leave a nasty problem for the guy who's standing at the wrong side of it.

Thank you Henk.
I was hoping I would recognise embossing of one of the types I am familiar with, but I do not.
However, the construction of the pendok does look very Balinese; I am looking at the way the back panel of the pendok is folded up over the sides of the front panel.
Silver is very easy to test. You buy a bottle of silver test from a jeweller`s supplier. It is very cheap and lasts for years.

David, this is just one blade style amongst many. It is clearly a weapon, and was undoubtedly used as such.
Purpose?
Termination of human life.

The baton style dress is more recent, just as tombak have been dressed as daggers for the last 100 years or so. Even the one I saw dressed as a keris, although the dress was old, was probably only 100 or so years old. It would not have gone back to, say, 1750-1850.

Realistically, looking at Henk`s example it is probably a second half of the 20th century scabbard, the ivory somewhat older, and the blade much older. Who knows how many times the dress may have been changed or different styles used?

Alan,

Thanks for your lesson. Although we have a lot of malay weaponry here in Holland, this one was new for me and i have never seen one before.

Thanks for your help, Alan.

Henk

Henk,

I think you have found yourself a modified european small sword in indonesian dress. The blade style is clearly not indonesian, but probably north european made (imported by the dutch?). It is probably cut (halfway) and resharpened.

The dress is indeed a recent creation, as you can see from the wood (at the beginning of the scabbard) and the metalworks (silver?)

There are plenty old european blades being modified in Indonesia, even in more recent times (1900's), your blade looks indeed a bit older. Try cleaning the blade propperly, maybe you still find more makers marks (Solingen?). My guess is its a mid to late 18th small sword.

A Euro pamor blade ?

New to me .

There is little question that the sheath is recent work, though the hilt obviously has some age to it, but it clearly looks like Indonesian work to me. I have never seen a European blade with this type of pamor work.....and why would Mr. Maisey, a man with half a century (sorry Alan, not trying to make you feel old :) ) of experience and exposure to Indonesian weaponry so clearly identify this weapon by name(s) if he wasn't familar with it? It is obviously something he is familiar with.

Triangular bayonets were used before 18 cent. Here are a lot of information.http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/blade/armbay.htm#359

I agree with David and Alan. I have a tombak from Alan that is very smiliar in blade construction though the recent dress is more like a command baton. Personally, I trust Alan's description as being correct.

Gentlemen,

I agree also with the members who agree with Alan. Although the remark has been made that it could be a rehilted european bayonet and that it was my first thought to, but the forging pattern doesn't match with a european manufactured bayonet. I've seen them in musea all over Europe but the steel is not forged in the way of mine example. Looking to the forging patterns I'm rather convinced it is a pamor blade.

saw this one while looking thru http://old.blades.free.fr/other_malay/batakdagger.htm , under 'other edged weapons'

sumatra, batak, cruciform or triangular blade?

Hello Henk,

you talk about "forging pattern" of your "dagger" but you must think this is an old bayonet of the 18 cent. This has been the first steps producing modern steel like cast steel. I think it was first Benjamin Huntsman who made the first crucible steel in 1742 in England. This dagger could be even older and could be in use by the British Troops in the time (1815) of Governor Raffles. For learning on manufacture of iron and steel the net has many information.

KJ

All Well and Fine ... But
 

I must ask ; why would the English wish to use crucible steel in a bayonet of all things when they had fine non crucible steel that was most likely easier to work , cheaper and tougher ? :confused:

I have in my hands right now a late 17th/early 18th century backsword blade English which is not crucible steel . If you melt an ingot of crucible steel for casting will it still retain any pattern or will it become homogenus ?

I do not think this has anything to do with European/British steel or bayonet and blade forms. I think it has its origins in the spears from Indo/Persia and other Asian influences on Indonesia.

Hey Henk, is the hilt easily removable like on a keris. It might be educational to have a look at the tang.

I'm inclined to agree with you Tim. Many India spearheads are like this. Trade perhaps? Not unheard of in this region.

Gentlemen, I'm very happy with your input.

Nechesh, I could remove the hilt and made some pictures of the tang. During taking the pictures I noticed a very small stamp on the blade, hardly visible, but the pictures don't lie. It is very hard to see what the mark is even under a magnifying glass. I asked my daughter to look for me and she saw something like a N and a 4 or a triangle. On the picture I have a better image and I see something as PM or PN but it is very small and hardly to see with naked eyes.
Ki Jayamalelo showed a link of bayonets with a triangular one. If you look at such a bayonet it is attached with a round elbowformed tube to the socket.
The tang of my blade is square and doesn't show signs of reattachement to the blade.

As far as I know those reattachements or welding spurs are easily to discover. I've seen often reattached peksi's to keris. The place were the peksi is reattached is always thicker and visible.

I would like to hear your comments on these facts.
Alan, I hope you will react as well.

Which way up is the mark read????

European
 

Well , I'm willing to eat my words . ;) :)
But what ?
Plug bayonet ?

Tim,

Now that I'm looking a bit better to the pictures you can read the mark with the point towards you as PM and with the angle towards you as NJ or something. I really cann't make anyting of it and better pictures than these are not possible.

