Different Borneo sword

Indianajones · 2nd April 2013, 04:38 PM

Found some pics of a somewhat similar example; it has the same type of (blunt ended) blade with the engraving and copper inset. Interestingly the scabbard is made of also a softer kind of wood as is Roy's grip. If its the same (type of) wood is ofcourse impossible to say (from pics) and than there's the problem of 'ascribing to a region/tribe'.
I can already hear everybody shouting 'Iban' again he he he (me too as it hasnt got the 'what I call' Murut type of grip n scabbard n engr. bars near grip)

See another comparative pic of a grip (deerhorn though) which sits on again a engraved blade. The carved features on this grip have some similarities TMHO; see the interconnecting vines, small 'whirlpools' (2 curved V's) and the "extension" beyond the grips 'horizontal'end. I put Roy's grip inbetween for convenience. (no worries;compar.exp.= sold)

Enjoy n look forward to the replies.

VVV · 2nd April 2013, 05:46 PM

Indiana,

Now it seems like you are deviating from the topic again.
I don't see how your posting of your ex-parang somehow brings any new input to the parang we are discussing?
However, they look quite nice

so why don't you publish them in a another thread so we can discuss them separately?

Anyway, you don't really need to own a lot of Borneo parang yourself to learn about them. There are a lot of museum databases on the Internet with provenanced Borneo blades and you can also quite cheap both visit museums and other collectors if you want to handle the swords yourself. It's much cheaper than buying them all yourself and within a couple of years you have acquired a lot of reference pictures for your coming studies.

On attributing Roy's parang to North Sarawak, that has never been an issue. The puzzle here is not where the blade comes from but why it looks so strange compared to all the 100's of related blades that I, Maurice, Arjan and some other Borneo collectors not active on this forum have in our study files. Also the handle is of lesser importance IMHO (but I admit that this assumption could of course easier be questioned).

On your reference parang it seems to be a jimpul related sword, which Roy's isn't, which makes it irrelevant as I brought up already in my earlier mail. That was the reason I only published the tips in my earlier post, to not bring in pictures of non-relevant blades in this thread to avoid spreading confusion.
Why don't you take your time and try to find something that will carry on the discussion if you don't like my attempt in two latest posts?

Michael

2nd April 2013, 04:38 PM	#1
Indianajones Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 180	Found some pics of a somewhat similar example; it has the same type of (blunt ended) blade with the engraving and copper inset. Interestingly the scabbard is made of also a softer kind of wood as is Roy's grip. If its the same (type of) wood is ofcourse impossible to say (from pics) and than there's the problem of 'ascribing to a region/tribe'. I can already hear everybody shouting 'Iban' again he he he (me too as it hasnt got the 'what I call' Murut type of grip n scabbard n engr. bars near grip) See another comparative pic of a grip (deerhorn though) which sits on again a engraved blade. The carved features on this grip have some similarities TMHO; see the interconnecting vines, small 'whirlpools' (2 curved V's) and the "extension" beyond the grips 'horizontal'end. I put Roy's grip inbetween for convenience. (no worries;compar.exp.= sold) Enjoy n look forward to the replies. Attached Images Last edited by Indianajones; 2nd April 2013 at 04:50 PM.

2nd April 2013, 05:46 PM	#2
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Indiana, Now it seems like you are deviating from the topic again. I don't see how your posting of your ex-parang somehow brings any new input to the parang we are discussing? However, they look quite nice so why don't you publish them in a another thread so we can discuss them separately? Anyway, you don't really need to own a lot of Borneo parang yourself to learn about them. There are a lot of museum databases on the Internet with provenanced Borneo blades and you can also quite cheap both visit museums and other collectors if you want to handle the swords yourself. It's much cheaper than buying them all yourself and within a couple of years you have acquired a lot of reference pictures for your coming studies. On attributing Roy's parang to North Sarawak, that has never been an issue. The puzzle here is not where the blade comes from but why it looks so strange compared to all the 100's of related blades that I, Maurice, Arjan and some other Borneo collectors not active on this forum have in our study files. Also the handle is of lesser importance IMHO (but I admit that this assumption could of course easier be questioned). On your reference parang it seems to be a jimpul related sword, which Roy's isn't, which makes it irrelevant as I brought up already in my earlier mail. That was the reason I only published the tips in my earlier post, to not bring in pictures of non-relevant blades in this thread to avoid spreading confusion. Why don't you take your time and try to find something that will carry on the discussion if you don't like my attempt in two latest posts? Michael