Interesting big sized javanese keris

Gustav · 23rd April 2010, 03:12 PM

Thank you, Detlef and Marco, for responses.

Alan is absolutely wright.

The "shadow" is a little bit of mysterium for me. It seems to be the same piece of wood, there is nothing glued, yet the line between both colours is very clear, the black part very homogenous. This line goes trough both patra's and it seems, regarding the carvings, there is no work with colour or something else. A spot of this black colour appears also on the bungkul at other, bright side.

Sarung (or the remains of it) seems to be East Javanese, the blade also. The problem is, my only experience regarding this subject are few books, nothing more. In Jensen's book some of the keris are attributed to Bantem, some to East Jawa, and it seems to me, he's point wasn't the blade characteristics.

There must be similarities, becouse both styles are coming from Mojopahit, but what are the differences?

Also I have very little information about East Java historically and culturally.

Sajen · 23rd April 2010, 07:10 PM

I think that the hilt is kayu Timoho.

A. G. Maisey · 23rd April 2010, 10:50 PM

The theory is that Blambangan came from Majapahit, Bali came from Majapahit, Banten came from Blambangan.

Majapahit was bolstered by Pajajaran smiths.

Surakarta style echoes in some respects Majapahit style.

Blambangan are regarded by some experts in Jawa as within the the same stylistic parameters as Majapahit.

However, when we see Majapahit keris that are almost universally agreed to be Majapahit, they are nowhere near the same size as Blambangan.- but you can see the stylistic relationship.

A lot of keris that come from far east of East Jawa are quite big --- I'm not talking about what might be regarded as clasical Blambangan keris, but east Jawa keris from the far East of Jawa.

Once again with this keris of Gustav's we're trying to play the tangguh game.

Bad move.

Its too difficult from pics and all the guesses just confuse people and make the water muddier than it already is.

In any case, its a decent old keris, and the delamination on the gonjo is, for me, a very minor defect, its just part of the character of a very old keris.

The wrongko is text-book trembalu, the jejeran might be timoho, but timoho is not used very often for jejeran because it is inclined to be soft. If it is not a very soft wood in the white sections, it might be safer to call it "pelet" which refers to the two colours and can be a number of different woods.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

23rd April 2010, 03:12 PM	#1
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,295	Thank you, Detlef and Marco, for responses. Alan is absolutely wright. The "shadow" is a little bit of mysterium for me. It seems to be the same piece of wood, there is nothing glued, yet the line between both colours is very clear, the black part very homogenous. This line goes trough both patra's and it seems, regarding the carvings, there is no work with colour or something else. A spot of this black colour appears also on the bungkul at other, bright side. Sarung (or the remains of it) seems to be East Javanese, the blade also. The problem is, my only experience regarding this subject are few books, nothing more. In Jensen's book some of the keris are attributed to Bantem, some to East Jawa, and it seems to me, he's point wasn't the blade characteristics. There must be similarities, becouse both styles are coming from Mojopahit, but what are the differences? Also I have very little information about East Java historically and culturally.

23rd April 2010, 07:10 PM	#2
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,272	I think that the hilt is kayu Timoho.

23rd April 2010, 10:50 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	The theory is that Blambangan came from Majapahit, Bali came from Majapahit, Banten came from Blambangan. Majapahit was bolstered by Pajajaran smiths. Surakarta style echoes in some respects Majapahit style. Blambangan are regarded by some experts in Jawa as within the the same stylistic parameters as Majapahit. However, when we see Majapahit keris that are almost universally agreed to be Majapahit, they are nowhere near the same size as Blambangan.- but you can see the stylistic relationship. A lot of keris that come from far east of East Jawa are quite big --- I'm not talking about what might be regarded as clasical Blambangan keris, but east Jawa keris from the far East of Jawa. Once again with this keris of Gustav's we're trying to play the tangguh game. Bad move. Its too difficult from pics and all the guesses just confuse people and make the water muddier than it already is. In any case, its a decent old keris, and the delamination on the gonjo is, for me, a very minor defect, its just part of the character of a very old keris. The wrongko is text-book trembalu, the jejeran might be timoho, but timoho is not used very often for jejeran because it is inclined to be soft. If it is not a very soft wood in the white sections, it might be safer to call it "pelet" which refers to the two colours and can be a number of different woods.