Identification of an indonesian dagger

Battara · 4th July 2006, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

I do not think this has anything to do with European/British steel or bayonet and blade forms. I think it has its origins in the spears from Indo/Persia and other Asian influences on Indonesia.

I'm inclined to agree with you Tim. Many India spearheads are like this. Trade perhaps? Not unheard of in this region.

Henk · 4th July 2006, 07:09 PM

Gentlemen, I'm very happy with your input.

Nechesh, I could remove the hilt and made some pictures of the tang. During taking the pictures I noticed a very small stamp on the blade, hardly visible, but the pictures don't lie. It is very hard to see what the mark is even under a magnifying glass. I asked my daughter to look for me and she saw something like a N and a 4 or a triangle. On the picture I have a better image and I see something as PM or PN but it is very small and hardly to see with naked eyes.
Ki Jayamalelo showed a link of bayonets with a triangular one. If you look at such a bayonet it is attached with a round elbowformed tube to the socket.
The tang of my blade is square and doesn't show signs of reattachement to the blade.

As far as I know those reattachements or welding spurs are easily to discover. I've seen often reattached peksi's to keris. The place were the peksi is reattached is always thicker and visible.

I would like to hear your comments on these facts.
Alan, I hope you will react as well.

Tim Simmons · 4th July 2006, 07:19 PM

Which way up is the mark read????

Rick · 4th July 2006, 07:29 PM

Well , I'm willing to eat my words .

But what ?
Plug bayonet ?

Henk · 4th July 2006, 07:37 PM

Tim,

Now that I'm looking a bit better to the pictures you can read the mark with the point towards you as PM and with the angle towards you as NJ or something. I really cann't make anyting of it and better pictures than these are not possible.

Tim Simmons · 4th July 2006, 07:45 PM

I still do not see a European bayonet. The mark, what we can see is not recognisably European. The brown bess type bayonets have thinner cutting edges.? They are not made of this type of steel. There seems to be no grinding on the blade? I suppose there is a wild chance that it could be some really early rich persons bayonet. Did rich people stand in line with bayonets?

Henk · 5th July 2006, 06:31 PM

Not that I know, Tim. As far as I know farmers did join the battles of their lords in the middle ages. But their weapons where more their tools they used to work with on the fields. In the ages after the middle ages the battles where fought by armies with trained soldiers. But i don't know enough about this subject to give a good answer on that.

A. G. Maisey · 6th July 2006, 09:18 AM

Thanks for your invitation to comment further, Henk, but I really have nothing further to contribute.

I know nothing more, and I dislike hypothesis without evidence or logical argument.

I do have a couple of these things around somewhere, if I can locate them I`ll post pics.

drdavid · 6th July 2006, 10:12 AM

Hi all,
Just to put one thread of this to bed. I collected bayonets for quite a number of years and have owned a number of the triangular form bayonets (still have one on the shelf). This item is not a modified bayonet from any form I have ever seen, the cross section is all wrong. It is most certainly not a Brown Bess.
cheers
DrD

Henk · 6th July 2006, 08:45 PM

Alan,

I hoped that the mark and the pictures of the tang could give any further information. I completely agree with you that speculating without evidence or logical arguments is useless. I invited you to comment because i highly appreciate your input and knowledge.
If you can manage to show some pics of a sangkuh to compare, it would be very nice.

DrD,

I agree with you that it is not a bayonet. It is just not right. I stay with the names Alan gave us for this weapon. Sangkuh or Buntut Mimi.

4th July 2006, 07:09 PM	#2
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Gentlemen, I'm very happy with your input. Nechesh, I could remove the hilt and made some pictures of the tang. During taking the pictures I noticed a very small stamp on the blade, hardly visible, but the pictures don't lie. It is very hard to see what the mark is even under a magnifying glass. I asked my daughter to look for me and she saw something like a N and a 4 or a triangle. On the picture I have a better image and I see something as PM or PN but it is very small and hardly to see with naked eyes. Ki Jayamalelo showed a link of bayonets with a triangular one. If you look at such a bayonet it is attached with a round elbowformed tube to the socket. The tang of my blade is square and doesn't show signs of reattachement to the blade. As far as I know those reattachements or welding spurs are easily to discover. I've seen often reattached peksi's to keris. The place were the peksi is reattached is always thicker and visible. I would like to hear your comments on these facts. Alan, I hope you will react as well. Attached Images

4th July 2006, 07:29 PM	#4
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	European Well , I'm willing to eat my words . But what ? Plug bayonet ?

6th July 2006, 10:12 AM	#9
drdavid Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 372	No bayonet Hi all, Just to put one thread of this to bed. I collected bayonets for quite a number of years and have owned a number of the triangular form bayonets (still have one on the shelf). This item is not a modified bayonet from any form I have ever seen, the cross section is all wrong. It is most certainly not a Brown Bess. cheers DrD

4th July 2006, 07:19 PM	#3
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,854	Which way up is the mark read????

4th July 2006, 07:37 PM	#5
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Tim, Now that I'm looking a bit better to the pictures you can read the mark with the point towards you as PM and with the angle towards you as NJ or something. I really cann't make anyting of it and better pictures than these are not possible.

4th July 2006, 07:45 PM	#6
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,854	I still do not see a European bayonet. The mark, what we can see is not recognisably European. The brown bess type bayonets have thinner cutting edges.? They are not made of this type of steel. There seems to be no grinding on the blade? I suppose there is a wild chance that it could be some really early rich persons bayonet. Did rich people stand in line with bayonets?

5th July 2006, 06:31 PM	#7
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Not that I know, Tim. As far as I know farmers did join the battles of their lords in the middle ages. But their weapons where more their tools they used to work with on the fields. In the ages after the middle ages the battles where fought by armies with trained soldiers. But i don't know enough about this subject to give a good answer on that.

6th July 2006, 09:18 AM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Thanks for your invitation to comment further, Henk, but I really have nothing further to contribute. I know nothing more, and I dislike hypothesis without evidence or logical argument. I do have a couple of these things around somewhere, if I can locate them I`ll post pics.

6th July 2006, 08:45 PM	#10
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	Alan, I hoped that the mark and the pictures of the tang could give any further information. I completely agree with you that speculating without evidence or logical arguments is useless. I invited you to comment because i highly appreciate your input and knowledge. If you can manage to show some pics of a sangkuh to compare, it would be very nice. DrD, I agree with you that it is not a bayonet. It is just not right. I stay with the names Alan gave us for this weapon. Sangkuh or Buntut Mimi.