Dagger for Identification

[Jerseyman]

This is a recent purchase which I have not yet received. These are dealer's pictures, and of course I have no dimensions to share. Obviously it will need cleaning when it arrives. It also appears that the blade is wedged in the hilt using paper.

I am unsure of where this dagger comes from as I've not seen this shape before, and I would welcome any information. I would assume one of the Pacific archipelagos, but which one?

Thanks

[Montino Bourbon]

It's a Badek, probably from Sumatra. Classic shape.

[Battara]

However I have never seen one with a fullered blade like this. Otherwise, I agree with Martino.

[Jerseyman]

Thanks. I'd never seen one with such an extreme handle, nor with a fullered blade, so hadn't thought of that classification.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, it has some characteristics of a badik, & I guess we need to call it a badik, but I've never seen even a photo of a badik that looks like this.

[kai]

Thanks. I'd never seen one with such an extreme handle, nor with a fullered blade, so hadn't thought of that classification.

Yes, it definitely is a badik from Sulawesi: This blade shape with a pronounced belly as well as the steeply angled/curving hilt suggest that it originates from the region of Lompobattang.

Most badik are meant for punching and come with slender, agile blades. Some of those blades with more pronounced belly have more heft to them and can feel more like a small meat cleaver. Adding a fuller makes sense if the balance needs to be improved.

Pretty much all antique badik from Sulawesi sport laminated or even pattern-welded blades (i.e. with pamor). It would be worth checking this example even if it most likely is monosteel.

From the craftsmanship and attaching the tang with paper/textile, I'd guess this piece hails from the first half of the 20th century, possibly around WW2.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Alan,

I've never seen even a photo of a badik that looks like this.

See the example in Albert's book: p. 27, fig. 24 is quite typical.

I have 2 of these coming in - let me try to add pics later.

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

Yes, it definitely is a badik from Sulawesi: This blade shape with a pronounced belly as well as the steeply angled/curving hilt suggest that it originates from the region of Lompobattang.

Kai is correct, a badik from Lompobattang, another example is shown by "Senjata Pusaka Bugis" on p. 351-352.

[Sajen]

Here are my two examples, got them recently, still need to etch them, both are laminated. Blades with fullers seems not uncommon, see my small example.

[Helleri]

That looks like it's been shoddily repaired. If it were something I had in my possession, I'd be tempted to carefully pry that cracked bit off. Remove the blade and wadding. Pour in some hot rosin and reset that tang. Then a little bone glue and watch band pins for the chipped piece of horn. Finish off that handle with a little light sanding and a few coats of lanolin...Looks like a fun project piece really.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

From the craftsmanship and attaching the tang with paper/textile, I'd guess this piece hails from the first half of the 20th century, possibly around WW2.

Hello Kai,

I am with Helleri here, the attachment of the hilt with paper or textile will be a repair.

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai & Detlef, gentlemen, the examples shown by Detlef do indeed have an overall appearance similar to the dagger that is the subject of this thread, however, perhaps you & I look at very different things:- to me this dagger of Jerseyman is very, very different to the examples you have shown.

The examples shown are well known and relatively common:- I have had a number of them over the years, and I think I still might have some, but to my eye, they vary strongly from JM's dagger.

In fact, I have seen custom made knives produced by makers in USA & Australia that resemble JM's dagger more closely than does the typical Sulawesi badik with the Beer Belly.

[kai]

G'day Alan,

Perhaps you could be a bit more specific which differences you feel have the strongest impact in your opinion?

Except for the wide fuller already discussed, the other unusual feature would be the choil.

OTOH, the other blades seem to be antique and I posit that this blade might well be younger.

Anyway, the fittings clearly support a Lompobattang origin... Any alternative suggestions?

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

I am with Helleri here, the attachment of the hilt with paper or textile will be a repair.

Not necessarily a repair; it could also point to an assembly at a period when these were not meant to be functional weapons anymore.

I was just mentioning it as a supporting indicator for a possible later date. (It certainly doesn't exclude a later period than suggested by me.)

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

Here are my two examples, got them recently, still need to etch them, both are laminated. Blades with fullers seems not uncommon, see my small example.

Yes, narrow (and shallow) fullers are seen. Multiple, too.

It's this wide fuller which is a bit more unusual IMHO...

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, what I said in my initial post was that I have never seen even a photo of badik that looks like this one.

