A recently acquired tabak (from Apalit?)

[Rafngard]

Originally Posted by Sajen

The knife byself I would place between the 1920s until 1940s but the scabbard looks much younger.

Do you think the scabbard is significantly younger in both cases?

So it arrived today! Quick shipping. These are after a bit of light cleaning with soap, water, and for the brass ferrule, lemon juice and salt.

Both the Blade and the scabbard are marked with the number "12." One side of the blade as what might have been intended to say "Apalit EB," but the stamp is unclear. I'm including side by side comparison of the tooled patterns on the tooled leather scabbard. They're nearly identical. The rear side of the scabbard shows similar construction.

Also, does anyone have any thoughts on caring for the leather? It's rather "dry" at present.

Thanks,
Leif

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Rafngard

Do you think the scabbard is significantly younger in both cases?

No, you are correct, I think the tabak is complete (sword & scabbard) younger as the other sword.

I use shoe polish for leather scabbards, it works great for me.

Regards,
Detlef

[Ian]

Leif:

You recently linked this thread in discussing another Apalit knife. I'm sorry I did not respond to your initial post--better late than never I guess.

Thank you for posting this example of a tabak with an Apalit hilt. I have not seen such a combination before, and I associate the tabak more with Ilokano examples, sometimes with a sinan kapitan hilt (the head of a guy in a military cap). This same blade style is seen in a Negrito weapon form that Fox* labeled as a katana and which he says was used for combat.

Very interesting mix of styles on your knife.

Ian.


* Fox, R.B. The Pinatubo Negritos: Their useful plants and material culture. Philippine Journal of Science 81: 260–361, 1952. [For a transcription of the text and copies of the figures, see here.]

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

Leif:

You recently linked this thread in discussing another Apalit knife. I'm sorry I did not respond to your initial post--better late than never I guess.

Thank you for posting this example of a tabak with an Apalit hilt. I have not seen such a combination before, and I associate the tabak more with Ilokano examples, sometimes with a sinan kapitan hilt (the head of a guy in a military cap). This same blade style is seen in a Negrito weapon form that Fox* labeled as a katana and which he says was used for combat.

Very interesting mix of styles on your knife.

Ian.


* Fox, R.B. The Pinatubo Negritos: Their useful plants and material culture. Philippine Journal of Science 81: 260–361, 1952. [For a transcription of the text and copies of the figures, see here.]

Hullo sir Ian =) We in Luzon define 'tabak' as a general combat blade. This is a thoroughly Apalit-provenanced piece (not a mixed one), which Fox correctly classified as 'katana'. The one you mentioned with a figural comes from somewhere else. There are actually different classifications for Northern Luzon blunt bolos, each with their own origin-area, handling nuances, and unique features

[Ian]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hullo sir Ian =) We in Luzon define 'tabak' as a general combat blade. This is a thoroughly Apalit-provenanced piece (not a mixed one), which Fox correctly classified as 'katana'. The one you mentioned with a figural comes from somewhere else. There are actually different classifications for Northern Luzon blunt bolos, each with their own origin-area, handling nuances, and unique features

Hullo Xasterix:

Again, thank you for the clarification. The designation "katana" has generated some discussion previously. Do you know the origin of this term in relation to the sword above? Can you also expand upon the "different classifications of Northern Luzon bolos, each with their own origin-area, handling nuances, and unique features."

Attached are some pictures from the Macau Exhibition and the descriptions for each one in the associated catalog. Can you comment on the provenance/naming for each of these? In the catalog the first one was attributed to Southern Luzon (Batangas), the second to Northern Luzon, and the third was attributed also to Batangas (clearly incorrect--the hilt is Ilocano). The first two have chisel-ground edges.

