Rare Dayak Daggers - Sadop and Dohong

[tom hyle]

These spearpoint (bayu?) madaus do not (except for the one in hte b&w pic) seem to be truly double edged, but to have a false edge bevelled more for thrusting than for cutting?
The wide triangular dagger bears an interesting resemblance to modern Moro gunongs/punals, as does the narrow dagger to tombaks and tombak daggers.

[Dajak]

Hi Tom these mandau s are no spearpoints and they are double edged
some have one side hollow flat other side same hollow flat like the normal
parang ihlang . they are very sharp both sides.

Ben

[tom hyle]

You misunderstand me. THe term spearpoint is used by N American cutlers (etc.) to designate a blade with a symetrically centralized point.

[asomotif]

A friend has this spear in his collection (well actually in a corner of his cellar, but he is sadly not considering to let it go )

take a look at the dohong in Zonneveld's, the decoration at the base, the way the sides are sharpened only from one side of the blade.
This blade seems very much a spearhead to me, but the dohong in Zonneveld is now a puzzle to me. is it a dagger or a spearhead hilted as a dagger

[VVV]

Hi Willem,

I also believe that some of the Dohong are remounted spearheads.
And then there seems to be another version which is more like a sword blade
(maybe ancestor of the Bayu?).
Probably Dohong is several, actually different, versions of old (pre 20th C) double-edged Dayak blades grouped together as one classification?

Michael

[Dajak]

Hi Michael and Willem this is not an Dohun Michael you see also an very big
spearhead in Kopenhagen the Dayaks have very big spear heads but don t make them dohun s


Ben

[Dajak]

Here some pics

Ben

[VVV]

Originally Posted by Dajak

Hi Michael and Willem this is not an Dohun Michael you see also an very big
spearhead in Kopenhagen the Dayaks have very big spear heads but don t make them dohun s


Ben

Hi Ben,

No I don't think that Willem's example is a Dohong.
But I suspect that some of the Dohongs were made of old spear heads.
Like f.i. the version below that are both found as spear heads and mounted as a Dohong.
Or maybe it's the Dohong blades that are mounted as spears as well?

Michael

[Albert]

Hello Michael,

Interesting photo!
From which publication is it?

Albert

[Dajak]

Hi Michael I think you are right when you say that dohuns are made from spearheads .

They where only used at funurals as ceremonium knife s
never as weapons and we see a lot off spearheads in the Indonesian archipalo mounted as knife s .


Ben

[VVV]

Albert,

It's just one of the pictures I found on the Internet. I saved it because it's the only picture I have seen with that kind of early 19th C spearhead otherwise only seen on old drawings.
Please join the discussion and let us know your view on the Dohong?

Ben,

Please note that I don't think all(!) Dohong were made from spearheads.
I suspect that there are several variations where some are remounted spearheads. I don't think that f.i. the larger and more swordlike version, that usually has big ivory handles, originally were spearheads.

Michael

[Dajak]

Hi Michael I am talking about the one in the picture this one is also pictured in Hornbill and dragon from Bernard sellato .
and the dohun you mean with the Ivory handle could be from an spearhead
I see a few but never so big like an bayu or mandau .
That could be why they use them for ceromonies and not for fighting because never intended to be an sword .
And you now how big and very old spearhead could be I never see an dohun
so big as that spearhead from the one in Kopenhagen.



Ben

[VVV]

Hi Ben,

I have to handle more Dohong first to be sure of this.
Like you have done because most of them are found in Dutch museums.

I have just added two additional, quite rare, Dayak knives to my collection site. It's the Piso Tongkeng of West Kalimantan and the Iban Lungat.

http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...view_album.php

Michael

[Dajak]

Hi Michael nice to see those rare knife s

here an picture off an big pisau rau



Ben

[VVV]

Interesting variation Ben!

I have to find a large one like that myself

Michael

[Dajak]

Hi Michael look how he is holding the little Knife

Ben

[VVV]

Interesting!

Thanks for the reference picture.

