Barong Classification

themorningstar · 10th April 2005, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunjer

federico,
glad you could chime in. you forgot to mention the boto shaped pommels

so, since you appear to be the primary authority on moro weapons, would it be safe to suggest that we should just forget about the classification? with your vast knowledge on this matter, how do you suggest i approach this? i'm really just trying to create a very elementary, general guideline. ultimately, what i'm trying to do is, i'm just trying to learn more about what measely collection i have, and at the least would like to know where it specifically came from. as i've stated, i've used cato's book and this specific thread as my referrence:
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000562.html

please fred, don't leave us hanging like this. whenever you get the time, it would be great if you can add pictures and stuff, maybe elaborate even more, then this thread would definitely be archive material...

ron

primary authority???

tom hyle · 10th April 2005, 10:15 AM

This is similar to what we're discussing with seme; there appear to be two definably different styles. defining them as different by their feature is like part A, then comes B; defining whether it is age/time, ethnicity, social status, personal taste, preferred fighting style, or what that makes for the difference; a whole 'nother, vaguer, more difficult it seems, and thankfully seperable can of worms.

Spunjer · 10th April 2005, 01:47 PM

ian,
good question. i was discussing that particular barong with a fellow forumite offline. it appears to be a post -1930 type based on the statement below:

Quote:

Spunjer
Quote:
...these "general guidelines" basically applies to the earlier barungs (pre-1930's) and not to barungs from WWII or later. The more contemporary barongs from WWII and later are almost too similar to distinguish between the different Sulu tribes.

thanks zel. forgot to add that very important piece of info...

based on our discussion, the punto appearance was mentioned; somehow it looks newer. also the hilt is missing the sheen found on older ones; but then again it could be the picture. what's your opinion on it?

btw, here's another one that i would like to hear everyone's comment:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEDW%3AIT&rd=1
samal battle barong???
i will add some closeups as soon as possible...

Ian · 10th April 2005, 04:19 PM

Hi Spunjer:

I put this one up for a couple of reasons. One of those is identifying when the shandigan style of barung arose. I have not seen more than a couple that I would confidently date to the 19th C. or earlier. Are most examples that we see today mainly a modern revival of an older and rare form?

As you say, this one could be post-1930 or has some post-1930 elements, but it's hard to say without direct inspection. It may be earlier 20th C. The punto, in particular, looks fairly recent.

Speaking of this punto, one thing missing from your previous discussions is mention of the Muslims living in the southern half of Palawan. The Palawano muslims are related to the Tausug and Samal, but they have some "local" features to their weapons in terms of decoration to the hilt and scabbard. One of the features that I have observed is the use of triangular designs, similar to the "nicks" seen on the punto of this barung. Similar designs are seen on some of the recently made barung scababrds from northern Borneo. You may have seen some Palawano pieces when you visited Mr Ven.

How do the Palawano weapons fit into your overall classification?

Ian.

tom hyle · 10th April 2005, 04:43 PM

I think the round hollow grind as such, especially applied to the flats of a blade, as with shandigan barong, and often on a variety of other sword types (I've seen kukuri, of course, pedang sabet/parang nabur, and Japanese "commoner" swords, as well as the contemporary (to us) CAS Iberia and I forget their big competitor's name work, and that of their smaller contemporaries) first came into coastal Asia plus India (India first? from Europe?) perhaps starting in the mid 19th, hitting some sort of pinnacle in the south before wwII, and coming in up north (PI) mostly after wwwII. Japan seems to cover almost the whole timeframe, as do kukuri?).
As to the finish on old Moro wood sword dress: I've seen it on nice old prewwII stuff be pretty much bare dry wood that had once been oiled or lightly waxed or else a thick, built-up high-gloss clear lacquer type substance; again we have two very different styles.......
Does some sort of flow of technological and cultural influence seem to sweep along the southern edge of the Himalayas?..........random thought...........