210. Luzon Tabak
Period : Post 1900, Katipunan Era.
Hilt : Carved fluted carabao horn hilt with brass wire inlaid in flutes.
Blade : Chisel ground blade with a forward down and upsweep shaped blade.
Scabbard : Tooled leather scabbard with leather throat.
Origin : Southern Luzon, possibly Batangas.*
Overall Length : 51.5 cm [20.3"]
Blade Length : 35.5 cm [14.0"]
Handle Length : 16 cm [6.3"]
Scabbard Length : 37.8 cm [14.9"]

211. Luzon Tabak
Period : Post 1900, Katipunan Era.
Hilt : Detailed and intricately carved carabao horn hilt in the shape of a horse head detailed silver reigns and eye cover. Round silver ferrule. Intricately carved floral motif. Peened tang.
Blade : Chisel ground blade with the clipped tip. Blade is inlaid with silver in floral motif.
Scabbard : Tooled leather scabbard with leather throat.
Origin : Northern Luzon
Overall Length : 49.2 cm [19.4"]
Blade Length : 33.2 cm [13.1"]
Handle Length : 16 cm [6.3"]
Scabbard Length : 32.5 cm [12.8"]


212.
Luzon Tabak
Period : Post 1900, Katipunan Era
Hilt : Carved carabao horn in the shape of a human figural head with hat/cap. Hilt with octagonal brass ferrule and cap with peened tang construction.
Blade : Long clipped tipped blade. Typical blade shape used by Katipuneros.
Scabbard : Not available
Origin : Southern Luzon, Batangas†
Overall Length : 65.2 cm
Blade Length : 50.2 cm
Handle Length : 15 cm
Scabbard Length : No Scabbard

Regards,

Ian

* On further consideration, I would say this one is also Northern Luzon. The hilt is typical of Tinguian knives and the blade shows the small cut-out feature adjacent to the hilt that is seen commonly on Tinguian knives.

† The figural hilt on the last one is definitely Ilocano in origin, probably from Ilocos Sur, and is termed sinan-kapitan or Antonio Luna according to migueldiaz. Antonio Luna was an Ilocano hero of the Philippine Revolution.
.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

Hullo Xasterix:

Again, thank you for the clarification. The designation "katana" has generated some discussion previously. Do you know the origin of this term in relation to the sword above? Can you also expand upon the "different classifications of Northern Luzon bolos, each with their own origin-area, handling nuances, and unique features."

Attached are some pictures from the Macau Exhibition and the descriptions for each one in the associated catalog. Can you comment on the provenance/naming for each of these? In the catalog the first one was attributed to Southern Luzon (Batangas), the second to Northern Luzon, and the third was attributed also to Batangas (clearly incorrect--the hilt is Ilocano). The first two have chisel-ground edges.
[/size][/font]Regards,

Ian

* On further consideration, I would say this one is also Northern Luzon. The hilt is typical of Tinguian knives and the blade shows the small cut-out feature adjacent to the hilt that is seen commonly on Tinguian knives.

† The figural hilt on the last one is definitely Ilocano in origin, probably from Ilocos Sur, and is termed sinan-kapitan or Antonio Luna according to migueldiaz. Antonio Luna was an Ilocano hero of the Philippine Revolution.
.

Hi Sir Ian. Apologies if I cannot answer in full, as some of the info you've requested is being kept confidential, for the reason that it may be published in a future book or study. I'll answer in a general sense, to strike a middle ground, but again, apologies if I cannot go into the specifics.

The samples which can support my claim are, unfortunately, also confidential and cannot be uploaded, but I'll at least mention the number and dates of the samples.

The Luzon Tabaks (210 and 211) are from Central Luzon, not Northern. At least 5 samples provenanced from that Central Luzon area- dated 1901, 1916, 1940, 1980s, and 2000s (with additional samples up to present-day) - exhibit similarities in blade profile, blade grind, scabbard, and hilt / scabbard patterns. Northern Luzon does not make chisel-ground blades.

While 212 exhibits a figural that can be found in Ilocos Sur, its blade features are not consistent with the blunt bolo type from that area. 212 is a katana. There are at least 4 pieces (2 of them katanas) that have similar figurals. By conjecture, either an Ilocos-made figural was married to a katana blade, or the artisans in Pampanga are also able to make figurals.