Michael

[Dajak]

About the dohun here on an soul boat pictured in Hornbill and dragon we see
that they are spears not intended too be swords


Ben

[VVV]

Seems to be the tree of life with a Dohun at the top.
Just like described in the Schärer book:

"The trunk of the Tree of Life consists of the sacred spear, its roots ends in spearpoints, and it is flanked by daggers."

Michael

[asomotif]

There was an interesting discussion on the swap forum on dohongs.

at a certain moment there was a claim that dohongs were pure ritual weapons, as there are no pictures of dayak fighting with dohongs.
But also other claims have been made :

quote-
The Dohong was most likely the traditional sword/knife before the mandau.
So most Dohongs are from before 1850 and there are not many in museum collections.-unquote

But previous in this same thread nov 9th 2006 :

quote-
[I]There are some drawings that show s Dajaks with blowgun and parang-ilang but never see one with Dohun or daggers that is in my opinion not so old on Borneo as the sword the dajaks Used
The daggers have Arabic moslim influence .[I]-unquote

so we have the opinion that the dohongs were there before the mandaus...
And than the opinion that the dohongs are not as old as dajak swords...
(strange enough by the same person)

I am hardly an expert and mostly atracted by form of waepons.
But what could / would be the thruth on dohongs / sadaps ?

Does anybody have pictures/drawings of these waepons being used at all ?

[Dajak]

Hi Willem as you can read it shows that dohung is not an weapon al this can be found in the books and that dohungs have only being used before 1850
is not true.

I have an pedang that was taken to England in 1820 , many weapons was taken to europe in that time so if they did fight a lot with dohungs there was
also taken dohungs from the battlefield never read about that.

There is no evidence for it .

That there is some arabic influence in Borneo is true read history books .

Ben

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by VVV

Seems to be the tree of life with a Dohun at the top.

Michael

Kether?

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by Dajak

Hi Willem as you can read it shows that dohung is not an weapon al this can be found in the books and that dohungs have only being used before 1850
is not true.

I have an pedang that was taken to England in 1820 , many weapons was taken to europe in that time so if they did fight a lot with dohungs there was
also taken dohungs from the battlefield never read about that.

There is no evidence for it .

That there is some arabic influence in Borneo is true read history books .

Ben

Hi Ben,

If you should have read the book that you bougth from me ( Schwaner ) you could clearly see on page 80 of the second part,that Schwaner give an excelent explanation about the use and History of the Dohong.
Schwaner was ther between 1843-1847.

here the translation of the text:

" The shield and mandau are imported on a later date but now very common.
In history the place of the mandau was taken by the Dohong and parang.
the Dohong must have been an ancesteral weapon.
It was a broad sword about one foot length, in the shape of a lance point and had a 8 inch long ,thick and round hilt, turned from ivory-so no doubt a outland creation-. from the dohong there are only a few examples left,which are kept as heirlooms from there ancestors.
nowadays they are only used to spread the blood of there victims on their bodies and to cut of the navel-string of the newborn kids."

So its quite clear we have here a very early evidence for the use of the dohong as well as a weapon in very early pre-mandau times, and after that being used indeed as a ritual dagger because of the heirloom status of the dagger.

There are also Dohongs in the collection of Bronbeek, a collection mainly built up by stuff from the battlefield.

About the arabic influence, I don't think that the arabs did their had their influence on the Dohong but the Malay.
The turned wooden hilt final is an detail that is used in many Malay objects and also daggers, see " Spirit of wood,the art of malay woodcarving".
Also I think that seen the large migrations in Borneo about 200 years ago, where the Kajans and Ibans where pushing from the north its good possible that the dagger (or the design) has been taken with tribes who did first live in the north put where pused to move to the south.The Dohong is mainly found among the Ngadjoe and Ot danum.
The ivory hilts could also be imorted by traders from Banjarmassin.

