[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

kino,

Your sword has had me thinking. It appears to have some age--probably not mid-19th C, but could easily be late 19th/early 20th C. While the overall form looks Bagobo, especially the downturned quillion, the shape of the pommel is not traditional, and the brass grip is not quite the same form as Jose's. It lacks the little "spikes" extending up towards the pommel. This makes me think that instead of Bagobo, it could be from the Tagakaolu who are a closely related group living around Davao City. They have brass ferrules of this form and hilts that are slightly different from the standard Bagobo form that Jose's shows.

The blade is a beauty and clearly well forged. It is also of the "small kampilan" type. This is a fairly common blade form among Bagobo swords—more common are the "fat-belly bolos" in my experience. Yours reminds me of the T'boli tok or kafilan blades and I wonder if your blade was forged by a T'boli. The T'boli made first rate blades that they traded widely and were renowned for their high quality and toughness.

It would not surprise me if this were a T'boli blade with mounts for a Tagakoalu owner.


BTW, the label says he represented his country, clearly the U.S.A. That would not be a reference to the US Civil War, which was fought between two sides of the same country (although the South disagreed). The Spanish-American War seems much more likely, which would place the sword being collected circa 1900–1905. Of course, the label could be entirely wrong.

Hope you won't mind me chiming in sir Ian- my curator-friend who worked with the Bagobo said that the outcropping with metal part at the butt-pommel may have been broken along with a significant part of wood, then it may have been repaired or smoothened over. He said that damage has been known to happen to such Bagobo kampilan variants.