As to why it's called a katana, there are 2 reasons for that. The general reason, and one easily believable and practical- is that it DOES look like a katana because of its blunt tip.

[xasterix]

Additionally, sir Ian: as I have gleaned from the elderly pandays in Ilocos, I have updated migueldiaz / sir Lorenz regarding the classification of Ilocos blades. The labeling of sinan- is only part of the classification. The complete classification runs thus:

Name of hilt (sinan-kapitan, sinan-Gabriela, sinan-bukelbukel, etc) + blade profile .

For example, in this modern blade I got from Santa, Ilocos Sur, the formal classification would be "sinan-kapitan na bulong pagay." Bulong pagay is the blade profile.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hi Sir Ian. Apologies if I cannot answer in full, as some of the info you've requested is being kept confidential, for the reason that it may be published in a future book or study. I'll answer in a general sense, to strike a middle ground, but again, apologies if I cannot go into the specifics.

The samples which can support my claim are, unfortunately, also confidential and cannot be uploaded, but I'll at least mention the number and dates of the samples.

The Luzon Tabaks (210 and 211) are from Central Luzon, not Northern. At least 5 samples provenanced from that Central Luzon area- dated 1901, 1916, 1940, 1980s, and 2000s (with additional samples up to present-day) - exhibit similarities in blade profile, blade grind, scabbard, and hilt / scabbard patterns. Northern Luzon does not make chisel-ground blades.

While 212 exhibits a figural that can be found in Ilocos Sur, its blade features are not consistent with the blunt bolo type from that area. 212 is a katana. There are at least 4 pieces (2 of them katanas) that have similar figurals. By conjecture, either an Ilocos-made figural was married to a katana blade, or the artisans in Pampanga are also able to make figurals.

As to why it's called a katana, there are 2 reasons for that. The general reason, and one easily believable and practical- is that it DOES look like a katana because of its blunt tip.

Hello Xas:

Thank you for getting back to me about these examples. Before responding to your comments, I must say I am deeply disappointed to see information coming from anonymous panday and examples that are held secretly. I have been hearing of possible publications relating to similar sources that were being discussed more than 20 years ago, and never amounted to anything. Data held in this manner is really not helpful at all. Scholarship shares freely and without secrets.

A while back, I wrote here on the work of Cole on the Tiguian and Ilocano people. I believe that your sources have overlooked the Tinguian in their analysis of the examples I have shown. For example, if you look at Figure 7 (no. 5) of Cole's work (which I reproduced in the referenced thread), you will see a blunt-ended sword that resembles a katana. This example was drawn in the early 1900s (1907-1908). Thus, the general style seems to be quite widespread in northern Luzon, and one could reasonably ask whether it originated in northern or central Luzon. Cole mentions that the swords of the Tinguian and Ilocano were highly prized and widely sought, and furthermore there has been a sizeable Ilocano population in Pampanga for a long time (according to Spanish and American census records). Is a knife made by an Ilocano in Pampanga an Ilocano or Pampangan knife (or both)? We can end up in a series of circular arguments without the kind of data that you suggest exists but is unavailable for wider study. Perhaps the weapon styles of some Northern and Central Luzon weapons are so inter-related that it makes little sense to separate Ilocano/Tinguian from Pampangan, because the distinctions are very subtle and may reflect a common historic source.

With respect to your proposal regarding no. 212 from the History of Steel Exhibition, another possibility is that the "katana" style was indeed made in Ilocos Sur and your sources are incorrect.

Lastly, the term katana seems to have been first recorded by Fox (1947) shortly after the conclusion of WWII and the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. Do you know if this term was present pre-WWII? As for its similarity to a Japanese katana, I guess that is possible but the similarity is not very close in terms of blade profile or length, more like a wakisashi in length (but not profile).

Again, thanks for your reply. I appreciate the information.

Regards,

Ian.