Engraved Panabas, how old is it.

drac2k · 7th July 2015, 11:40 PM

I have several engraved weapons, however this is my first panabas done as such.I have often struggled with how old these items are and if they were truly for fighting or decoration.
Listed under "Philippine Weapons, plates from Herbert W. Kriegan's the Collection of Primitive Weapons and Armor of the Philippine Islands," in the U.S. National Museum, there is an example like mine.It is next to a similarly decorated kampilan which he states was taken in Mindanao in 1903 and the picture plates were in the museum in the early 1920's(as memory serves), so I guess it could be approx. 100 years old.
The other question ; is it a fighting weapon? The blade is very sharp and it has a consistency of a kampilan; the thickness at the base of the spine is 3/16", rather than the 1/4" to 3/8" that my other heavier panabas have.

Ian · 8th July 2015, 03:38 PM

This one is clearly made as a weapon, although a number of these style of panabas appear to have been made for sale to non-Moros and have unsharpened, thinner blades with flimsier construction. I had a couple of these "tourist" versions for a while before moving them on. The similar one shown in Krieger's plates is the earliest example of this style that I have seen.

The okir engraving on the blade certainly fits with a Maranao origin IMO. Yours does not seem to have seen much action, and I think it is probably early 20th C judging from its appearance.

Ian.

drac2k · 8th July 2015, 03:52 PM

Thanks, for your input.

Battara · 9th July 2015, 03:13 AM

Ian (of course) is on the money on this. All I have to offer is that this would not be for beheading but more the size for fighting.

You can fight with beheading ones, but they are thicker and the handle is longer and larger, giving it the heft for cutting through bone.

On the other hand, I wold think that the fighting ones would need to be lighter for swifter movement, and so they usually have shorter handles and are somewhat lighter in heft.

Yours is one of the few fighting ones that I have see engraved.

Very nice and congratulations on obtaining such a piece (grumble, grumble, envy, envy

)........

drac2k · 9th July 2015, 04:34 AM

Thanks, it was just pure luck.It came with the other panabas made from a file and a barong with an unusual pommel .

Battara · 9th July 2015, 11:48 PM

Oh would you post those too, please?

Sajen · 10th July 2015, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Oh would you post those too, please?

One of the both you can see here Jose: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=20167

Best regards,
Detlef

Battara · 11th July 2015, 04:10 AM

Got it. Thanks Detlef. I'll turn my brain on now....

drac2k · 11th July 2015, 01:38 PM

Technically you are right; I did mention a barong with that group.I'll post it soon.

7th July 2015, 11:40 PM	#1
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,230	Engraved Panabas, how old is it. I have several engraved weapons, however this is my first panabas done as such.I have often struggled with how old these items are and if they were truly for fighting or decoration. Listed under "Philippine Weapons, plates from Herbert W. Kriegan's the Collection of Primitive Weapons and Armor of the Philippine Islands," in the U.S. National Museum, there is an example like mine.It is next to a similarly decorated kampilan which he states was taken in Mindanao in 1903 and the picture plates were in the museum in the early 1920's(as memory serves), so I guess it could be approx. 100 years old. The other question ; is it a fighting weapon? The blade is very sharp and it has a consistency of a kampilan; the thickness at the base of the spine is 3/16", rather than the 1/4" to 3/8" that my other heavier panabas have. Attached Images

8th July 2015, 03:38 PM	#2
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,197	This one is clearly made as a weapon, although a number of these style of panabas appear to have been made for sale to non-Moros and have unsharpened, thinner blades with flimsier construction. I had a couple of these "tourist" versions for a while before moving them on. The similar one shown in Krieger's plates is the earliest example of this style that I have seen. The okir engraving on the blade certainly fits with a Maranao origin IMO. Yours does not seem to have seen much action, and I think it is probably early 20th C judging from its appearance. Ian.

8th July 2015, 03:52 PM	#3
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,230	Thanks, for your input.

9th July 2015, 03:13 AM	#4
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,219	Ian (of course) is on the money on this. All I have to offer is that this would not be for beheading but more the size for fighting. You can fight with beheading ones, but they are thicker and the handle is longer and larger, giving it the heft for cutting through bone. On the other hand, I wold think that the fighting ones would need to be lighter for swifter movement, and so they usually have shorter handles and are somewhat lighter in heft. Yours is one of the few fighting ones that I have see engraved. Very nice and congratulations on obtaining such a piece (grumble, grumble, envy, envy )........

9th July 2015, 04:34 AM	#5
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,230	Thanks, it was just pure luck.It came with the other panabas made from a file and a barong with an unusual pommel .

9th July 2015, 11:48 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,219	Oh would you post those too, please?

11th July 2015, 04:10 AM	#8
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,219	Got it. Thanks Detlef. I'll turn my brain on now....

11th July 2015, 01:38 PM	#9
drac2k Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 1,230	Technically you are right; I did mention a barong with that group.I'll post it soon.