Is it a jimpul, help needed
 

Hello dear members, I have just purchased a Dayak sword and I am a little bit unsure how this sword would be called properly. :rolleyes:

Pictures from the seller, more and better pictures when I have received it.

It certainly looks like a jimpul to me. There is a specimen with a somewhat similar blade profile shown in Albert Zonneveld's book "Traditionele Wapens van Borneo - Deel III: Zwaarden en Messen" on page 84 (though with two "steps" in the profile of the tip and a few more decorations along the spine).

Thank you for your comment! :) Yes, this example is similar. But it's certainly not a classical jimpul.

Regards,
Detlef

As the two swords look rather similar to me, I'm not clear on why one would not be a "classical" jimpul.

It's also unclear to me which would be referred to as Classical. Could you please shed more light on the issue?

Hello Bob,

I am not an expert by Dayak swords and sometimes it's difficult to name them correctly, see for example here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=jimpul

What I would call a classical jimpul look to the attached pictures taken from other threads.

Regards,
Detlef

Hello Detlef,

How about a Gayang ? Or a Tilang Kemarau ?

Hello Willem,

I've considered both, but I am quite unsure about them too, as there are differences between these types too. But as I said, I'm quite inexperienced with Borneo swords, so it's not for nothing that I asked for help! ;)
What would you say?

Regards,
Detlef

What sets these three (jimpul, gayang, tilang kamerau) apart? Is it to do with the tip shape? Curvature? Decorative elements?

I've had a hard working day behind me but I will look for examples to show the differences. I think it's a mixture of all.

Regards,
Detlef

Two possible "gayang" examples I found here in old threads. Both are from Charles Saunders.

And here two possible examples of "tilang kemarau".

Detlef,

I think there are many similar swords shown here, and in other threads of the forum, with variously attributed names. Perhaps the different names reflect the usage of different tribal sub-groups for essentially the same sword, but with minor differences in embellishments or style of blade. To me, they come from a common family and were likely used in a similar fashion. Jimpul seems to be the most common term used to describe these swords, and I personally would settle for that designation, knowing that there may be alternative names based on subtle differences or geographic/ethnic preferences. For those of us outside the culture of origin, it may be extremely difficult to learn the subtle, and perhaps not very important, differences in terminology.

Thanks for the examples Detlef. I must say I agree with Ian in that I'm going to have a harder time than usual telling these apart. :o

Sorry, being a bit late to the party!

Looking from a distance, you may classify a car as a SUV. Manufacturer, model, age, etc. will make quite a difference for someone interested in cars though.

Bornean swords can be quite a challenge: Subtle details can make quite a difference! And examples in text books are not rarely misattributed. IMHO, it's important trying to place them into a multidimensional space not only including ethnic (sub)group, blade type, hilt style, etc. but also considering historic timelines and estimated age when classifying any specific piece. There are oddballs and cross-over pieces, too.

Regards,
Kai

Hello Detlef,

More pics would be good - I hope it's arriving soon!

Regards,
Kai

Kai, I agree with you. If someone has a special interest in these particular swords, then it may be worth the effort and time to try to understand the various local names that may apply. The question comes, at what point does this attempt become a "name game." For the collector with a somewhat passing interest in such items, such as myself, I'm pleased others are willing to try to sort this out but I'm also content to recognize the swords here as simply jimpul.

Hello Ian,

As Kai already wrote, it's interesting for me to find out more about the sword in question, which ethnic group it's come from, ect.
For example, when we talk about swords from Mindanao, we also try to assign them to a specific ethnic group. I think in this case it's not much different.

Regards,
Detlef

Thank you as well! :) Me too but I like to learn! ;)

Regards,
Detlef

I really doubt that it's a jimpul. :confused:

Hello Kai,

It arrived and here are some pictures taken this morning. In the meanwhile I doubt that it's an antique example from the 19th century, I guess that it's pre 1900 with a later scabbard, therefore it may be difficult to place it correctly.

Regards,
Detlef

Some more pictures.

Dimensions:

overall: 68,5 cm
blade: 53,5 cm
9 mm thick at the spine behind the handle

Hi Detlef,

Whatever it may be called, it is a very nice sword and I agree with your dating that it appears to be a 19th C example, probably with an updated scabbard. The fuller and file work are well done, and a nice thick blade.

Thank you Ian! :)

Thanks for the pics, Detlef!

Yes, the scabbard is modern - my guesstimate would be after WWII. Later scabbards seem even harder to place than antique examples.

The blade obviously ticks some boxes well. I have some uneasy feelings though: My main problem is how the krowit seems to be carved out of the base of the blade a bit like an afterthought and resulting in this narrowing width. I don't think this blade is from the 19th century.

The hilt seems to have some age. The carving is on the rougher side of things which fits the region; the grip braiding also seems genuinely old. To me that the copper "coin" is more recent (or horribly butchered from anything but TLC). Thus, this sword possibly being a composite also needs to be considered.

All in all, I guess it might be fair to classify it as a jimpul. IMHO it might be more of a revival piece rather than an original from the transition period in the late 19th century.

Let's see what others comment on this piece. Possibly the scabbard may help to narrow down the ethnic (sub)group it last got utilized by?

Regards,
Kai

Hello Kai,

Thank you for your comment! I agree with you that it isn't a 19th century sword like I stated already in post #20. But I doubt that the krowit is a later addition and the blade has definitely seen some action, there are several nicks at the edge.
But you are correct by the scabbard, it's for sure much later as the sword and I occur with your dating.

Regards,
Detlef

On the subject of jimpul vs gayang, vs tilang kemarau, I'm mostly ignorant, but I have been told (by someone way more knowledgable than I) that this Borneo sword of mine is a tilang kemarau.

Have fun,
Leif

Hello Leif,

An interestingly sword! Sadly many Borneo experts post only sometimes, for me it would be interesting to distinguish between the three curved swords from Borneo.

Regards,
Detlef

Just to add to the discussion. I chatted with Charles Saunders on this topic some time ago while discussing the gayang below, and this was his reply (posted with his permission).

Thank you Jeff (and Charles) for the very useful information! Considering this information I guess my sword is a tilang kemarau. But still not 100% sure! :D