Why don't Co Jang have scabbards?

[JeffS]

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

[Gavin Nugent]

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/

[werecow]

In case that met museum link dies:

[Ian]

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.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Gavin Nugent

... 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/

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

Gliwang from Aceh, around 1870.

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. It was carried by the chiefs staff, and when traveling.

After the pacification of Aceh, it was prohibited to carry these swords, and many gliwang had been transformed to agricultural tools, while others kept in use for butchering sacrificial animals.

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

[Sajen]

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

[Sajen]

My Co Jang

[thomas hauschild]

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