Bolo with wide blade and t-grip for identification

[tom hyle]

BTW, a bit about the definitions given of machete; they do not (as I suppose one might expect from lexicographers?...) show a good understanding of the proper use and the physics of machete (or perhaps of cutting), in perhaps typical fashion, getting things wrong when trying to go in depth. First, though I find the relation of the name to "mace" very interesting, especially in light of the traditional use of the flat of the machete as bludgeon by police and bosses, machete is not a heavy knife or sword; there are heavy varieties, but it is by and large marked by being a lightweight sword. The old forged ones had distal taper, for all the same reasons as any other sword. The reason it's not good for (heavy) woody vegitation is certainly not that it lacks a primary bevel (which, rather subtly and best seen at the butt of the tang, many old ones do have, anyway); if machete had a high and easily noticed primary bevel/wedge section at the thickness it's at it would have a very fine edge, rather than the heavy one it does have, and chopping wood would just snap its edge out, like a butcher knife (yes, I've seen it; it's sad). No, the reason machete isn't the best for cutting hard woody vegetation (though it will do it for a good long while before the tang finally breaks; seen that, too) is that it is too thin, especially at the base, but also in the cutting area. The increased width often seen toward the tip is not to add weight, as often said; that's incidental; the mass serves another purpose, which is to absorb some of the vibration that can be such a problem, especially with thin swords.
Why is machete thin? oh, fun times, explaining that! African influence?(check!) Cheapness (check!) The rise of spring-tempered blades (check!) Origins as a slave tool master didn't want to be too good for fighting (check!) It would really tire you out to use a heavy one all day (check!); lot of use I am there.....

[tom hyle]

Wow, I don't think I'll edit that one any more (unless it offends someone and I have to); check it out; I tried to roll my eyes at my own broad net-casting, but the placement worked out just right to roll 'em up at Master's oppressiveness.....I tell youse; it was a total accident, but I really enjoy it though; even the computer can make a joke, I guess.
One other little thing about the word machete; Spanish officials in the 19th and (at least) early 20th used to apply it very broadly and liberally; How 'bout it, Therion; that Spainish military "machete" I swapped you ain't no machete, eh? It's a heavy-ass backsword.....I'd hesitate to use the Spanish term as a designation for this type, though as it's all we have I guess it makes sense. I certainly wouldn't read any thing into it as to the traditional usage of the sword.

[Rick]

Tom , maybe you're looking at the wrong language for the word root .
Try macerar , Spanish to macerate .

[Ian]

Thanks Tom ... I think. My eyes are having trouble reading fast enough to keep up with your thoughts. Man, you pack a lot in one paragraph.

How does what you say here mesh with Carter Rila's essay on the machete posted elsewhere on this site?

Ian.

Originally Posted by tom hyle

The reason it's not good for (heavy) woody vegitation is certainly not that it lacks a primary bevel (which, rather subtly and best seen at the butt of the tang, many old ones do, anyway); if machete had a high and easily noticed primary bevel/wedge section at the thickness it's at it would have a very fine edge, rather than the heavy one it does have, and chopping wood would just snap its edge out, like a butcher knife (yes, I've seen it; it's sad). No, the reason machete isn't the best for cutting hard woody vegetation (though it will do it for a good long while before the tang finally breaks; seen that, too) is that it is too thin, especially at the base, but also in the cutting area. The increased width often seen toward the tip is not to add weight, as often said; that's incidental; the mass serves another purpose, which is to absorb some of the vibration that can be such a problem, especially with thin swords.
Why is machete thin? oh, fun times, explaining that! African influence?(check!) Cheapness (check!) The rise of spring-tempered blades (check!) Origins as a slave tool master didn't want to be too good for fighting (check!) It would really tire you out to use a heavy one all day (check!); lot of use I am there.....

[tom hyle]

not sure; Carter & I usually agree about machete, but use very different language; he tends to talk about the action of the hand and wrist that produce the proper/true machete cut, while I tend to talk about its result; the way it moves the cutting tip through the.....workpiece? victim? Also, I don't remember if he said anything about the African connection that seems fairly clear to me. It's been a while; I'll re-read.....dang homework
Rick; doesn't mace come in under that same etymology somewhere? To chew up or to crush.....that's what I was thinking, anyway.