Finally, the use of the turned hilt final is a Budistic stupa symbol.

sources: Schwaner -beschrijving van het stroomgebied van den Barito
by C.A.L.M.Schwaner 1853

farisch A.Noor and Eddin Khoo Spirit of Wood

[Dajak]

Look at this part from the Museum leiden the Junboll


It says it was taken over from an other culture written by Sal Müller

and in my opinion it was in use by some local dayaks but not all .


the Malay did bring the arabic infulence in Borneo just read the books

Schwaner was in one erea in Borneo when he wrote this and he might be writing over the bayu instead over the dohung he did not pictured it so we don t now .



mandaukudi
Member


Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 49

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Ben,

one ( 16-284 ) is a very early collected piece came in to the museum around 1860 but was from the journey of Salomon Muller who visited Borneo in 1836.
Salomon visited the south of Borneo the aria upriver Barito from Banjarmassin.
In his book there's one time that he mentioned " we bought some chickens and other food,some mats,weaponery and jewellery" in the village Lontontoer.So its possible that he obtained this Bayu there.

the other (781-04) I'm not for sure but the number is from just before 1900.
the handle looks almost chinese and the scabbard has a " never used patina".

Arjan.

Arjan read what Sal Müller say s about this in Jhunboll

You can t beat the facts Arjan

Ben

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by Dajak

Look at this part from the Museum leiden the Junboll


It says it was taken over from an other culture written by Sal Müller

and in my opinion it was in use by some local dayaks but not all .


the Malay did bring the arabic infulence in Borneo just read the books

Schwaner was in one erea in Borneo when he wrote this and he might be writing over the bayu instead over the dohung he did not pictured it so we don t now .



mandaukudi
Member


Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 49

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Ben,

one ( 16-284 ) is a very early collected piece came in to the museum around 1860 but was from the journey of Salomon Muller who visited Borneo in 1836.
Salomon visited the south of Borneo the aria upriver Barito from Banjarmassin.
In his book there's one time that he mentioned " we bought some chickens and other food,some mats,weaponery and jewellery" in the village Lontontoer.So its possible that he obtained this Bayu there.

the other (781-04) I'm not for sure but the number is from just before 1900.
the handle looks almost chinese and the scabbard has a " never used patina".

Arjan.

Arjan read what Sal Müller say s about this in Jhunboll

You can t beat the facts Arjan

Ben

dear Ben,

at first:

You wrote your answer between the lines I have written in my answer so it looks almost if I have written it, maybe you can edit that?

second: reading before you answer should provide a long and unessesary discussion.

thirth: Indeed Salomon Muller says in Juynboll that the Dohong is probably taken over from another culture because he says that it maybe is from the times that "Modjapit rules about the coasts of Borneo"
good possible because the blade of the Dohong looks like very old Modjapit daggers.So not Arababs did have their influence on the Dohong but the Hindu.
( however the Arabs did trade in this area)

fourth: (reading before you write) was Schwaner talking about a Bayu when he used the word "Dohong" and talked about a 8 inch turned ivory round and thick hilt? Of course not! You can't beat the facts Ben!

five:I still stay with my opinion that the hilt is of malay origin, the hilts of the 18th and 19th Pattani parangs and Anak Wali's are almost of the same shape.
As Borneo is a mix of diverse tribal influences also its of course possible that the dohong is also a mix creation of Hindu influence with Malay details.

six: please stay reading as professional as your way of collecting,you are a marvelous collector! The treads in this forum are to help eachother with ideas,knowledge and study.But only by staying professional readers we can lift this forum to the high unique level it deserves!

best regards,

Arjan.

[Dajak]

Arjan trans late the page off schwaner in English


I said might be Arjan read please

here start it

mandaukudi
Member


Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 49

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Ben,

one ( 16-284 ) is a very early collected piece came in to the museum around 1860 but was from the journey of Salomon Muller who visited Borneo in 1836.
Salomon visited the south of Borneo the aria upriver Barito from Banjarmassin.
In his book there's one time that he mentioned " we bought some chickens and other food,some mats,weaponery and jewellery" in the village Lontontoer.So its possible that he obtained this Bayu there.

the other (781-04) I'm not for sure but the number is from just before 1900.
the handle looks almost chinese and the scabbard has a " never used patina".

