Sword from Lombok -- comments please

[Ian]

This is one I have had for a number of years and was sold to me as a "woman's sword" from Lombok. I am not so sure about the female attribution, and even less sure about what to call it. It may be a pedang suduk. Recently another similar sword was on eBay from a dealer in Bali who called it a Cundik/Sendirung, which I cannot find in v. Zonneveld or any other reference that I have.

The sword itself is of good quality, with silver and gold mounts (yes it has been tested and found to be gold, although the percentage of gold is probably low). The handle is wood, and resembles pelet wood that we discussed recently on another thread. The precision of fit of the sword to the scabbard indicates this scabbard was made for the sword and may be original. The blade was polished when I got it, and a light etch indicates a pamor that may be ngulit semonko. The tip of the blade appears to have been reshaped a little. The blade is partially sharpened on the back edge, like many pedang.

Interested to hear what you think of this sword, and in particular how you think I should do a "traditional" etch to bring out the pamor of the blade.

Ian

[Rick]

Hi Ian , I like this sword very much .

I'd suggest the Capt's way of etching ; it worked quite nicely on his blade ... BUT ... I'm afraid Nechesh is gonna put the hoodoo on me if you took my advice .

Tell me one thing ; is the base of the ukiran carved so that it fills the gold cup/selut at the base or is that empty space in there ?

I've always wanted one of these (along with a million other pieces) !

[nechesh]

I agree with Rick, by all means etch it, but i would stay away from the battery acids myself. It looks like there is a nice pamor in there.
I also doubt the women's sword attribution. Would this blade be deemed a pedang?
And Rick, what's a Beantown Yankee boy like you know about Hoodoo anyway!

[Rick]

Born On The Bayou Dave (the Back Bayou) .

Ian , I find the tip of the blade interesting ; done on purpose ?

[Ian]

Definitely done on purpose -- quite symmetrical and ground to that particular shape. Possibly a repair?

Ian

[Rick]

Ian , Nechesh , do you think there's any chance at all that this is a re-shaped keris blade ?

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Rick

Tell me one thing ; is the base of the ukiran carved so that it fills the gold cup/selut at the base or is that empty space in there ?

Sorry Rick, I did not answer your question. The fit of the handle to the selut has a space that has been filled with a pitch-like material that has been ground to a precise, flush fit to the lip of the selut. Does that make sense?

Ian.

[Rick]

Thanks Ian , now that has me thinking .

That method of assembly seems a little suspicious , so now I'm wondering if it is a composite piece .

[Ian]

Don't know Rick -- looks original to me, although an old repair or assembly is possible. The matching of the guard to the sheath is perfect, and the guard is integral with the gold cup/selut. I have not seen any others to be able to comment on whether this is a normal arrangement. Perhaps Naga Sasra could help or one of the other Forumites with more specific knowledge than I have.

Ian.

[Rick]

Hi Ian , I don't really mean to play the skeptic , but that part of the construction struck me as a little strange . If the piece were used couldn't the exposed edge around the hilt tend to possibly injure the hand that wields it ?
Maybe the original ukiran has been replaced .



/I'm still lovin' it though !

[RobT]

I have a sword that is virtually identical to the one in this thread. The ferrule and the oval guard are the same although mine is made of humble brass. The shape of my hilt is the same also except at the base it flairs out so that it fills the cup of the ferrule completely. The prabot on the blade is the same also. The tip on my blade has not been damaged. The double fullers ending in a reinforced tip looks like the tip on some Balinese keris. The scabbard and its attendant metal banding looks the same also except for the fact that mine doesn't have a metal chape. I don't have a digital camera so I can't post pictures but if folks at the forum think they need to see pictures of my blade, I try to borrow a camera from somewhere. I tend to think that the existence of two such similar blades indicates that they are part of an ethnographic type and not a composite made from salvaged blades. This conjecture is strengthened by the presence of the Balinese style tip. I don't ever recall seeing this feature on a Sumatran panjang. Perhaps the similarity in size and shape to a keris panjang is a case of convergent evolution where similarities in customs and fighting styles caused weapons of separate lineages to attain a similar morphology.
Sincerely,
RobT

[Dajak]

Looks Like a balinese pedang

[Bill]

Conogre, nice Keris Panjang, any other opinions on the keris. The blade looks older than 20C, at least I have seen a lot older keris panjang with very simular blades. Seems quite a few of these were made in 20C, why?, for collectors market?, or for status reasons? They either seem really old or really new. Sure isn't a lot of info on them.

[Ian]

Rob:

Any picture you can provide would be much appreciated.

Ian.