[tom hyle]

Meshes fairly well, I think. I had forgotten Carters' creditting of American Indian stick use for machete origins. A very good spice to add to the mix He does also mention the more usually heard lineage through the "sailors' cutlass" and other european hangers, including dual use types like langenmesser (commonly called grossmesser; props to Therion for diseminating the more correct form, or at least he says so, and he's probably right, but I don't know how the argument goes.....cutlace, cuttoe, there was a Spanish version, too; a dual-use soldiers' and peasants' landclearing sword with a curved blade and wide tip, but I forget the name; I think Museum Rep.s once had a copy for sale). It is worth noting that machetes are said to be commonly called "cutlass" in the Caribean region.
The resemblance to butchering knives is A/intentional, as there has always been a somewhat legalistic claim that machete (as with many large European peasant knives) is a knife, rather than a sword; ie nonviolent ( so strong and persistent is this custom that N American men still regularly tell me "That's not a sword; that's a machete!" Yeah, and that's not a mammal, it's a dog.....the women [of course?] more usually know that they don't know..... ), and B/ only pertains to the overall view of the sword, and the handle design, but certainly the cross-section is different in that machete, even when it does have a slight full height bevel, has a thick, heavy, relatively obtusely angled edge for strength against battering, compared to a butchering knife's thin, fine, acute edge for slashing/slicing.
Carter also mentions the way the term seems to be much more broadly applied and to heavier implements in Spain than in at least N America.
I don't think he's right about machete costeno of the Acapulco region being a post wwII phenomenon. This is the "yelman" machete; also known, I am told, as "cuchilla del costa" or (West) coast knife. We've all seen the engraved ones, I guess, with the saddle scabbards and the eagle pommels, that are so very similar to US machetes of the early 20th, and though production of the horn handled distal tapered, full height bevel machete seems to have gone on longer in Mexico than US, many of them seem quite old. I've an old farmery one, with a different (zoomorphic?) type pommel. The two native ones (I've another with a possibly reshaped Robert Mole blade) that I have both have typical hotstruck Spanish colonial maker's marks; name (personal? family? town?) or initials, as seen on Luzon bolos as well, while the engraving is a later cold process, and this seems typical of Mexican and Spanish colonial work in general? I had a nice little "bowie" though, where there was only engraving "Vivan los Herdez" Herdez is a family name; not sure maker or owner......otherwise it's more often sometimes the other way; hotstruck mark but no engraving, or else both.
We're pretty well on the same page it seems as to the role played by the rise of cheap modern spring tempered carbon steel in the rise of this thin, light sword, which lacks stiffness when softer, though one does encounter softer ones, as well.

[tom hyle]

Leyte has an official website with a map. Abuyog is on the East coast. There is a town called Kananga in the interior, for whatever that might mean.

[nosmo king]

Hello everyone,I was noticing the "mystery" native's earrings.They are called batlings and they are made of hornbill.They are only worn by Ilongots that have taken heads.Here is a pic of an Ilongot with a segmented set of batlings.Notice his facial features!!!
Also,one of the Igorot tribes are the Kankana-ey this could be what they meant on that photo.
Here's an interesting link:http://www.geocities.com/sagada_igor...ic_groups.html

[Ian]

Nosmo:

I've blown up that picture of the guy with the bandana a few times and I thought that the two pieces of material coming down each side of his head were the two ends of the bandana tied around his forehead. Really hard to make out much detail in our mystery man photo.

Ian.

[tom hyle]

found it! Machete filipina to compare to parang pandat

[Ian]

This is an old thread about a mystery machete-like knife with a bifid hilt. They are not common, but they are old enough to be found in Spanish museums that collected them in the 19th C. The knife was eventually identified because the individual holding it in the studio photograph had ear ornaments peculiar to the Ilongot.

Attached to this post is a picture of Ilongot warriors carrying these large knives. The bifurcated ends of the hilts and circular disc guards are clearly visible. That these are Ilongot men is confirmed by the man standing at the right of the picture--the head dress he wears is unique to the Ilongot and is made from a particular hornbill. This head dress can only be worn by a warrior who has taken the head of an enemy. The Ilongot were headhunters until the mid-20th C. when they were finally persuaded by the Philippines Government to stop their headhunting practices.