Bontoc Shield

Ian · 11th March 2005, 12:40 PM

Yes, that Kalinga shield is a very nice example. It has the same "glossy" look as the Bontoc shield. Seems that they have both been treated with a similar coating of wax or polish. Quite an attractive finish, but probably not original.

Conogre · 11th March 2005, 02:09 PM

The kalinga shield looked fairly authentic to me, while I know for a fact that the Bontoc shield is not......and they did NOT come from the same seller, by the way.
In fact, one member asked me about an opinion during the sale and I told him that it's a reproduction, with the source seller having sent me a photo of about 1/2 dozen that he has and he told me that they were repros when he offered me one......I didn't say conclusively, but the strong wording about "it will get there when it gets there" made me suspect that the seller was pre-selling pieces before ordering them from the Philippines only claiming they were much older than they were.
I also HAVE one exactly like it that I bought about 4-5 years ago for $45 from a dealer in Manilla about the same time I bought that large batch(25 ) of Mindenao pieces, a couple older but most made in the past 30 years or so.
Can you say "ouch!"?
I certainly did and also learned a lesson about how much prices can change in just 4-5 years! LOL! Ouch,ouch,ouch,ouch!
Mike

Naga Basuki · 11th March 2005, 03:32 PM

I was interested in it until I consulted several Forum members who suggested it was not old. Recently made and patinated.

And I quote:

"I can not be sure, but from the photos (To be sure I need to see it in
person) I would say that the ebay shield is not very old, and not made for use. It is very clean and crisp with no signs of age or use. It looks to be a bit of a harder wood as you can see the tool marks. The older ones are some kind of fiberous palm wood, and the adz marks are not present. In the Phillipines they have been making these for the market and they are very good at rattan weaving, and making the old dark patina as you can see on this one. I would not recomend this shield for your collection."

Bill · 11th March 2005, 04:58 PM

I have 2 of these shields. One seems to be quite a bit older & shows its use. The younger one seems to be made exactly the same way, but slightly smaller. I assume that there are 50 or more years of differance & likely more. Sad as it may be, the one that has never seen combat is hanging on the wall, the experienced one is in the closet. Love the old one, but I can get away (wife factor) with the newer one displayed.

Ian · 11th March 2005, 05:42 PM

Mike:

Thanks for your direct confirmation of my skepticism. These days I'm reluctant to come out and say publicly that something is not genuine, especially from pictures, but that Bontoc shield just did not look right for some reason — and you articulated well why it is not the real deal.

In the hand, the old ones are lighter than more recently made examples, reflecting different construction materials (as Mike said). Despite its size and bulk, my early 20th C. example of a Bontoc shield is really quite light and would be easily maneuvered for defensive purposes.

Ian.

Conogre · 11th March 2005, 08:06 PM

It's my understandiong that at least some of these are "dance shields" and not made JUST for tourists, but I don't have any direct confirmation of this.
On most, a little digging with a fine blade (such as under the handle) will reveal a light wood that's been stained.
In my case, I'm happy with it for what it is, a ceremonial piece at best, but still a very good reproduction (good enough that it would be serviceable in a pinch) which displays well.
I just hate to see people arrempting to pass these, and other things, off as authentic, giving a distinctly unpleasant smell to an otherwise honorable and enjoyable hobby......in at least a couple cases, I've e-mailed the sellers and "hinted" about the origins only to get evasive and highly defensive replies, a la teeth and hair, that pretty well make it clear that it's NOT an accidental misidentification.
The probable original seller, on the other hand, is extremely honest and forthcoming, someone I have nothing but respect for.
Mike

Battara · 15th March 2005, 01:59 AM

Well if you think about it, the goal was not to stop a blow with a static shield, but deflect a blow with movement, causing the blow to move at an angle. Thus heavy shielding was not needed nor preferred. A heavy shield would not be conducive for light quick movement and footwork in battle.