I still do not see a European bayonet. The mark, what we can see is not recognisably European. The brown bess type bayonets have thinner cutting edges.? They are not made of this type of steel. There seems to be no grinding on the blade? I suppose there is a wild chance that it could be some really early rich persons bayonet. Did rich people stand in line with bayonets?

Not that I know, Tim. As far as I know farmers did join the battles of their lords in the middle ages. But their weapons where more their tools they used to work with on the fields. In the ages after the middle ages the battles where fought by armies with trained soldiers. But i don't know enough about this subject to give a good answer on that.

Thanks for your invitation to comment further, Henk, but I really have nothing further to contribute.

I know nothing more, and I dislike hypothesis without evidence or logical argument.

I do have a couple of these things around somewhere, if I can locate them I`ll post pics.

No bayonet
 

Hi all,
Just to put one thread of this to bed. I collected bayonets for quite a number of years and have owned a number of the triangular form bayonets (still have one on the shelf). This item is not a modified bayonet from any form I have ever seen, the cross section is all wrong. It is most certainly not a Brown Bess.
cheers
DrD

Alan,

I hoped that the mark and the pictures of the tang could give any further information. I completely agree with you that speculating without evidence or logical arguments is useless. I invited you to comment because i highly appreciate your input and knowledge.
If you can manage to show some pics of a sangkuh to compare, it would be very nice.

DrD,

I agree with you that it is not a bayonet. It is just not right. I stay with the names Alan gave us for this weapon. Sangkuh or Buntut Mimi.

I undertook to post some pics of sangkuh in my possession. I have located one of these, and here are the pics.

Harsrinuksmo has an entry for a tombak of this triangular shape that he calls a "lingiran". In Javanese the word "lingiran" simply means something with sharp sides.

Any of these blades that I have seen have not been tombak, as all have lacked a metuk.

Harsrinuksmo notes that some people are of the opinion that this form was inspired by old-time bayonets.

Thanks for posting pics of your sangkuh, Alan.

The similarity on the second picture is the forging pattern of the blade above the pamor. That is what is vissible on mine example too.

The difference between your sangkuh and mine is the base. The peksi of your example is round and the base is worked out with rings where the peksi ended and the blade begins, like a methuk then the blade is getting smoothly broader. Mine peksi is square and between the peksi and the base of the blade there is no transition.
As you wrote: Harsrinuksmo notes that some people are of the opinion that this form was inspired by old-time bayonets.
I did find out that the dutch army used such triangular bajonets. But those bajonets certainly weren't forged and made of plain steel.

Sangkuh, IMHO, could be an alteration and looks very identic to word 'Sangkur', a Javanese and Bahasa word, which in English means, as we expect, bayonet. I haven't heard here in Jogjakarta that this kind of blade would be classified as 'sangkuh', but I would except it, as I cannot give any other alternate names, while this kind of dagger quite familiar :D
I had also found 'true bayonet', with a ring for mounting the blade onto the muzzle, (or 'a round elbowformed tube to the socket' as Henk describe) and with a splitted pamor, exactly like Henk and Alan have. Could it be a Javanese made bayonet ? But for sure, it is not a tombak/spear. Tombak, as Alan said, need a 'methuk' to be mounted onto the spear shaft, in Javanese style spear. In fact, looking for a good methuk is the first step on assesing the tombak blades. the 'lingiran' tombak usually has an equilateral triangle shape, with a long pesi, and a methuk. The more common is the quadrangular, phillips screwdriver's shape which may leave a nasty ' + ' shape if you let it come into your stomach :D This quadrangular blade usually called 'cipiran', shaped like cipir, a kind of tasty vegetables.

But if you ask me to vote, I may vote for modified bayonet. A flat side with a fuller and marking on one side only is a typical to this blade, as Henk pictures show.

Yes, "sangkuh" is Javanese for "sangkur".

I only knew the Javanese, which is all I`ve ever heard these referred to in Solo, but after I read your post I checked a couple of dictionaries, and sure enough, sangkur is the Indonesian equivalent of sangkuh.

Yesterday I found where I had stowed away my Sangkuh/Sangkur.
I got it several years ago in an auction lot together with several other Indonesian weapons.
At first I didn't feel like keeping it because of the dress. But then I noticed a collection number and thought it was strange that a bayonet blade was mounted as a Keris. And all the other weapons from that collection were interesting. So I decided that it was better to keep it until I found out what it was. Thanks to this thread I did and here is another example.

I also found this combination weapon at eBay and thought it was a Sumatran Kaso.
But now I assume that it's also a Sankuh.

Michael

PS More pictures at http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...view_album.php

Michael,

The dress for that sangkuh is most unusual. That madurese kerisdress is from the period 1945-1950, made for the dutch soldiers to bring home. Just like the kerisdress with the wrangka as a lying lion with the ukiran in the shape of a woman or man
It means that this sangkuh was used for "tourist"-trading purposes with the dutch soldiers during that period.

Henk,

Thanks for your comments. That's what I suspected and was hesitant to keep this at first when I got it together with the other weapons I really wanted.
But still it was the first Sangkuh I have seen and somehow I found it interesting without knowing what it was.
Maybe it was made as a special order for a Dutch soldier?

Michael