Filipino Traditional Blades--a brief review (part I)

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Ian

This photograph shows an agricultural tool from Palawan.
This item is attributed to Palawan, which is a Tagalog-speaking island (except perhaps in the south among Muslim groups). I cannot find pangarit in my Tagalog/English dictionary. It appears to be derived from the affix pan/pang- and -arit. Arit is a Malay word meaning "sickle" which, given the appearance of this blade, would be an accurate description. There is a term in Cebuano, pangarit, which is synonymous with karit and that also means "sickle." I am unsure why a Palawano blade would have a Cebuano name, but the native term seems to be "sickle." It is a little disturbing to see that this also seems to be called panabas or garab in other regions. Neither a Moro panabas nor a Visayan garab look anything like this sickle.

I think this is one way in which unfortunate rumors can start. The neophyte reading this might jump to the conclusion that the panabas is a weapon of Muslims on Palawan. And so we have the Palawano panabas being discussed as if it were a fact. There could be a Palawano panabas similar to those in Mindanao or Sulu (I've never heard of one or seen any evidence for such a claim), but this picture is not the evidence for such a weapon or tool.

My conclusion on reading this site (and I did not get through all of it by any means) is that there are some really good data mixed in with some confusing and sometimes inaccurate information. Sorting through what's good and what's not takes an experienced eye and some knowledge of the languages used. I don't have the linguistic skills to decipher the subtleties of different dialects and had to rely on books/online sources. I would suggest that folks read the data on this site carefully and try to figure out what is wheat and what is chaff. Like any blog site, the material is not reviewed for accuracy and people can post whatever they wish. That said, this site seems above average in the quality of its pictures and comments.

DISCLAIMER: Everything I have written here is my personal view and in no way reflects the opinions of Vikingsword, EEWRS, or other members of this web site.

Ian
.

Hi sir Ian,

Your review is much appreciated, thanks for this. If I may point out, however, the format of FilTradBlades is to present the weapons as is, as they are identified by the regional peoples affiliated with them (I say regional peoples and not Filipino, as certain groups- such as BangsaMoro- identify themselves differently).

I don't believe there is a 1:1 correspondence with regards to a particular Filipino weapon and its name. For example, a Talibong in Panay is so different than the extinct Leyte Talibong. The Ginuntings of Antique and Bikol, while sharing similar names, have different blade profiles, grind, and hilt style. The list goes on- sundang, pinuti, even panabas- different regions have different weapon schemas for these.

In light of this fact, there will always naturally be confusion regarding traditional weapon classification. The only way to circumvent this is to assign a thorough classification system- e.g. Regional, Provincial, Tribal or Peoples-specific (Southern Palawan, Palaw'an Tribe, Badung).

I believe the primary objectives of FilTradBlades are as follows: 1) to combat the misinformation being spearheaded by commercialized blade reproduction outfits (they are now legion), 2) to profile the FilTradBlades in their natural habitat, with the correct regional and cultural context in mind; and most importantly, 3) to support the remaining traditional smiths by showcasing their stories and products.

[Ian]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hi sir Ian,

Your review is much appreciated, thanks for this. If I may point out, however, the format of FilTradBlades is to present the weapons as is, as they are identified by the regional peoples affiliated with them (I say regional peoples and not Filipino, as certain groups- such as BangsaMoro- identify themselves differently).

I don't believe there is a 1:1 correspondence with regards to a particular Filipino weapon and its name. For example, a Talibong in Panay is so different than the extinct Leyte Talibong. The Ginuntings of Antique and Bikol, while sharing similar names, have different blade profiles, grind, and hilt style. The list goes on- sundang, pinuti, even panabas- different regions have different weapon schemas for these.

In light of this fact, there will always naturally be confusion regarding traditional weapon classification. The only way to circumvent this is to assign a thorough classification system- e.g. Regional, Provincial, Tribal or Peoples-specific (Southern Palawan, Palaw'an Tribe, Badung).

I believe the primary objectives of FilTradBlades are as follows: 1) to combat the misinformation being spearheaded by commercialized blade reproduction outfits (they are now legion), 2) to profile the FilTradBlades in their natural habitat, with the correct regional and cultural context in mind; and most importantly, 3) to support the remaining traditional smiths by showcasing their stories and products.

Hi xasterix:

Thank you for putting the information on this site in sharper perspective. It is indeed important to understand the primary focus of the FTB site in recording verbatim the names (as used by locals) of these items and their source. Collecting raw data in this manner certainly has merit, but, as you point out, it needs to lead to a classification system that provides a rational nosology for these edged weapons and tools. While it is relatively easy to assemble a data base of pictures and names, sorting through the individual items to arrive at an overall classification system is much harder.

To a degree, Robert Cato attempted to do this for Moro edged weapons (with moderate success). Albert van Zonneveld's classification of Indonesian weapons was a more detailed and broader classification, based largely on blade shapes and hilt styles. There are examples of this type of approach for weapons of other cultures too.

I think the problems come when folks try to extrapolate/speculate beyond the information provided but do not understand the limitations of the data.

Ian

[Spunjer]

I believe the primary objectives of FilTradBlades are as follows: 1) to combat the misinformation being spearheaded by commercialized blade reproduction outfits (they are now legion), 2) to profile the FilTradBlades in their natural habitat, with the correct regional and cultural context in mind; and most importantly, 3) to support the remaining traditional smiths by showcasing their stories and products

thank you for this. i've tried in my own way to do likewise, but it's an uphill battle, so sometimes i feel like the best way is to just let it be.
but i do commend you and your page. madamo gid nga salamat