[tom hyle]

A couple things have slid by without challenge that I don't know are true, so I'm gonna try to catch up with them. I don't remember who said them, and it doesn't much matter, anyway. K(e)ris panjang, AFAIK "long kris", has been fairly extensively questioned as a purely ceremonial/execution weapon; I've seen and heard the contention that it was a combat weapon, and that it was a response to European thrusting swords. I don't really know the truth of this, but if it's been settled in a definite way, I haven't heard about that. Second, K(e)ris in general, in its true fighting form, is an effective slashing weapon. In the first place, the tangs are not as weak as many seem to expect from their size (and some of them are actually pretty robust); they don't just go around snapping at the drop of a hat; many, I say many, old "Western" butchering knives, used for slashing as their routine purpose, have very similar tangs; indeed, about identical. Also, some k(e)ris have oval-section tangs, though I increasingly suspect this is one of those things I didn't realize the unusualness of when I've seen it before. But mainly, I think there is a misunderstanding concerning the term "slash". First, a slash is not synonymous to a hack or chop. The aspect of this I will address at the moment is that a hack or chop is an action that distributes its force across the blade, while a slash, however, distributes its force largely along the blade, and along the tang as well, and a proper slash does not unduly stress a tang. K(e)ris is a competent cut-and-thrust weapon, and also, though I don't know the extent of its use thus within its native culture, quite capable of competent and effective parries (which also distribute their force along the tang). The main concern in slashing with a modernly mounted k(e)ris is neither the blade (if it's a fighting one, and not unduly over-washed) nor the tang, but the joining to the handle, or the lack thereof; the danger is that the blade would simply pull out of the hilt.

[nechesh]

Tom makes a good point about the joining of the hilt and blade being perhaps a bigger problem than the tang when fighting with a keris. I have heard that in some places pitch was used for a more secure hold on the blade when a keris was to possiblly be used in fighting. I have not been able to comfirm this though. I did once receive a Bali keris in this condition, though it is impossible to know exactly when and by whom this attachment was made. Tom is also correct that there is a big difference between slashing and chopping. However, given the traditional manner of grasping the weapon, with thumb and forefinger actually holding the blade at the pecetan, i'm not sure if slashing in the usual manner is very practical, though this would not, i suppose, count out making short slashes with the blade. This grasp seems really to be most ideal for a stabbing action and it has been my understanding that the angle at which the blade sits is intended specifically for this stabbing action in order to more likely guide the blade towards the center of the body and the vital organs. I would think parrying might be dangerous with ones fingers on the blade, but maybe not.

[BluErf]

Technically, the keris panjang does not have a picetan. At least most don't; they have that small circular cavity cut into the gandik area.

Furthermore, the form of the keris panjang blade does not aid slashing. It is long but narrow, and is seldom very sharp along the edges; a decently broad and sharp blade would have facilitated slashing. Also, while there are robust panjangs, there are also a substantial number of flimsy bladed ones, some barely longer than 18 inches.

The thing that really makes me dismiss the rapier-vs-panjang idea is the fact that the only time you see a panjang is during a ceremony involving some sultan or raja, such as coronation ceremonies. You don't see it being carried around by during normal every day life.

And of course, there is no record of a fight involving a keris panjang. Only of a keris panjang being used to execute high ranking criminals.

[RobT]

Here are the images of my sword. Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
RobT

[tom hyle]

Helps me; beautiful
The pinched grip is absolutely no impediment to cutting. In fact, I, and a great many other cooks and hunters, often hold my knives this way, and not only when board-chopping (a motion not much like combat), but when butchering (an action very much like cutting an opponant) as well. In cutting it aids control. It does seem an impediment to parrying. As I've said I don't know how parrying with a k(e)ris fits or doesn't fit into its native culture (and, to elucidate, I do not, for instance, even know the age of the pinchy hold, nor its universality; does anyone?); I just know that it can be done, and done quite nicely; I don't know (waxing repetitive; I'd explain why, but someone might not like the explanation) about its nativeness/traditionality, and have clearly (I hope) said so.

[Ian]

Rob:

Thank you for posting the pictures. Remarkably similar sword to the one I show above. They could almost have come from the same hands. Even the scababrd style is virtually identical. I would say we have a definite style of sword and not an unusual assemblage.

Noting the wear to the wood handle on yours, I wonder whether the handle on mine might be a replacement for a damaged original (hence its different fit to the cup).

Ian.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Ian

Rob:

Thank you for posting the pictures. Remarkably similar sword to the one I show above. They could almost have come from the same hands. Even the scababrd style is virtually identical. I would say we have a definite style of sword and not an unusual assemblage.

Noting the wear to the wood handle on yours, I wonder whether the handle on mine might be a replacement for a damaged original (hence its different fit to the cup).

Ian.

That would be my guess Ian , the only thing that puzzles me is that a replacement for the hilt would be easy to carve to fit . That brings me to the conclusion that the present handle was swapped out rather than a new handle having been carved . I suspect that this was done because of the quality of the wood that the present hilt seems to show .

[Ian]

Yes Rick, that would make sense. Perhaps the handle was originally made for a keris and got swapped over -- would explain the odd fit. Pelet wood is a prestigious material.

Ian.