Information needed Peru bolas weapon

stekemest · 5th May 2016, 05:45 PM

As far as I know, those star shaped heads were nearly exclusively used as heads on shafted maces, not as bolas, so I think it was remounted when those ancient weapons of warfare were not needed anymore (but bolas still used for hunting). Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive study of stone mace heads to my knowledge, so it is hard to date this piece. Probably Inca as older mace heads often have more than six spikes.

Tim Simmons · 5th May 2016, 06:10 PM

I do not think there is a hole in the stone if you look closely. It is a modern peasant weapon from the early 20th century.

Nick Wardigo · 5th May 2016, 07:28 PM

To my eyes, it looks like the center of the head is covered by a piece of leather, so I don't think you can tell if it has a hole or not.

I know almost nothing about these things, but it looks like it has genuine age. I like it a lot.

Please take my largely-ignorant opinion with a grain of salt, but I would be surprised if this was NOT meant to be thrown. If you're just swinging this thing and, God forbid, actually make contact with something (like an opponent's skull), I don't see what's stopping it from being deflected back into your own face. As has been previously stated, this danger is mitigated with a morning star by attaching the chain or cord to the end of a handle that is longer than the cord, itself. On the other hand, the construction of this piece seems simple enough that I can imagine a hunter or warrior throwing this and not being too upset, if he couldn't retrieve it for some reason.

Another question...are you sure the head is made of stone? Just looking at the color and texture, I wouldn't be surprised to learn this was a heavily-patinated piece of iron.

Tim Simmons · 5th May 2016, 09:20 PM

I agree that breaking the rythem of a swing could be dangerous. That would be the same for other weapons. I think the stone is a disc that has been cut into making a star shape. Until I have it it is hard to tell if it is iron or stone. It was sold as stone.

Ferguson · 6th May 2016, 01:10 AM

I don't think it is a stone head. Looks like iron or steel. I think I see grinder marks on the V-shaped cut outs. Could be wrong though.

Steve

Robert · 6th May 2016, 05:29 AM

Maybe these might help.

RobertGuy · 6th May 2016, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferguson

I don't think it is a stone head.
Steve

Time for a magnet test?

Tim Simmons · 6th May 2016, 11:34 AM

It is on it's way but will take time. I have started to find a little more on bolas of this type. The single weight version is Bola Perdida and is said to be mainly used against humans. Some sites suggest that stone {if it is stone? one would hope a seller could tell the difference} bola tend to be old. There is the possibility that as mine is a complicated shape rather than a simple ball it might be old and have served more than one users life?

This link to the Pitt-Rivers Oxford UK is the only reference to its use as a weapon of war I have found so far.

http://web.prm.ox.ac.uk/rpr/index.ph...9455vol2p3982/

Which introduces me to a new area of interest, early colonial ethinc conflict in South America.

The Thomas Falkner mentioned in the Pitt-Rivers link was a Jesuit missionary in Argentina and surrounding countries not just a traveler. 1707-1784.

More pics any help??

It is a matter of skill. Pretty girls and boots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AldeVzGBh1Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqU6dubeUng

6th May 2016, 05:29 AM	#6
Robert EAAF Staff Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Centerville, Kansas Posts: 2,196	Maybe these might help. Attached Images

6th May 2016, 11:34 AM	#8
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,922	It is on it's way but will take time. I have started to find a little more on bolas of this type. The single weight version is Bola Perdida and is said to be mainly used against humans. Some sites suggest that stone {if it is stone? one would hope a seller could tell the difference} bola tend to be old. There is the possibility that as mine is a complicated shape rather than a simple ball it might be old and have served more than one users life? This link to the Pitt-Rivers Oxford UK is the only reference to its use as a weapon of war I have found so far. http://web.prm.ox.ac.uk/rpr/index.ph...9455vol2p3982/ Which introduces me to a new area of interest, early colonial ethinc conflict in South America. The Thomas Falkner mentioned in the Pitt-Rivers link was a Jesuit missionary in Argentina and surrounding countries not just a traveler. 1707-1784. More pics any help?? It is a matter of skill. Pretty girls and boots. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AldeVzGBh1Q https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqU6dubeUng Attached Images Last edited by Tim Simmons; 6th May 2016 at 02:26 PM.

5th May 2016, 05:45 PM	#1
stekemest Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Heidelberg, Germany Posts: 183	As far as I know, those star shaped heads were nearly exclusively used as heads on shafted maces, not as bolas, so I think it was remounted when those ancient weapons of warfare were not needed anymore (but bolas still used for hunting). Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive study of stone mace heads to my knowledge, so it is hard to date this piece. Probably Inca as older mace heads often have more than six spikes.

5th May 2016, 06:10 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,922	I do not think there is a hole in the stone if you look closely. It is a modern peasant weapon from the early 20th century.

5th May 2016, 07:28 PM	#3
Nick Wardigo Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA Posts: 54	To my eyes, it looks like the center of the head is covered by a piece of leather, so I don't think you can tell if it has a hole or not. I know almost nothing about these things, but it looks like it has genuine age. I like it a lot. Please take my largely-ignorant opinion with a grain of salt, but I would be surprised if this was NOT meant to be thrown. If you're just swinging this thing and, God forbid, actually make contact with something (like an opponent's skull), I don't see what's stopping it from being deflected back into your own face. As has been previously stated, this danger is mitigated with a morning star by attaching the chain or cord to the end of a handle that is longer than the cord, itself. On the other hand, the construction of this piece seems simple enough that I can imagine a hunter or warrior throwing this and not being too upset, if he couldn't retrieve it for some reason. Another question...are you sure the head is made of stone? Just looking at the color and texture, I wouldn't be surprised to learn this was a heavily-patinated piece of iron.

5th May 2016, 09:20 PM	#4
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,922	I agree that breaking the rythem of a swing could be dangerous. That would be the same for other weapons. I think the stone is a disc that has been cut into making a star shape. Until I have it it is hard to tell if it is iron or stone. It was sold as stone.

6th May 2016, 01:10 AM	#5
Ferguson Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Kernersville, NC, USA Posts: 793	I don't think it is a stone head. Looks like iron or steel. I think I see grinder marks on the V-shaped cut outs. Could be wrong though. Steve