Spunjer · 11th April 2005, 10:15 PM

ian,
again, for clarification, the compilation was based on the two sources given above. this is not mine to take credit for; i'm merely rehashing what's already been written, kinda like cliff notes. i haven't read any threads, past or present, that challenges what the authors wrote and discussed, therefore i would assume that the majority agrees to what's being stated. if there are new findings and would like to share the information, that is great; this is what this thread is for. i'd like to be content knowing i have a neat looking leaf shaped sword with wooden handles and wooden scabbard, but unfortunately (or fortunately, however you wanna look at it) i respect it too much and i think it would be a travesty to not learn more about it.

as for where the palawano barong fits in according to the original post; well, it doesn't because those sources quoted only explains, and again i would like to emphasize, the general differences between the tausug, samal and yakan barongs.

i'm sure volumes can be written about the barong in general, as i'm sure there are variants within those tribes that we haven't seen before. maybe one day, a book or two will be written about it, and that goes for all pilipino weapons. that would be nice...

tom,
not trying to ignore you or anything, i just need to clarify these things. as for your thoughts, it is something to think about.

themorningstar,
you have pm!

Spunjer · 11th April 2005, 10:27 PM

here's the barong i was talking about...

11th April 2005, 10:27 PM	#7
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	here's the barong i was talking about... Attached Images

10th April 2005, 10:15 AM	#2
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	This is similar to what we're discussing with seme; there appear to be two definably different styles. defining them as different by their feature is like part A, then comes B; defining whether it is age/time, ethnicity, social status, personal taste, preferred fighting style, or what that makes for the difference; a whole 'nother, vaguer, more difficult it seems, and thankfully seperable can of worms.

10th April 2005, 04:19 PM	#4
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,453	Hi Spunjer: I put this one up for a couple of reasons. One of those is identifying when the shandigan style of barung arose. I have not seen more than a couple that I would confidently date to the 19th C. or earlier. Are most examples that we see today mainly a modern revival of an older and rare form? As you say, this one could be post-1930 or has some post-1930 elements, but it's hard to say without direct inspection. It may be earlier 20th C. The punto, in particular, looks fairly recent. Speaking of this punto, one thing missing from your previous discussions is mention of the Muslims living in the southern half of Palawan. The Palawano muslims are related to the Tausug and Samal, but they have some "local" features to their weapons in terms of decoration to the hilt and scabbard. One of the features that I have observed is the use of triangular designs, similar to the "nicks" seen on the punto of this barung. Similar designs are seen on some of the recently made barung scababrds from northern Borneo. You may have seen some Palawano pieces when you visited Mr Ven. How do the Palawano weapons fit into your overall classification? Ian.

10th April 2005, 04:43 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	I think the round hollow grind as such, especially applied to the flats of a blade, as with shandigan barong, and often on a variety of other sword types (I've seen kukuri, of course, pedang sabet/parang nabur, and Japanese "commoner" swords, as well as the contemporary (to us) CAS Iberia and I forget their big competitor's name work, and that of their smaller contemporaries) first came into coastal Asia plus India (India first? from Europe?) perhaps starting in the mid 19th, hitting some sort of pinnacle in the south before wwII, and coming in up north (PI) mostly after wwwII. Japan seems to cover almost the whole timeframe, as do kukuri?). As to the finish on old Moro wood sword dress: I've seen it on nice old prewwII stuff be pretty much bare dry wood that had once been oiled or lightly waxed or else a thick, built-up high-gloss clear lacquer type substance; again we have two very different styles....... Does some sort of flow of technological and cultural influence seem to sweep along the southern edge of the Himalayas?..........random thought...........

11th April 2005, 10:15 PM	#6
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	ian, again, for clarification, the compilation was based on the two sources given above. this is not mine to take credit for; i'm merely rehashing what's already been written, kinda like cliff notes. i haven't read any threads, past or present, that challenges what the authors wrote and discussed, therefore i would assume that the majority agrees to what's being stated. if there are new findings and would like to share the information, that is great; this is what this thread is for. i'd like to be content knowing i have a neat looking leaf shaped sword with wooden handles and wooden scabbard, but unfortunately (or fortunately, however you wanna look at it) i respect it too much and i think it would be a travesty to not learn more about it. as for where the palawano barong fits in according to the original post; well, it doesn't because those sources quoted only explains, and again i would like to emphasize, the general differences between the tausug, samal and yakan barongs. i'm sure volumes can be written about the barong in general, as i'm sure there are variants within those tribes that we haven't seen before. maybe one day, a book or two will be written about it, and that goes for all pilipino weapons. that would be nice... tom, not trying to ignore you or anything, i just need to clarify these things. as for your thoughts, it is something to think about. themorningstar, you have pm!