BARUNG TAUSUG?

[Battara]

As I look at this again, I find the blade profile is strange and not traditional, unless this is a trick of the camera angle.............

[Ian]

I thought it was the angle of the picture that made the blade look a little odd. Buy Xasterix may be right, that this is not Sulu. Yves, can you give us a picture taken directly over the blade?

[xasterix]

Here's a similar sample with 80s provenance; it's already been halfway restored, it came from a lot of rust and dirt. As you can see, if I tilt the camera angle a little, it directly resembles the OP's blade profile. Even the broken 'beak' is consistent here; the textile is just a different pattern. MOP is also present in this 80s sample, just of a different style.

Detlef, I believe that particular blade profile did not exist before the 1970s. The break at the pommel of the OP's barung may not necessarily be due to age; bunti can crack when improperly handled either during pommel creation or handling (especially with a crack as large as that one). So far the age cracks I've encountered on pre-1900 bunti aren't as large yet as to allow the insertion of a coin.

[Ian]

Hi Xas,

I think your blade's profile is a little more extreme than in the OP. The spine is almost straight and the belly of the blade is a long way forward of the midpoint of the edge. The OP shows a more curved spine and the belly about midpoint of the blade. Also, the hilt is more crudely carved and the kakatua is less refined on yours, while the quality of the MOP carving is much better on the OP. Even allowing for differences in quality, I thought the hilt and its punto looked fairly typical Sulu work. Let's see if Yves can give us better pics of the blade.

Ian.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Detlef, I believe that particular blade profile did not exist before the 1970s. The break at the pommel of the OP's barung may not necessarily be due to age; bunti can crack when improperly handled either during pommel creation or handling (especially with a crack as large as that one). So far the age cracks I've encountered on pre-1900 bunti aren't as large yet as to allow the insertion of a coin.

Hi Xas,

Hope it's not too rude to say that you compare an apple with a potato, the pommel of the OP is rather good carved, the pommel from the example you posted is very crude and simple carved, the ferrule from the OP seems to be from silver (I guess, Yves can you confirm??), your example seems to has one from aluminium, the MOP inlays at the scabbard from the OP are from very good quality carving, yours are very crude.
The only point is the blade profile but like Ian I would like to see better pictures in a different angle from the OP.

Regards,
Detlef

[Sajen]

comparison

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by Sajen

Hi Xas,

Hope it's not too rude to say that you compare an apple with a potato, the pommel of the OP is rather good carved, the pommel from the example you posted is very crude and simple carved, the ferrule from the OP seems to be from silver (I guess, Yves can you confirm??), your example seems to has one from aluminium, the MOP inlays at the scabbard from the OP are from very good quality carving, yours are very crude.
The only point is the blade profile but like Ian I would like to see better pictures in a different angle from the OP.

Regards,
Detlef

No offense taken; my sample is indeed more crude, but I still believe it's from the same time period as OP's post. The variability in width of the blade is also noted in both barungs; however I believe they are still similar in terms of blade profile configuration. It's the only picture I have on hand, but I've handled others that are of similar build yet as better quality in terms of aesthetics (closer to OP's sample).

Like all artisan-based products, there are levels of quality; but some indicators remain consistent despite aesthetic differences.

[David]

So Xasterix, but i see two rather different blade profiles here. The differences are subtle, but clear to me.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by David

So Xasterix, but i see two rather different blade profiles here. The differences are subtle, but clear to me.

Hello David,

We really would need to see pictures from both (Yves and Xas) barungs in a similar angle like my example is shown.
It's rather difficult for me since they are not shown from up. I've played with pictures from both pieces but come to no conclusion.

Regards,
Detlef

[Ian]

Perhaps Xas is referring to the wrap on the scabbard. This appears to be Yakan rather than Tausug. I had not looked carefully enough at the scabbard fittings. Part of the problem with very dark pictures is missing subtle but important features. Here's a better look at the scabbard and its wraps.


.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by xasterix

No offense taken; my sample is indeed more crude, but I still believe it's from the same time period as OP's post. The variability in width of the blade is also noted in both barungs; however I believe they are still similar in terms of blade profile configuration. It's the only picture I have on hand, but I've handled others that are of similar build yet as better quality in terms of aesthetics (closer to OP's sample).

Like all artisan-based products, there are levels of quality; but some indicators remain consistent despite aesthetic differences.

Fine! You may not know that I have a similar example to the OP in my collection ( in my opinion, I can be wrong), the scabbard which come with also has had once MOP in up and down, blade shape could be similar (?) and I think that both from a similar time frame, the OP may be a little bit younger. I would place both around WWII. The ferrules are by my one from German silver or white brass and the blade is laminated.
I really would like to know if the ferrule from the OP is silver. Silver by barungs in this quality after WWII I never have seen!
And laminated blades after this time I am also not aware of. So it would be also good to know if the OP has a laminated blade.
See here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=restore

Regards,
Detlef