Any sources on non-moro Philippine forging?

[MaharlikaTimawa]

Originally Posted by mross

Battara, I'm afraid like my bad penny analogy earlier the dreaded laminated vs mono steel will keep coming up. Laminate looks cooler than mono steel but that is really all it has going for it. Laminate as you mentioned came about as a necessity, the available steel was rare and the other metal was not very good. So combined they made something useful. Unfortunately many are still enamored by magic and ignore technology. I still hear that today's current smiths cannot do what the smiths of history did. Ancient lost secrets and all that. It's usually debated by those that are mostly clueless about metallurgy. The heat treat is more important than the steel. But that's a discussion for another day. For the record leaf springs are usually 5160 steel. Philippines smiths (the more modern ones) like to use ball bearings which are 52100.

I think the assertion is right that Filipino "steel" was faulty in comparison to their asian and moro counterparts. Moro weapons have always been compared to spanish, japanese and even other european blades. However barely if any Filipinos blades are even looked at by the Spanish or Americans. In fact during te Fil-Am war, most Americans were scared of the Moros as opposed to Filipinos wielding knives.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by MaharlikaTimawa

I think the assertion is right that Filipino "steel" was faulty in comparison to their asian and moro counterparts. Moro weapons have always been compared to spanish, japanese and even other european blades. However barely if any Filipinos blades are even looked at by the Spanish or Americans. In fact during te Fil-Am war, most Americans were scared of the Moros as opposed to Filipinos wielding knives.

Hi I'm sorry, but with regard to the Filipino American war, I must strongly disagree with your assertion. The Americans had great difficulty in securing the Leyte/Samar areas due to the bolo-wielding Pulahanes and their crescent talibongs, to the extent that the real casualty count of American soldiers had to be censored, and the death toll of Filipino rebels falsely increased just to avoid demoralization of American troops. I have a ton of historical references and footnotes regarding this, if you need further proof.

[xasterix]

Sorry I don't usually snap, but as someone who collects Luzon and Visayan swords, may I point out that the Katipunan pieces are highly prized and, I think, of a quality level that at least equals that of the Mindanao, while with regard to Visayas, eBay is filled with tons of Pulahan weapons and Panay blades that survived the war or were given as bringbacks. The survival of these weapons until now is, I believe, enough proof that that these were in no way inferior than their Moro counterparts.

[Robert]

Originally posted by xasterix.
I point out that the Katipunan pieces are highly prized and, I think, of a quality level that at least equals that of the Mindanao

I totally agree, here is one of those "inferior" Luzon blades where I would say the quality of both workmanship and materials used is equal to or better than any Moro pieces I have ever owned or so far seen.

Best,
Robert

[ShazamsLaw]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hi I'm sorry, but with regard to the Filipino American war, I must strongly disagree with your assertion. The Americans had great difficulty in securing the Leyte/Samar areas due to the bolo-wielding Pulahanes and their crescent talibongs, to the extent that the real casualty count of American soldiers had to be censored, and the death toll of Filipino rebels falsely increased just to avoid demoralization of American troops. I have a ton of historical references and footnotes regarding this, if you need further proof.

I would like to see those sources.

[MaharlikaTimawa]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hi I'm sorry, but with regard to the Filipino American war, I must strongly disagree with your assertion. The Americans had great difficulty in securing the Leyte/Samar areas due to the bolo-wielding Pulahanes and their crescent talibongs, to the extent that the real casualty count of American soldiers had to be censored, and the death toll of Filipino rebels falsely increased just to avoid demoralization of American troops. I have a ton of historical references and footnotes regarding this, if you need further proof.

If you look at some of the statistics of the amount of men the Filipinos lost to the Americans, you can see that the difference is by a couple of thousands. There's also little to no sources of how much "difficulty" it was to take over a people who were willing to be colonized.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by MaharlikaTimawa

If you look at some of the statistics of the amount of men the Filipinos lost to the Americans, you can see that the difference is by a couple of thousands. There's also little to no sources of how much "difficulty" it was to take over a people who were willing to be colonized.

There are actually a lot of sources, they're well documented in the National Library of the Philippines. It was also ascertained that the American death toll was lessened and the Filipino death toll grossly exaggerated to discourage other areas from uprising. Why else would the Americans acknowledge General Lukban as brilliant? Kindly PM me your email address so I could send you the relevant references. Otherwise we'd just be going back and forth here.

