Indonesian blade with 'Tjikeroeh' inscription

Amuk Murugul · 21st September 2009, 09:24 AM

Hullo everybody!

The blade appears to be made in the village/district of Tjikeroeh, which still exists today and is now spelt Cikeruh (any other form of current spelling is either born out of ignorance or a simple typo).
It appears to be of good quality, considering the era and the fact that the manufacturing was a small village operation, which also turned out everyday utensils (i.e. not an armourer). In fact, the operation was generally a sort of village cooperative, with different households being involved in different parts of the manufacturing process.
The blade was made at the end of the period when the village was producing swords for the colonial Dutch para-military/military (the Dutch shifted production of swords to Europe in 1898).

The motif and the clip-point suggests that it was probably made for a European and not as a run-of-the-mill product.
I call it a pedang as it does not follow the golok protocol.
The hilt and scabbard are also atypical for a local pedang.

Best,

sta94 · 21st September 2009, 11:51 AM

Hi Amuk, thanks for the additional info, much appreciated!

Henk · 21st September 2009, 04:28 PM

Because this type of daggers was made for the Dutch and after european standards I wouldn't call this nor a Golok nor a Pedang.

The shape of this dagger is more that of a Hartsvanger (Dutch) or as the Germans call it a Hirschfanger.

asomotif · 21st September 2009, 09:46 PM

I agree with Henk.

These weapons where not made for indonesian people.
In that case I can not Imagine that there would be a date and name.

The shape is indeed of a hartsvanger and also the handguards often follow hartvangers designs.

Ps. this summer I visted family in France and I saw a golok with also a inscription, but then tjikeru or something like that.
The owner told me that he bought it in the 70' and that it was made before his own eyes in a workshop in Jakarta, using old car springs.

So I can imagine that the name Tjikeroeh was also used in other locations.

Sajen · 21st September 2009, 11:51 PM

After looking again to the complete piece I have to agree with Henk and Willem, it look indeed like a "Hirschfänger" and in this case the handle and sheat would be original.

sajen

Amuk Murugul · 22nd September 2009, 12:17 AM

Hi everybody,

I see the usual problem of naming an article.

It is definitely not a golok.
However, it was made in Soenda and it is a short sword (by European standards). The Soenda generic word for sword is 'pedang'.(BTW... I should emphasise that the piece is a good quality commercial piece, not as good as a military piece )

Are we going to quibble and be pedantic about whether it should be called a shortsword/hunting-sword/hunting-dagger/forestry-sword/forestry-dagger (English), hirschfanger (German) or hartsvanger (Dutch)?

As for the bit about the Jakarta workshop,.... Not surprising!
Ref. saying:'Ada doeit....can do it....'
...anything can be done for the right money.....
Hence....CAVEAT EMPTORRR!!

If we want to play the blame game...
Quite a few vendors/dealers (especially from Europe where prices are relatively higher than in the USA) go to Indo once or twice a year to stock up. Some among them have 'special requests'.

......Big Brother is watching....

Best,

sta94 · 22nd September 2009, 04:31 AM

hmmmm ... interesting ... very interesting. Thanks for all the additional info. Really appreciate it. I paid a decent amount but thankfully not too much for this piece, so I will not be laying awake at nights! Also, I really like it.

Really great to know all the extra stuff you guys mentioned.

sta94 · 22nd September 2009, 04:40 AM

BTW, a lot of the photos I posted above seem to be showing up as red Xs. Are you guys seeing the same? Usually I use pics saved on photobucket, which show up oretty big. But to save space I decreased their size on Picasa and posted them here. Anything I'm doing wrong? Thanks!

21st September 2009, 09:24 AM	#1
Amuk Murugul Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben Posts: 473	Hullo everybody! The blade appears to be made in the village/district of Tjikeroeh, which still exists today and is now spelt Cikeruh (any other form of current spelling is either born out of ignorance or a simple typo). It appears to be of good quality, considering the era and the fact that the manufacturing was a small village operation, which also turned out everyday utensils (i.e. not an armourer). In fact, the operation was generally a sort of village cooperative, with different households being involved in different parts of the manufacturing process. The blade was made at the end of the period when the village was producing swords for the colonial Dutch para-military/military (the Dutch shifted production of swords to Europe in 1898). The motif and the clip-point suggests that it was probably made for a European and not as a run-of-the-mill product. I call it a pedang as it does not follow the golok protocol. The hilt and scabbard are also atypical for a local pedang. Best,

21st September 2009, 11:51 AM	#2
sta94 Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 16	Hi Amuk, thanks for the additional info, much appreciated!

21st September 2009, 04:28 PM	#3
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Because this type of daggers was made for the Dutch and after european standards I wouldn't call this nor a Golok nor a Pedang. The shape of this dagger is more that of a Hartsvanger (Dutch) or as the Germans call it a Hirschfanger.

21st September 2009, 09:46 PM	#4
asomotif Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,235	I agree with Henk. These weapons where not made for indonesian people. In that case I can not Imagine that there would be a date and name. The shape is indeed of a hartsvanger and also the handguards often follow hartvangers designs. Ps. this summer I visted family in France and I saw a golok with also a inscription, but then tjikeru or something like that. The owner told me that he bought it in the 70' and that it was made before his own eyes in a workshop in Jakarta, using old car springs. So I can imagine that the name Tjikeroeh was also used in other locations.

21st September 2009, 11:51 PM	#5
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,330	After looking again to the complete piece I have to agree with Henk and Willem, it look indeed like a "Hirschfänger" and in this case the handle and sheat would be original. sajen

22nd September 2009, 12:17 AM	#6
Amuk Murugul Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Kaboejoetan Galoenggoeng Mélben Posts: 473	Hi everybody, I see the usual problem of naming an article. It is definitely not a golok. However, it was made in Soenda and it is a short sword (by European standards). The Soenda generic word for sword is 'pedang'.(BTW... I should emphasise that the piece is a good quality commercial piece, not as good as a military piece ) Are we going to quibble and be pedantic about whether it should be called a shortsword/hunting-sword/hunting-dagger/forestry-sword/forestry-dagger (English), hirschfanger (German) or hartsvanger (Dutch)? As for the bit about the Jakarta workshop,.... Not surprising! Ref. saying:'Ada doeit....can do it....' ...anything can be done for the right money..... Hence....CAVEAT EMPTORRR!! If we want to play the blame game... Quite a few vendors/dealers (especially from Europe where prices are relatively higher than in the USA) go to Indo once or twice a year to stock up. Some among them have 'special requests'. ......Big Brother is watching.... Best,

22nd September 2009, 04:31 AM	#7
sta94 Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 16	hmmmm ... interesting ... very interesting. Thanks for all the additional info. Really appreciate it. I paid a decent amount but thankfully not too much for this piece, so I will not be laying awake at nights! Also, I really like it. Really great to know all the extra stuff you guys mentioned.

22nd September 2009, 04:40 AM	#8
sta94 Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 16	BTW, a lot of the photos I posted above seem to be showing up as red Xs. Are you guys seeing the same? Usually I use pics saved on photobucket, which show up oretty big. But to save space I decreased their size on Picasa and posted them here. Anything I'm doing wrong? Thanks!