If I may add to Alan’s response re: giving keris a redress with a personal anecdote. For context I am of Javanese-heritage (Jogja) but grew up in Singapore and only recently reconnecting with the Javanese culture and the tosan aji world.
Some time ago I had the good fortune of acquiring a keris made by Empu Djeno, an esteemed ‘kamardikan’ keris-maker from Jogja. The blade was in decent condition (thin surface rust - I had it cleaned and lightly restained to bring out the pamor), but sheathe was of such material, working and condition that I thought to be improper to the keris (or at least my perceived value of it).
It was unthinkable for me not to commission a new warangka and pendok, and find suitable deder (handle) and mendak for the keris, especially if I have the opportunity/means to do so. Based on the values taught to me by family elders and ‘senior collectors’, it is a mark of respect and tribute to the keris and its maker. I had the old warangka cleaned and repolished to be kept separately (perhaps to house other keris if needed).
An alternative analogy on the relationship between sheathe and the keris is like a frame to a painting: it should be respectful to the painting and its painter, ideally reflecting the period and the “artist intention” if possible. Perhaps it is even akin to a sacred relic and its reliquary (I happened to be a Catholic so this is the nearest analogy I can think of to highlight the esoteric value of a keris to a Javanese, especially of old). The frame and reliquary as a standalone item will never be valued as much as the painting or sacred relic, no matter how expensive the material or the craftsmanship - since by nature they are ancillary and can always be replaced or upgraded as the need arise).
|