Two recent purchases

kisak · 7th July 2008, 11:38 AM

Hello all.

Here's a pair of blades I picked up at a recent auction. First there's a sword which the Auction house had labelled as Tibetan, but based upon LaRocca's "Warrior's of the Himalayas" I would rather say Bhutan. The 19th century feels plausible.

The other one was labelled as a golok, and from looking around a bit here I guess that might be correct. Still mostly a question mark for me though, haven't manged to find anything matching it all that closely, a few pieces that were attributed to Java appearing the closest. Tourist work perhaps? The blade has obviously been through a lot, seems like it might have been cleaned with some rather aggressive chemicals, and there's still a few decent spots of rust. There's a very shallow fuller between about a third of the blade's width from the edge to the decorative groove. Laminate construction at least, the line at the edge is somewhat visible in the pictures. If there's more to it (folding, pattern welding, or so) then it's currently not visible (hidden by the pitting), though there are hints of fine longitudinal lines here and there. Grip appears to be horn (though I won't write off wood entirely either), with repaired cracks. Scabbard is covered in some white metal, a bit of silver polish didn't really affect it at all and it has a slight yellowish hue to it at times, so I guess some sort of copper alloy.

I' contemplating some sort of restoration for the golok, but not really knowing what I have makes it a tough call. On one hand, it isn't in too good a shape now, so it should be relatively easy to avoid making things worse, and it doesn't feel like I'm risking anything of major historical value here. On the other hand, considering the depth of the pitting, I wonder if there would be much of the blade left once the majority of that has been polished off, and I generally hesitate to do anything much to antiques, or even potential antiques. Easier to do than undo, after all.

RhysMichael · 7th July 2008, 06:13 PM

Congratulations on some nice pieces and welcome. I would agree that it looks bhutan to me. I am guessing that the blade might show a nice hairpin folding pattern from what you are describing. The Golok does look to have some age on it also but its hard to tell from a picture

josh stout · 7th July 2008, 06:58 PM

Yes, it definately has a Bhutanese style pommle and scabbard. The blade might be Tibetan or Bhutanese, but the odds are the blade was made near where the fittings were made.

Generally, I think of Bhutanese blades as being a bit slimmer than Tibetan ones, and made with narrower hairpin bars (though not the "folded all together" style described in LaRocca). This is just a general feeling about the Bhutanese stuff, based on a fairly limited sample. More specifically, a Bhutanese blade will often have narrow parallel grooves (washo) carved along the blade. These are not supposed to be on Tibetan blades, though I can think of at least one Tibetan jian with them in LaRocca. So the washo are not diagnostic either way.

I do think I see hairpin folding, and more interestingly, it looks like it might be double ended. Am I seeing too much in the photo?
Josh

dennee · 7th July 2008, 08:05 PM

Nice Bhutanese sword in the "belpa chenm" style. The red bands on the grip are said to be indicative of an official, perhaps a high one, but the fittings are less expensive (brass, and not a pierced gubor).

I think I have found Bhutanese swords to be a bit heavier than Tibetan ones, at least when considered in proportion to length, although there is variation, and perhaps the most prized blades may have been thinner and more flexible.

kisak · 8th July 2008, 08:57 AM

Thanks for the replies. The pattern welding is hard to tell, there are some lengthwise sections of steel with different hues, basically warmer and colder colouration respectively (the edge being the warmer colour). It's rather discrete though. Due to all the dried-in dirt on it when I got it I've been wondering if the differences in colour might not just be staining from that, with the scabbard "scratching" off the dirt in a few places as the sword is drawn/sheated. The picture attached shows the two before any cleaning. I've only washed off the blade though, perhaps a light touch up with some very fine grit wet sanding paper could help reveal any pattern welding? A light etching as well perhaps?

Quote:

it looks like it might be double ended.

Its single edged, if that's what you mean.

Quote:

The red bands on the grip are said to be indicative of an official

Interesting, though the bands here doesn't seem to ever have been coloured red, just naturally coloured string, with some patination.

If anyone is interested in measurements, then for the Bhutanese sword we cave a total lengths of 77cm, grip 10cm, 790g, center of mass 20cm from the base of the blade (the "collar"). The blade itself is 62cm long, 36mm wide, and the spine goes from about 6mm to maybe 2mm just before the tip grind begins. Pretty stiff and sturdy.

The golok would be 51cm total, 490g, center of mass 11cm from the grip. Blade 39cm long, 35mm wide at the widest, spine tapering from 12mm to 3mm, with most of the taper in the first half, it's about 4mm thick in the middle.

I've also tried some brass polish on the scabbard of the golok, which worked much better than the silver cleaner.

Henk · 8th July 2008, 10:47 AM

I think your golok isn't a golok.

