Is it a jimpul, help needed

[Sajen]

Two possible "gayang" examples I found here in old threads. Both are from Charles Saunders.

[Sajen]

And here two possible examples of "tilang kemarau".

[Ian]

Detlef,

I think there are many similar swords shown here, and in other threads of the forum, with variously attributed names. Perhaps the different names reflect the usage of different tribal sub-groups for essentially the same sword, but with minor differences in embellishments or style of blade. To me, they come from a common family and were likely used in a similar fashion. Jimpul seems to be the most common term used to describe these swords, and I personally would settle for that designation, knowing that there may be alternative names based on subtle differences or geographic/ethnic preferences. For those of us outside the culture of origin, it may be extremely difficult to learn the subtle, and perhaps not very important, differences in terminology.

[werecow]

Thanks for the examples Detlef. I must say I agree with Ian in that I'm going to have a harder time than usual telling these apart.

[kai]

Sorry, being a bit late to the party!

Looking from a distance, you may classify a car as a SUV. Manufacturer, model, age, etc. will make quite a difference for someone interested in cars though.

Bornean swords can be quite a challenge: Subtle details can make quite a difference! And examples in text books are not rarely misattributed. IMHO, it's important trying to place them into a multidimensional space not only including ethnic (sub)group, blade type, hilt style, etc. but also considering historic timelines and estimated age when classifying any specific piece. There are oddballs and cross-over pieces, too.

Regards,
Kai

[Ian]

Originally Posted by kai

... IMHO, it's important trying to place them into a multidimensional space not only including ethnic (sub)group, blade type, hilt style, etc. but also considering historic timelines and estimated age when classifying any specific piece. There are oddballs and cross-over pieces, too.

Regards,
Kai

Kai, I agree with you. If someone has a special interest in these particular swords, then it may be worth the effort and time to try to understand the various local names that may apply. The question comes, at what point does this attempt become a "name game." For the collector with a somewhat passing interest in such items, such as myself, I'm pleased others are willing to try to sort this out but I'm also content to recognize the swords here as simply jimpul.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Ian

For the collector with a somewhat passing interest in such items, such as myself, I'm pleased others are willing to try to sort this out but I'm also content to recognize the swords here as simply jimpul.

I really doubt that it's a jimpul.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by werecow

Thanks for the examples Detlef. I must say I agree with Ian in that I'm going to have a harder time than usual telling these apart.

Thank you as well! Me too but I like to learn!

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Ian

Detlef,

I think there are many similar swords shown here, and in other threads of the forum, with variously attributed names. Perhaps the different names reflect the usage of different tribal sub-groups for essentially the same sword, but with minor differences in embellishments or style of blade. To me, they come from a common family and were likely used in a similar fashion. Jimpul seems to be the most common term used to describe these swords, and I personally would settle for that designation, knowing that there may be alternative names based on subtle differences or geographic/ethnic preferences. For those of us outside the culture of origin, it may be extremely difficult to learn the subtle, and perhaps not very important, differences in terminology.

Hello Ian,

As Kai already wrote, it's interesting for me to find out more about the sword in question, which ethnic group it's come from, ect.
For example, when we talk about swords from Mindanao, we also try to assign them to a specific ethnic group. I think in this case it's not much different.

Regards,
Detlef