Pattern-welded (twist core) Budiak

Maurice · 15th September 2010, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

Maurice, I have scanned in one of the plates from Krieger (1926) below and have labeled the spears with the tribal associations given in the text. Numbers 8 & 9 appear to have a square neck, but are Bagabo & Moro, respectively. Similarly, the etched panels on the blade faces are present and absent with both associations. The text describes the ferrules of these examples as being of brass or iron.

Lee, thank you for the scanned Krieger plate. I do have the Krieger images on my computer, but in a smaller format, so it is more clear to see now.
Bagobo & moro, panels present and absent, I think a lot of work and research can and need to be done here to find out more about these great pieces...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

I suppose that these Malaysian spearheads would have spread throughout the region by trade and capture and so can no more be precisely placed geographically than a European winged spearhead of the 9th - 10th century (socketed instead of tanged, but of about the same size and with sometimes with similar pattern-welding!) Mountings would clearly help, when present, in the rare cases where examples of known provenance are available for comparison. Hopefully, some day the chronology and regional variations will be worked out for these most impressive artifacts.

Yes I agree with the trade and capture part. Therefore it is harder to track down the origine for us.
I hope there is somebody able to study the regional variations.
I once started a thread about provenanced pieces. But I was the only one it seemed who was interested in, cause there were no reactions or postings from others. This could enlighten a lot and would be a great threat as reference material and might be an important "Sticky".........but forumites need to post their pieces first...:-)

Maurice

Battara · 15th September 2010, 10:05 PM

Well, I was wondering if this was an earlier form of budiak myself.

As far as the okir is concerned, I was thinking that the okir is not of the same quality of that I see in Mindanao for example. Also the type of okir is more reminiscent of Sulu rather than that of Mindanao. I would cautiously place it therefore as Sulu work.

Rick · 15th September 2010, 11:54 PM

Is this then possibly an early Sulu form ?

Oh for some provenance .

Even the spears I acquired from the Bandholtz collection were labeled as Budiak !!

Confusion seems to be everywhere on this subject .

We need a book on spears of the area .

Lee · 16th September 2010, 04:44 PM

I am going pretty far out on a flimsy limb, but, I do agree with the suspicions stated above and I believe this is well the oldest of my budiaks if I am to judge by blade surfaces. All of them have been taken care of over the years, but there are always little lapses that accumulate and leave their marks. (I have one more budiak to share.)

Similarly, while out on that limb, I will speculate that something like this budiak could have 'evolved' through the features we see in Maurice's Sulu budiak on the way to Rick's example on the right. But then I am ignoring Rick's example on the left.

Rick - It turned out to be simple and harmless to expose the base of the neck of my spearhead and it remains a simple square. Asomotif - I believe that, despite the tears and dents, very little silver is missing from the ferrule and that you are correct that it remains very restorable and deserves restoration. (If I can find copper pipe of the correct diameter, that might provide a definitive underlying support.) Battara - I have tried to give a better view of the okir below:

Battara · 17th September 2010, 01:57 AM

I hesitate to call it a true budiak since it does not have the usual chiseling for a budiak.

However the twistcore and the way it is done as well as the okir still indicates to me so far that this is an early Sulu spear.

Lee · 18th September 2010, 01:34 PM

Battara - So, if I understand correctly, Rick's spear on the left up in reply #2 would not be called a budiak as it lacks the chiseled panel, and only the 4th from the left in the panoply shown in Maurice's post (#4) would qualify for the name budiak.

In a playful vein, I shall, for the moment term this old Sulu spear as a protobudiak.

I have built a composite picture below - not to precise scale and digitally bleached to bring up more detail in the bases - in order of similarity of features. Our protobudiak is fullered and has no elaboration at its base; the blade tapers into a square cross section. (Maurice's splendid provenanced Sulu spear would come next in this sequence.) The second spear from the left below has a shallow chiseled panel which carries into a square neck as a line before an abrupt, but slight expansion into a round base. The two on the right are proper budiaks with a well developed chiseled panel and the thicker edges terminating in a classic floral? curve. These have rings around a round neck and re-expand substantially to meet the ferrule (or be partially covered by it in the right example).

Krieger's plate 6 does strongly suggest both forms (chiseled with complex base and non-chiseled with square base) remained in use by both the Moro and Bagobo until the early 20th century. So chronology versus geography (of manufacture) or more likely a bit of both.

Lee · 24th September 2010, 03:28 PM

This protobudiak was my very first 'Malaysian' spear. I bought it in a small (now sadly perished) private arms and armour museum in Kutztown, Pennsylvania in the late 1990s. I collected it as a superb example of pattern-welding for a small group of comparative ethnographic examples I was building. It was so out of place in the museum's small coop shop and it cost me less than a hundred dollars. I still delight in my memory of finding it. I have over the years mislaid that delicate silver ferrule cylinder on more than one occasion, but shall be careful not to again lose it, and I indeed look forward to seeing it put back together again.

