Philippine Axe

Tim Simmons · 15th April 2005, 09:14 PM

Hello.Thats very helpful but I was hoping for a few more pictures to help get the feel of these axes.The Philippines, for a fairly small group of islands have an amazing range of weapons.I very much like the Panaba but I have only seen one for sale in the UK,it was good and alas the price was too high for me anyway.Tim

Conogre · 16th April 2005, 05:47 AM

Here's my contribution, Tim.
Simple, plain and fairly late manufacture.
Besides the obvious head taking attribution, the difference in cultural uses by shape becomes obvious when I see these referred to as "tools" because the tang arrangement wouldn't stand up for almost anything that I would use an axe for by US standards.
Mike

tom hyle · 16th April 2005, 01:50 PM

For the most part I see your point about these and other tangs in this regard. Some of the tangs themselves are quite sturdy at like 3/8" thick, but still short, no? and I don't know that the thicker ones were ever standard. Not only that, but tha amount of wood that fits inside that long ferule is not that much, and that can seem unsturdy (more at the blade than at the handle end, where the swept swell gives it decent strength). They handle well, and one can use one (in good shape) to cut briars and light vines for practice; if they're a tool I agree it'd be more machete than axe. I wonder about the more tooly back-curved one though; same tang? I know it doesn't seem a strong arrangement (I wouldn't design it and think it sturdy), but also some consideration must be given (as with thin swords, brass blades, thin African axes, etc.) to how flimsy a lot of old stuff seems to us now, and the degree to which traditional people were just much more appreciative of, and loving and careful toward their possessions than modernes seem to be. A nice feature in these axes? Some of them have a "shandigan" type reinforced edge.

Ian · 16th April 2005, 02:00 PM

Mike:

I think your example is also Bontoc, but with the concave rather than convex edge. Don't see many in this style around. Congrats.

Ian.

Conogre · 16th April 2005, 10:05 PM

Thanks Ian.....that was my basic assumption as to origin as well, while I sat here wondering as the discussion deepened.
Of course, it stands to reason that mine would end up being slightly odd (I sometimes feel that I have an entire collection of "almosts"**grin**).
I drool over the "fingered" hilt pieces whenever I see one as they always seem to have an elegant air to them, those with exceptionally thin and elongated heads in particular.
Is there any special significance to those?

Mike

Ian · 16th April 2005, 11:42 PM

Mike:

I think yours is a good "odd." Most of the Bontoc axes we see are of the standard tool/utility variety. Nice to see the weapon-grade version.

Ian.

Federico · 17th April 2005, 02:06 AM

Mike got an axe almost exactly the same as yours (a little longer ferrule). Which when I got it, it screamed bontoc, but then it had the concave head. Im wondering if the distinction has to be more complete between bontoc and kalinga, involving more than concave and convex, to include shaft (little finger on Kalinga no finger on Bontoc), and head shape (Ive noticed the kalinga heads are longer/thinner). Does this strike everyone as a decent distinction between the two? Any other oddities that throws this off? In Krieger's plates there is a Bontoc warrior with a concave head axe, but then Ive seen other plates (eg. the earlier book that I mentioned) with the convex head. Im wondering if some convex heads were not just utilitarian. Anyways, like you Ive always drooled over the kalinga heads, definitely seen more fancier Kalinga axes (more brass decor, etc...) whereas almost all the Bontoc axes Ive seen have been far more utilitarian in look.

16th April 2005, 05:47 AM	#2
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	Here's my contribution, Tim. Simple, plain and fairly late manufacture. Besides the obvious head taking attribution, the difference in cultural uses by shape becomes obvious when I see these referred to as "tools" because the tang arrangement wouldn't stand up for almost anything that I would use an axe for by US standards. Mike Attached Images

15th April 2005, 09:14 PM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,854	Hello.Thats very helpful but I was hoping for a few more pictures to help get the feel of these axes.The Philippines, for a fairly small group of islands have an amazing range of weapons.I very much like the Panaba but I have only seen one for sale in the UK,it was good and alas the price was too high for me anyway.Tim

16th April 2005, 01:50 PM	#3
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	For the most part I see your point about these and other tangs in this regard. Some of the tangs themselves are quite sturdy at like 3/8" thick, but still short, no? and I don't know that the thicker ones were ever standard. Not only that, but tha amount of wood that fits inside that long ferule is not that much, and that can seem unsturdy (more at the blade than at the handle end, where the swept swell gives it decent strength). They handle well, and one can use one (in good shape) to cut briars and light vines for practice; if they're a tool I agree it'd be more machete than axe. I wonder about the more tooly back-curved one though; same tang? I know it doesn't seem a strong arrangement (I wouldn't design it and think it sturdy), but also some consideration must be given (as with thin swords, brass blades, thin African axes, etc.) to how flimsy a lot of old stuff seems to us now, and the degree to which traditional people were just much more appreciative of, and loving and careful toward their possessions than modernes seem to be. A nice feature in these axes? Some of them have a "shandigan" type reinforced edge.

16th April 2005, 02:00 PM	#4
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,396	Mike: I think your example is also Bontoc, but with the concave rather than convex edge. Don't see many in this style around. Congrats. Ian.

16th April 2005, 10:05 PM	#5
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	Thanks Ian.....that was my basic assumption as to origin as well, while I sat here wondering as the discussion deepened. Of course, it stands to reason that mine would end up being slightly odd (I sometimes feel that I have an entire collection of "almosts"grin). I drool over the "fingered" hilt pieces whenever I see one as they always seem to have an elegant air to them, those with exceptionally thin and elongated heads in particular. Is there any special significance to those? Mike

16th April 2005, 11:42 PM	#6
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,396	Mike: I think yours is a good "odd." Most of the Bontoc axes we see are of the standard tool/utility variety. Nice to see the weapon-grade version. Ian.

17th April 2005, 02:06 AM	#7
Federico Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA Posts: 312	Mike got an axe almost exactly the same as yours (a little longer ferrule). Which when I got it, it screamed bontoc, but then it had the concave head. Im wondering if the distinction has to be more complete between bontoc and kalinga, involving more than concave and convex, to include shaft (little finger on Kalinga no finger on Bontoc), and head shape (Ive noticed the kalinga heads are longer/thinner). Does this strike everyone as a decent distinction between the two? Any other oddities that throws this off? In Krieger's plates there is a Bontoc warrior with a concave head axe, but then Ive seen other plates (eg. the earlier book that I mentioned) with the convex head. Im wondering if some convex heads were not just utilitarian. Anyways, like you Ive always drooled over the kalinga heads, definitely seen more fancier Kalinga axes (more brass decor, etc...) whereas almost all the Bontoc axes Ive seen have been far more utilitarian in look.