In spite of the photos of Sulawesi badiks that Detlef posted, I still have not seen a photo of a badik that looks like this one.

Yes, I agree there is a very approximate, very broad similarity in overall form, but also outstanding significant differences, not only in the blade, but also in the hilt & the scabbard.

I'm guessing that the reason I cannot come right out and give you my total agreement with you is that with weaponry that has an agreed standard form, when I see variation from that standard form my mind tells me I'm seeing something different. Possibly the reason for this mindset is my strong background in Javanese keris & weaponry. If it doesn't fit, it is different.

I definitely do not have any suggestions in respect of where or when this item under discussion might have originated, and I definitely do not have intention of trying to convince you & Detlef that it is not what you believe it to be.

But for me, it is a one off.

[naturalist]

Would love to see the fullered badik is really pamor badik. Since i guess, the origin of the blade might be repurposed from mass produce machetes such as Crocodile (Martindale?) brand that has several fullers..

[naturalist]

Really nice Macassar Ebony, unfortunately with poor execution....

Originally Posted by Jerseyman

This is a recent purchase which I have not yet received. These are dealer's pictures, and of course I have no dimensions to share. Obviously it will need cleaning when it arrives. It also appears that the blade is wedged in the hilt using paper.

I am unsure of where this dagger comes from as I've not seen this shape before, and I would welcome any information. I would assume one of the Pacific archipelagos, but which one?

Thanks

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Kai, what I said in my initial post was that I have never seen even a photo of badik that looks like this one.

In spite of the photos of Sulawesi badiks that Detlef posted, I still have not seen a photo of a badik that looks like this one.

Yes, I agree there is a very approximate, very broad similarity in overall form, but also outstanding significant differences, not only in the blade, but also in the hilt & the scabbard.

Hello Alan,

I see what you mean, starting by the blade, the edge by the one in question is straight, by the by me posted examples belly. And of course the notch. And the spine differs as well.
Handle is by the example from JM round at the outer end, by the from me posted examples tapered, also the bend is different.
By the scabbard the bulge is very different too.
So I have to agree with you, it's a different animal.
But why did I think it is from same family? It will be the overall appearance by superficial examination.

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by kai

Not necessarily a repair; it could also point to an assembly at a period when these were not meant to be functional weapons anymore.

Hello Kai,
They are still made as functional weapons I guess, I've seen 2006 a Bugis wearing a badik, near Makassar. And I own a fairly recent example, well made but clearly used.

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Detlef, my first post was #5, what I wrote was this:-

"Yes, it has some characteristics of a badik, & I guess we need to call it a badik, but I've never seen even a photo of a badik that looks like this."

If others think it is a badik, and I cannot give a better name for it, I'm happy to call it badik.

But I'm equally happy to call it a "dagger" or anything else that two or more other people can agree on.

[Sajen]

Jep, still would call it badik and I think it's from Sulawesi. Someone will have had his own understandingo of how a badik has to look.

Regards,
Detlef

[kai]

Hello Alan,

Thanks for your response!

Kai, what I said in my initial post was that I have never seen even a photo of badik that looks like this one.

In spite of the photos of Sulawesi badiks that Detlef posted, I still have not seen a photo of a badik that looks like this one.

Yes, I agree there is a very approximate, very broad similarity in overall form, but also outstanding significant differences, not only in the blade, but also in the hilt & the scabbard.

I'm guessing that the reason I cannot come right out and give you my total agreement with you is that with weaponry that has an agreed standard form, when I see variation from that standard form my mind tells me I'm seeing something different. Possibly the reason for this mindset is my strong background in Javanese keris & weaponry. If it doesn't fit, it is different.

I definitely do not have any suggestions in respect of where or when this item under discussion might have originated, and I definitely do not have intention of trying to convince you & Detlef that it is not what you believe it to be.

But for me, it is a one off.

That certainly helps to understand your perspective! I definitely agree that there are differences - most of which I am willing to attribute to an assumed/estimated younger age. For example, there are loads of current era keris from the land of Jawa which fall short of any established pakem and/or exhibit fittings that are not conforming to any keraton standard. Still, I'd be inclined to regard these as keris (at least those with a reasonable amount of craftsmanship put into them and possibly excluding any pieces that are intentionally breaking with tradition and meant to be pure pieces of art only) - as much as I'm inclined to call this piece a badik.