[MaharlikaTimawa]

Originally Posted by xasterix

There are actually a lot of sources, they're well documented in the National Library of the Philippines. It was also ascertained that the American death toll was lessened and the Filipino death toll grossly exaggerated to discourage other areas from uprising. Why else would the Americans acknowledge General Lukban as brilliant? Kindly PM me your email address so I could send you the relevant references. Otherwise we'd just be going back and forth here.

I sent a PM for the sources.

You mention General Lukban but recent studies have shown that some of the famous battles that he "partook" in were actually a facade and that he was never behind some of the battles that were well known to the Philippine side such as the Balangiga massacre.

[kai]

We really need to be careful when interpreting history! Even more so if emotions play any role.

Any and every contributor has an agenda (or even several) - be it any historical source or any scientific research. Without scrutinizing all possible agendas and their possible influence on each contribution, we can't even start to evaluate them.

There are quite few historical events (of any wider importance) that have been sufficiently documented as well as studied by a larger number of independant scientists, extensively discussed at an international level, and finally resulting in a widely shared interpretation of that event. In the vast majority of historic events, especially if badly documented, of lesser interest, from periods long ago, we may never be able to ascertain what really happened. period.

A healthy dose of skepticism does help to avoid falling prey of agendas, spurious claims, as well as uncritically believing in "established facts" - not rarely defined by the winning side of history...

Regards,
Kai

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by kai

We really need to be careful when interpreting history! Even more so if emotions play any role.

Any and every contributor has an agenda (or even several) - be it any historical source or any scientific research. Without scrutinizing all possible agendas and their possible influence on each contribution, we can't even start to evaluate them.

There are quite few historical events (of any wider importance) that have been sufficiently documented as well as studied by a larger number of independant scientists, extensively discussed at an international level, and finally resulting in a widely shared interpretation of that event. In the vast majority of historic events, especially if badly documented, of lesser interest, from periods long ago, we may never be able to ascertain what really happened. period.

A healthy dose of skepticism does help to avoid falling prey of agendas, spurious claims, as well as uncritically believing in "established facts" - not rarely defined by the winning side of history...

Regards,
Kai

Well said Kai, thanks for this. Actually I was just looking for a particular Waray sword in that era, never thought I'd stumble upon a version of history that's not included in local history books. As I delved further, I understood why.

MaharlikaTimawa, I've shared with you three studies for starters

[kai]

to take over a people who were willing to be colonized.

Sounds like an unusual assertion - could you elaborate, please? TIA!

Regards,
Kai

[mross]

Originally Posted by MaharlikaTimawa

I think the assertion is right that Filipino "steel" was faulty in comparison to their asian and moro counterparts. Moro weapons have always been compared to spanish, japanese and even other european blades. However barely if any Filipinos blades are even looked at by the Spanish or Americans. In fact during te Fil-Am war, most Americans were scared of the Moros as opposed to Filipinos wielding knives.

I agree with the Moro comparisons. I have a Moro blade whose steel looks every bit like a Japanese blade (minus the visible hada and hamon, which is a product of polish technique, the Moro's used a much different technique than the Japanese) I sorta disagree with the last part. Collectiblity has very little to do with quality and more to do with what is currently "hot". Give it time and Filipino blades may be the next big thing. (If I could predict what is collectible, I would be fabulously wealthy and to busy to do this. )

[ashkenaz]

To Ian, Kai, Kino, Sajen and Rick.

Would you like to know where the claim that Visayan blades are brittle, breakable as glass, poorly made? Why ShazamsLaw made a thread like this, and why I made this thread It's why I made this thread. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=23453

Here? Because the one who is spreading bad news and reputations about Visayan and Luzon blades being poorly made, breakable as glass is actually MaharlikaTimawa who has less than 34 posts. He is the source of all this "Visayan blades are bad" narrative and he posts the same opinion to many Filipinos on social media, youtube, other forums, etc.

He's the reason why ShazamsLaw and myself was attracted to this forum, investigating this matter because we were told he was getting his information here because he's a member. And the convergence of me and ShazamsLaw aim to investigate is by no means a coincidence because Maharlika led us here.

Sorry for this, but five of you were wondering the source of this same "Visayan blades are bad" narrative, and I can no longer keep up this 2 years of silence. I apologize.

-

MaharlikaTimawa's reliance on his single source, William Henry Scott, had caused confusion among myself and many others. I only discovered that Moro Blades were made from Chinese imported steel. We should go by actual finds of the oldest traditionally made Visayan blades to confirm instead of unverified "opinion" pieces.

Regards

[Battara]

As long as we do not get into personality conflicts, I think it is a great idea to provide evidence and accounts of the quality of Visayas steel. Please do so - it would help me and others out for sure.