Is it a jimpul, help needed

[Sajen]

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

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

[werecow]

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).

[Sajen]

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

Regards,
Detlef

[Bob A]

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?

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Bob A

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

[asomotif]

Hello Detlef,

How about a Gayang ? Or a Tilang Kemarau ?

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

I have just purchased a Dayak sword and I am a little bit unsure how this sword would be called properly.

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

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

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

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

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

[Sajen]

Some more pictures.

Dimensions:

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

[Ian]

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.

[Sajen]

Thank you Ian!

[kai]

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

[Sajen]

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