So, ironically, the protobudiak gets to be the reference point as I pull something from the opposite side of the globe and a millennium further back out of the armoury to compare with it, namely a mid to late Viking Age (Carolingian) winged spearhead. The big, obvious differences are that the winged spearhead is socketed (with two small protrusions or 'wings' arising from the socket) and the tanged protobudiak has more pronounced fullering. In functional impact, however, these two spearheads are nearly identical in length (protobudiak 355 mm; winged spearhead 345 mm - measuring from where each blade begins to expand out from neck to the tip) and in mass (protobudiak as pictured including partial mounts and epoxy 469 grams; winged spearhead 409 grams with some losses from the socket on the opposite side).

18th September 2010, 01:34 PM	#6
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 932	So I will call it ... a protobudiak Battara - So, if I understand correctly, Rick's spear on the left up in reply #2 would not be called a budiak as it lacks the chiseled panel, and only the 4th from the left in the panoply shown in Maurice's post (#4) would qualify for the name budiak. In a playful vein, I shall, for the moment term this old Sulu spear as a protobudiak. I have built a composite picture below - not to precise scale and digitally bleached to bring up more detail in the bases - in order of similarity of features. Our protobudiak is fullered and has no elaboration at its base; the blade tapers into a square cross section. (Maurice's splendid provenanced Sulu spear would come next in this sequence.) The second spear from the left below has a shallow chiseled panel which carries into a square neck as a line before an abrupt, but slight expansion into a round base. The two on the right are proper budiaks with a well developed chiseled panel and the thicker edges terminating in a classic floral? curve. These have rings around a round neck and re-expand substantially to meet the ferrule (or be partially covered by it in the right example). Krieger's plate 6 does strongly suggest both forms (chiseled with complex base and non-chiseled with square base) remained in use by both the Moro and Bagobo until the early 20th century. So chronology versus geography (of manufacture) or more likely a bit of both. Attached Images Last edited by Lee; 18th September 2010 at 01:45 PM.

24th September 2010, 03:28 PM	#7
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 932	Just for kicks: Compare this with a mid to late Viking Age (Carolingian) winged spear This protobudiak was my very first 'Malaysian' spear. I bought it in a small (now sadly perished) private arms and armour museum in Kutztown, Pennsylvania in the late 1990s. I collected it as a superb example of pattern-welding for a small group of comparative ethnographic examples I was building. It was so out of place in the museum's small coop shop and it cost me less than a hundred dollars. I still delight in my memory of finding it. I have over the years mislaid that delicate silver ferrule cylinder on more than one occasion, but shall be careful not to again lose it, and I indeed look forward to seeing it put back together again. So, ironically, the protobudiak gets to be the reference point as I pull something from the opposite side of the globe and a millennium further back out of the armoury to compare with it, namely a mid to late Viking Age (Carolingian) winged spearhead. The big, obvious differences are that the winged spearhead is socketed (with two small protrusions or 'wings' arising from the socket) and the tanged protobudiak has more pronounced fullering. In functional impact, however, these two spearheads are nearly identical in length (protobudiak 355 mm; winged spearhead 345 mm - measuring from where each blade begins to expand out from neck to the tip) and in mass (protobudiak as pictured including partial mounts and epoxy 469 grams; winged spearhead 409 grams with some losses from the socket on the opposite side). Attached Images

15th September 2010, 10:05 PM	#2
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Well, I was wondering if this was an earlier form of budiak myself. As far as the okir is concerned, I was thinking that the okir is not of the same quality of that I see in Mindanao for example. Also the type of okir is more reminiscent of Sulu rather than that of Mindanao. I would cautiously place it therefore as Sulu work.

15th September 2010, 11:54 PM	#3
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Is this then possibly an early Sulu form ? Oh for some provenance . Even the spears I acquired from the Bandholtz collection were labeled as Budiak !! Confusion seems to be everywhere on this subject . We need a book on spears of the area .

16th September 2010, 04:44 PM	#4
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 932	I am going pretty far out on a flimsy limb, but, I do agree with the suspicions stated above and I believe this is well the oldest of my budiaks if I am to judge by blade surfaces. All of them have been taken care of over the years, but there are always little lapses that accumulate and leave their marks. (I have one more budiak to share.) Similarly, while out on that limb, I will speculate that something like this budiak could have 'evolved' through the features we see in Maurice's Sulu budiak on the way to Rick's example on the right. But then I am ignoring Rick's example on the left. Rick - It turned out to be simple and harmless to expose the base of the neck of my spearhead and it remains a simple square. Asomotif - I believe that, despite the tears and dents, very little silver is missing from the ferrule and that you are correct that it remains very restorable and deserves restoration. (If I can find copper pipe of the correct diameter, that might provide a definitive underlying support.) Battara - I have tried to give a better view of the okir below: Attached Images

17th September 2010, 01:57 AM	#5
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	I hesitate to call it a true budiak since it does not have the usual chiseling for a budiak. However the twistcore and the way it is done as well as the okir still indicates to me so far that this is an early Sulu spear.