Hard to tell what it is. The hulu or grip is a replacement and not original to the blade.
I have a feeling the piece is Sumatran. Could be a pedang, a short sword or a badek. That's my first and careful guess.
Certainly not tourist work. It is a well made blade. It might even be a pamor blade.

VVV · 9th July 2008, 09:00 AM

On the golok I agree with Henk that the handle probably is a replacement (based on its fit to the blade).
This makara variation is usually found on golok from West Java and sometimes also swords that has been collected around Palembang, Sumatra (which is nearby and where other kinds of W Java blades also has been found).
What's unusual is that your handle is made from wood and not horn as usual.
The scabbard is probably white brass.
And the metal of the blade I couldn't figure out when I inspected it at the same auction house as you got it from.

Michael

7th July 2008, 11:38 AM	#1
kisak Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Stockholm Posts: 182	Two recent purchases Hello all. Here's a pair of blades I picked up at a recent auction. First there's a sword which the Auction house had labelled as Tibetan, but based upon LaRocca's "Warrior's of the Himalayas" I would rather say Bhutan. The 19th century feels plausible. The other one was labelled as a golok, and from looking around a bit here I guess that might be correct. Still mostly a question mark for me though, haven't manged to find anything matching it all that closely, a few pieces that were attributed to Java appearing the closest. Tourist work perhaps? The blade has obviously been through a lot, seems like it might have been cleaned with some rather aggressive chemicals, and there's still a few decent spots of rust. There's a very shallow fuller between about a third of the blade's width from the edge to the decorative groove. Laminate construction at least, the line at the edge is somewhat visible in the pictures. If there's more to it (folding, pattern welding, or so) then it's currently not visible (hidden by the pitting), though there are hints of fine longitudinal lines here and there. Grip appears to be horn (though I won't write off wood entirely either), with repaired cracks. Scabbard is covered in some white metal, a bit of silver polish didn't really affect it at all and it has a slight yellowish hue to it at times, so I guess some sort of copper alloy. I' contemplating some sort of restoration for the golok, but not really knowing what I have makes it a tough call. On one hand, it isn't in too good a shape now, so it should be relatively easy to avoid making things worse, and it doesn't feel like I'm risking anything of major historical value here. On the other hand, considering the depth of the pitting, I wonder if there would be much of the blade left once the majority of that has been polished off, and I generally hesitate to do anything much to antiques, or even potential antiques. Easier to do than undo, after all. Attached Images

7th July 2008, 06:13 PM	#2
RhysMichael Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Virginia Posts: 520	Congratulations on some nice pieces and welcome. I would agree that it looks bhutan to me. I am guessing that the blade might show a nice hairpin folding pattern from what you are describing. The Golok does look to have some age on it also but its hard to tell from a picture

7th July 2008, 06:58 PM	#3
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	Yes, it definately has a Bhutanese style pommle and scabbard. The blade might be Tibetan or Bhutanese, but the odds are the blade was made near where the fittings were made. Generally, I think of Bhutanese blades as being a bit slimmer than Tibetan ones, and made with narrower hairpin bars (though not the "folded all together" style described in LaRocca). This is just a general feeling about the Bhutanese stuff, based on a fairly limited sample. More specifically, a Bhutanese blade will often have narrow parallel grooves (washo) carved along the blade. These are not supposed to be on Tibetan blades, though I can think of at least one Tibetan jian with them in LaRocca. So the washo are not diagnostic either way. I do think I see hairpin folding, and more interestingly, it looks like it might be double ended. Am I seeing too much in the photo? Josh

7th July 2008, 08:05 PM	#4
dennee Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 186	Nice Bhutanese sword in the "belpa chenm" style. The red bands on the grip are said to be indicative of an official, perhaps a high one, but the fittings are less expensive (brass, and not a pierced gubor). I think I have found Bhutanese swords to be a bit heavier than Tibetan ones, at least when considered in proportion to length, although there is variation, and perhaps the most prized blades may have been thinner and more flexible.

8th July 2008, 10:47 AM	#6
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	I think your golok isn't a golok. Hard to tell what it is. The hulu or grip is a replacement and not original to the blade. I have a feeling the piece is Sumatran. Could be a pedang, a short sword or a badek. That's my first and careful guess. Certainly not tourist work. It is a well made blade. It might even be a pamor blade.

9th July 2008, 09:00 AM	#7
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	On the golok I agree with Henk that the handle probably is a replacement (based on its fit to the blade). This makara variation is usually found on golok from West Java and sometimes also swords that has been collected around Palembang, Sumatra (which is nearby and where other kinds of W Java blades also has been found). What's unusual is that your handle is made from wood and not horn as usual. The scabbard is probably white brass. And the metal of the blade I couldn't figure out when I inspected it at the same auction house as you got it from. Michael