Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16th August 2024, 11:56 PM   #1
RobT
Member
 
RobT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 476
Default Baca Baca Question

CharlesS,

You consider the blade to be pre 20th century. The baca baca is the one piece form which I have always thought first appeared at the very end of the 19th century and continued on into the 20th century. I have asked on this forum for confirmation of my assumption but I don’t believe I have ever gotten an answer so I would be very interested your take (and other forum members opinions) on when the one piece baca baca appeared. (Taking into account of course that the baca baca currently on the blade may not have been the original.)

Sincerely,
RobT
RobT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2024, 11:58 AM   #2
Ian
Vikingsword Staff
 
Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,167
Default

Rob,

This is an old thread. I have not seen CharlesS posting here for some time, so you may not get a reply from him. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by a baca baca being "a one piece form."
Ian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2024, 02:21 PM   #3
RobT
Member
 
RobT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 476
Default One Piece Vs Two Piece

Ian,

A two piece baca baca has a closed “stirrup” (usually steel) that fits around the blade. The second piece is a strap (brass in every example in my collection) that is looped around the the stirrup and extends up under the hilt wrap. As you can see in Gustav’s example, the stirrup isn’t closed off on the top and the two legs that fit under the hilt wrap are of a piece with the stirrup. I believe that the baca baca were originally added to stabilize the blade/hilt connection against shock and torque stresses when a blow is struck and the one piece design offers a mechanical advantage over the two piece version. In support of this I will mention that I have never seen a kris with a pair of one piece baca baca. I assume that is because the one piece design is strong and rigid enough to make a pair unnecessary.

Sincerely,
RobT
RobT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2024, 06:36 PM   #4
kino
Member
 
kino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 999
Default

RobT, Are these the 2 types that you’re referring to?
Attached Images
  
kino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2024, 12:54 AM   #5
RobT
Member
 
RobT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 476
Default Exactly

kino,

Your example on the left is the one piece and the right example is the two piece (albeit with a broken brass strap).

Sincerely,
RobT
RobT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2024, 03:41 AM   #6
Rick
Vikingsword Staff
 
Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,287
Default

One is steel and one is silver.
Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2024, 04:57 AM   #7
Ian
Vikingsword Staff
 
Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,167
Default

Hi Rob,

I see what you are referring to from the subsequent pictures. It is not a feature that I have followed in my records of several hundred Moro kris found online. Looking just at those that appear in the Sold section on the older Oriental Arms web site (over 200 examples), the single-piece asang asang (baka baka) appears to make a relatively late appearance on Mindanao kris with one asang asang. I could not find any kris with two asang asang that had single-piece constructions--that effectively excludes most Sulu kris.

As to dating when this feature appeared, judging from the swords on which it appears it seems to correspond with the second half of the 19th C and later (i.e., mainly on longer and heavier kris from that period, including straight and waved blades). Examples of two-piece asang asang predate the appearance of the single-piece feature, and are contemporaneous with it well into the 20th C.

I think the single-piece construction is limited almost entirely to some Mindanao kris from the second half of the 19th C and later. These are mainly Maguindanao kris judging from the "elephant trunk" area and the dress of the sword.

Because we still see a majority of two-piece asang asang on Maguindanao/Mindanao kris during the same period, I would say that the single-piece version is probably more of a style variant than a functional variant. As best I can judge, the single-piece construction is not a Sulu feature.

Cheers, Ian.

Last edited by Ian; 18th August 2024 at 01:09 PM.
Ian is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.