Why don't Co Jang have scabbards?
 

Anyone else curious why Co Jang swords do not typically use scabbards while most other Sumatra/Aceh swords do?

Could it be more of a question of what survived?

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/662961

Maurice is very knowledgeable where Dutch colonial colonial sources are concerned and references them as not being worn with a scabbard... he may be able to cite references for you.
https://bataviacollectables.jimdofre...-cojang-rudus/

In case that met museum link dies:

Jeff,

I have not seen a scabbard for the Co Jang either, until Gavin's link to the Met item. As the museum notes say, this is a northern Sumatran sword with inlaid gold work done in what is now Malaysia. I would suggest that the scabbard came from Malaysia also, as it does not look like Aceh work to me. In any case, the only way to get that sword into that scabbard would be to have a slot down part of the top of the scabbard that admitted the wide blade towards the tip. I've not seen a slotted scabbard on Aceh swords before. The scabbard shown seems rather bulky and cumbersome for routine carry--perhaps designed for more ceremonial use.

Your original idea that these swords did not have a scabbard, at least within the Aceh culture, may be correct. That doesn't answer your question as to why they did not (usually) have a scabbard. Perhaps the progressive widening of the blade from hilt to tip made it difficult to design a tight fitting (closed) scabbard for them, and for some reason this alternative scabbard design with a slotted entry was unpopular or unavailable in Aceh.

Just to document Maurice's comment about his "gliwang" (aka klewang, kelewang) which is pertinent to Jeff's question.

This suggests a ceremonial/display role for the co jang. The same use was made of the kampilan among the Moro groups of Mindanao.

The shown example from the Met isn't a Co Jang but a Rudus, the blade form is the same but it was used by the Batak while a Co Jang or Gliwang is a Aceh sword and was the favored weapon by the Aceh war. The scabbard from the Met example is also Batak (Pakpak) work and not Malay, the complete sword seems very ceremonial or status to my eyes while the Co jang was a war sword.
Why the scabbards from the Co Jang have been simple from palm leaves or goat skin I can't answer but may have to do with the fact that it was a pure war sword.

Regards,
Detlef

My Co Jang

My one with scabbard. Is this a cojang or rudus ?

Fantastic ensemble!

Beautiful Thomas! :cool: It's a Co Jang from Aceh. Do you have a translation from the inscription on the scabbard?

Well, there you go. Thank you. Is the scabbard one piece with the open top or two halves? Does the band add a bit of a spring to hold the blade? I've read descriptions of Moro kampilan scabbards that have that feature.

A stunning status sword Thomas. I love the Peurawot like throat section.

These open sheath types are quite common amongst a variety of knives and swords from the region, I'm sure some simple google image searches will turn up many.

Attached is another sword type from Sumatra, albeit a later sheath, it is of the type found with these weapons, both ceremonial, status and combat.

The knives are not typically open backed, but do carry the elaborate hooked motifs at the throat.

Here are some variants from within the Forum pages.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=33079
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...1&postcount=15
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18416

No I do not have translation

#all: thanks a lot

2 halfs of wood without glue. The brass bands hold them together, but not so strong that there will be a springy effect

I think Maurice's observation that the gliwang is never worn, but rather carried in the hand, is consistent with the scabbards we see here. Thomas's example with the slit along the top of the scabbard would make it hard to wear on the body, and keep the sword contained, and these can be reasonably long swords as well. The Moro panabas, another heavy battle weapon, tends not to have a sheath too. The blade edge sometimes had a small strip of wood with a groove that was fastened with a strip of cloth to protect the edge, and the entire weapon was usually wrapped in cloth and carried to its place of use. The edge guard and cloth were discarded when battle was engaged.

First time I've seen a slotted scabbard from Aceh. Gavin, can you show us more examples?

Well, Maurices description actually was:

"It is remarkable that a gliwang never had been worn with a scabbard. It was always carried in hand and not in the belt. Sometimes the blade had been covered in palmleaf or goatskin."

Which corresponds to the earlier Albert van Zonneveld's publication: "The Co Jang is worn without a scabbard. As protection the blade may be wound in palm-leaf or goat's skin."

The carrying in the hand is already the second line of defense, so to say.

Not at hand other than other types in close localities in the links I quickly cobbled together... as a side note, here is a Panabas scabbard for you.

Two swords from Aceh with similar scabbards, one of them collected 1888, and a third one, which could be Batak and perhaps with a different kind of blade, but collected in Aceh, all in Wereldmuseum. It seems, Wereldmuseum (former Tropenmuseum) doesn't diferentiate between Co Jang and Rudus and calls them generally Rudus. These swords appear to have identical blades, as Sajen already noted.

Thanks Gavin. Yes, there were occasional scabbards for panabas, but not commonly. Governor William Taft in the background of the photograph. Went on to become U.S. President after Teddy Roosevelt, and was pretty much a disaster. Later became Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court

A very interesting Cojang Thomas. I have never seen a scabbard like this before.

In the past we had a few active forum members who where able to decyphre this Djawi / arabic writtings.
But unfortunately they are not active anymore I believe.

Best regards,
Willem