![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 320
|
![]()
Anyone else curious why Co Jang swords do not typically use scabbards while most other Sumatra/Aceh swords do?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]()
Could it be more of a question of what survived?
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/662961 Maurice is very knowledgeable where Dutch colonial colonial sources are concerned and references them as not being worn with a scabbard... he may be able to cite references for you. https://bataviacollectables.jimdofre...-cojang-rudus/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Leiden, NL
Posts: 472
|
![]()
In case that met museum link dies:
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,143
|
![]()
Jeff,
I have not seen a scabbard for the Co Jang either, until Gavin's link to the Met item. As the museum notes say, this is a northern Sumatran sword with inlaid gold work done in what is now Malaysia. I would suggest that the scabbard came from Malaysia also, as it does not look like Aceh work to me. In any case, the only way to get that sword into that scabbard would be to have a slot down part of the top of the scabbard that admitted the wide blade towards the tip. I've not seen a slotted scabbard on Aceh swords before. The scabbard shown seems rather bulky and cumbersome for routine carry--perhaps designed for more ceremonial use. Your original idea that these swords did not have a scabbard, at least within the Aceh culture, may be correct. That doesn't answer your question as to why they did not (usually) have a scabbard. Perhaps the progressive widening of the blade from hilt to tip made it difficult to design a tight fitting (closed) scabbard for them, and for some reason this alternative scabbard design with a slotted entry was unpopular or unavailable in Aceh. Last edited by Ian; 6th November 2023 at 08:53 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | ||
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,143
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,716
|
![]()
The shown example from the Met isn't a Co Jang but a Rudus, the blade form is the same but it was used by the Batak while a Co Jang or Gliwang is a Aceh sword and was the favored weapon by the Aceh war. The scabbard from the Met example is also Batak (Pakpak) work and not Malay, the complete sword seems very ceremonial or status to my eyes while the Co jang was a war sword.
Why the scabbards from the Co Jang have been simple from palm leaves or goat skin I can't answer but may have to do with the fact that it was a pure war sword. Regards, Detlef |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,716
|
![]()
My Co Jang
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Germany
Posts: 139
|
![]()
My one with scabbard. Is this a cojang or rudus ?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|