Please also note that the pics referred to above are far from comprehensive - there is more variation. Moreover, despite badik taking the place of keris in the cultures from SW Sulawesi, they don't seem to have been under similarly strong stylistic regulation by the local ruling classes. While we certainly see some regional styles most likely based on long-standing traditions, these apparently were not enforced by the local elites/palace in the recent centuries. We also see lots of mixing or pieces popping up at distant places, most likely due to the political turmoils, long distance trading and traveling (not to mention the many expat communities across SE Asia).

When trying to establish the origin of any piece, differences hardly ever help except to alert oneself to be more cautious with any conclusions. For establishing an origin for anything that doesn't perfectly fit with known examples, we rather have to look for shared similarities, especially those which have a high likelihood to be uniquely based on shared cultural/historic roots:

1. I still feel that the blade shape is quite convincing: There is a bit of variation with clearly antique examples and I'm not aware of any other badik (or other SE Asian blade) coming close; there are some pretty hefty badik blades with belly from elsewhere but this belly has a rounder curve without a sharp point. The waist also varies quite a bit but a distinct choil might well be a (non-traditional) one-off (there are some other SE blades with choil-like features which appear to be unrelated though).
2. The extremely curved hilt seems to point to Gowa but comes in quite some variations as seen in extant antique pieces (see Senjata Pusaka Bugis p.329).
3. The scabbard does not really help - it is missing the typical triangular extension at the mouth (also not present in some antique examples though - see reference above). Also the foot, especially if a separate piece, can vary widely with badik. I agree that this scabbard is not very well crafted as already mentioned by Anton; it might even be younger than I suggested for the badik.
4. Badik like the antique examples mentioned above are generally referred to as either Makassarese or specifically of Lompobattang style. I'm not sure if this style was really limited to the Lompobattang region or whether this may have been just the last notable/remaining production center. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that similar and possibly slightly variant styles might originate from neighbouring areas.

Thus, let me re-phrase my original suggestion:

Yes, it definitely is a badik from Sulawesi: This blade shape with a pronounced belly as well as the steeply angled/curving hilt suggest that it originates from the region of Lompobattang.

I believe this to be a badik from Sulawesi: This blade shape with a pronounced belly and a pretty sharp point as well as the steeply angled/curving hilt suggest that it most likely originates from the sphere of influence of Gowa, possibly from the wider region of Lompobattang. The scabbard is not of a very typical form and of lesser quality; this may attest to its later manufacture (maybe DIY).

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Originally Posted by naturalist

Would love to see the fullered badik is really pamor badik. Since i guess, the origin of the blade might be repurposed from mass produce machetes such as Crocodile (Martindale?) brand that has several fullers..

Thanks, Anton!

To me these fullers look too irregular to be remnants of machine-ground fullers as in some machetes. This also seems true for a few other multi-fullered badik blades I saw.

Would certainly like to see these blades etched though!

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Detlef,

They are still made as functional weapons I guess, I've seen 2006 a Bugis wearing a badik, near Makassar.

While the function as weapon never got retired, badik had the same function as keris in tanah Jawa. Thus, wearing a badik could have been due to many and possibly multiple reasons. Like for most people still carrying a knife every day nowadays, any possible weapon function is likely the least realized function (if ever)...

I was not implying that this badik got manufactured without any real use in mind. However, whenever the current tang attachment was chosen, I doubt that any heavy use (neither as tool nor as weapon) was intended. This may point to a later date but does not imply that other badik from the same period were not attached with some local sort of cutler's resin.

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, I've noted all your comments, it seems that I have not been particularly clear with my own comments.

I have no issue at all with whatever you or anybody else wishes to call this dagger, I have not offered a different name for it, and I will not offer one, as I have already said, I'll agree with any two people who wish to call it whatever they will. I have no stake in this, I really don't care what this dagger is called.

But the fact remains:- if it is to be called a badik, or perhaps somebody might like to call it a kawali, I have never seen a badik/kawali that looks like this dagger.

That is all I am saying.

No more, no less.

Everybody else can draw lines of similarity if they wish, I do not wish. But I'm not prepared to debate the matter. I'm offering an observation, just that.

However, there is one small matter that I must disagree with.

The badik/kawali does not & did not have the same function for the Bugis people as does & did the keris for the people of Jawa & Bali.

It has & had a similar function.

Am I splitting hairs?

No, not at all, the word "same" does mean the same as the word "similar".