11th March 2005, 12:40 PM	#1
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,395	Yes, that Kalinga shield is a very nice example. It has the same "glossy" look as the Bontoc shield. Seems that they have both been treated with a similar coating of wax or polish. Quite an attractive finish, but probably not original.

11th March 2005, 02:09 PM	#2
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	The kalinga shield looked fairly authentic to me, while I know for a fact that the Bontoc shield is not......and they did NOT come from the same seller, by the way. In fact, one member asked me about an opinion during the sale and I told him that it's a reproduction, with the source seller having sent me a photo of about 1/2 dozen that he has and he told me that they were repros when he offered me one......I didn't say conclusively, but the strong wording about "it will get there when it gets there" made me suspect that the seller was pre-selling pieces before ordering them from the Philippines only claiming they were much older than they were. I also HAVE one exactly like it that I bought about 4-5 years ago for $45 from a dealer in Manilla about the same time I bought that large batch(25 ) of Mindenao pieces, a couple older but most made in the past 30 years or so. Can you say "ouch!"? I certainly did and also learned a lesson about how much prices can change in just 4-5 years! LOL! Ouch,ouch,ouch,ouch! Mike

11th March 2005, 03:32 PM	#3
Naga Basuki Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Big old machine shop/foundry/warehouse in Atlanta GA USA Posts: 51	I was interested in it until I consulted several Forum members who suggested it was not old. Recently made and patinated. And I quote: "I can not be sure, but from the photos (To be sure I need to see it in person) I would say that the ebay shield is not very old, and not made for use. It is very clean and crisp with no signs of age or use. It looks to be a bit of a harder wood as you can see the tool marks. The older ones are some kind of fiberous palm wood, and the adz marks are not present. In the Phillipines they have been making these for the market and they are very good at rattan weaving, and making the old dark patina as you can see on this one. I would not recomend this shield for your collection."

11th March 2005, 04:58 PM	#4
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	I have 2 of these shields. One seems to be quite a bit older & shows its use. The younger one seems to be made exactly the same way, but slightly smaller. I assume that there are 50 or more years of differance & likely more. Sad as it may be, the one that has never seen combat is hanging on the wall, the experienced one is in the closet. Love the old one, but I can get away (wife factor) with the newer one displayed.

11th March 2005, 05:42 PM	#5
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,395	Mike: Thanks for your direct confirmation of my skepticism. These days I'm reluctant to come out and say publicly that something is not genuine, especially from pictures, but that Bontoc shield just did not look right for some reason — and you articulated well why it is not the real deal. In the hand, the old ones are lighter than more recently made examples, reflecting different construction materials (as Mike said). Despite its size and bulk, my early 20th C. example of a Bontoc shield is really quite light and would be easily maneuvered for defensive purposes. Ian.

11th March 2005, 08:06 PM	#6
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	It's my understandiong that at least some of these are "dance shields" and not made JUST for tourists, but I don't have any direct confirmation of this. On most, a little digging with a fine blade (such as under the handle) will reveal a light wood that's been stained. In my case, I'm happy with it for what it is, a ceremonial piece at best, but still a very good reproduction (good enough that it would be serviceable in a pinch) which displays well. I just hate to see people arrempting to pass these, and other things, off as authentic, giving a distinctly unpleasant smell to an otherwise honorable and enjoyable hobby......in at least a couple cases, I've e-mailed the sellers and "hinted" about the origins only to get evasive and highly defensive replies, a la teeth and hair, that pretty well make it clear that it's NOT an accidental misidentification. The probable original seller, on the other hand, is extremely honest and forthcoming, someone I have nothing but respect for. Mike

15th March 2005, 01:59 AM	#7
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,280	Well if you think about it, the goal was not to stop a blow with a static shield, but deflect a blow with movement, causing the blow to move at an angle. Thus heavy shielding was not needed nor preferred. A heavy shield would not be conducive for light quick movement and footwork in battle.