Arjan.

here it s end

looks like you talk 2 things Arjan


ben

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by Dajak

Arjan trans late the page off schwaner in English


I said might be Arjan read please

here start it

mandaukudi
Member


Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 49

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Ben,

one ( 16-284 ) is a very early collected piece came in to the museum around 1860 but was from the journey of Salomon Muller who visited Borneo in 1836.
Salomon visited the south of Borneo the aria upriver Barito from Banjarmassin.
In his book there's one time that he mentioned " we bought some chickens and other food,some mats,weaponery and jewellery" in the village Lontontoer.So its possible that he obtained this Bayu there.

the other (781-04) I'm not for sure but the number is from just before 1900.
the handle looks almost chinese and the scabbard has a " never used patina".

Arjan.

here it s end

looks like you talk 2 things Arjan


ben

Hi Ben,

are you not exchancing Muller and Schwaner with eachother?

or do you think that I exclude the bayu from beiing used as weapon?

however the exact text in Schwaner says: The Dohong must be ,according to what they say have been the ancesteral weapon.

included a pic of item no 16-284 taken by myself in de depot, from the very nice bayu collected by Muller.

arjan.

[Dajak]

YOUR TRANSLATION IS NOT RIGHT ABOUT WHAT SCHWANER SAYS

That is what I mean the whole time read it like it is .

Muller has taken some weapons and is writing about that the dohung is not an dayak weapon tells you in Juynboll that these are story s .

What weapon did Schwaner take to the museum for weapons ?

Schwaner talks about the parang as an Weapon that was before the mandau this is could be true . but dohung is no proof.

sometimes people wanna believe something and has nothing to do if one is an
outstanding collector or not who make rules if one is an good or bad collector.

Translation is

that in that ....part of borneo .....the shield and mandau came in later (that part and not counting for whole Borneo) but now in that time common the dohung must be after what they tell him a weapon from there ancestors (but they don t now for sure)
also tells that the dohung is from an other culture .

If we believe Stone the pandat is the weapon off the seadayaks IBANS
is this true because he says it . proof did bring us that it must be an land dayak weapon

Ben

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by Dajak

YOUR TRANSLATION IS NOT RIGHT ABOUT WHAT SCHWANER SAYS

That is what I mean the whole time read it like it is .

Muller has taken some weapons and is writing about that the dohung is not an dayak weapon tells you in Juynboll that these are story s .

What weapon did Schwaner take to the museum for weapons ?

Schwaner talks about the parang as an Weapon that was before the mandau this is could be true . but dohung is no proof.

sometimes people wanna believe something and has nothing to do if one is an
outstanding collector or not who make rules if one is an good or bad collector.

Translation is

that in that ....part of borneo .....the shield and mandau came in later (that part and not counting for whole Borneo) but now in that time common the dohung must be after what they tell him a weapon from there ancestors (but they don t now for sure)
also tells that the dohung is from an other culture .

If we believe Stone the pandat is the weapon off the seadayaks IBANS
is this true because he says it . proof did bring us that it must be an land dayak weapon

Ben

HI Ben,

I never told anywhere that the Pandat isn't the weapon of the Iban.
But the Iban settled later on Borneo than the Ngadjoe and Ot Danum.
I also didn't tell that the Dohung was in use by all Dayaks.
As you have read you see that wrote that the Dohung was in use among the Ngadjoe and the Ot Danum.
Of course the Dohunghilts did come from another country course they used Ivory for it and you can't find that on Borneo.
But not all Dohongs have Ivory hilts and not all Dohungs have the same shape.

Arjan.

Arjan.

[Dajak]

Arjan the pandat is not the weapon off the Iban
I only try to say that what someone put up in an books does not have to be right it could be his interpetation .

what proof do you have that the Iban setteld later on Borneo

Ben