Sombro Or Jaka Sura?

ganjawulung · 15th October 2011, 12:06 PM

Karttikeya, the proportion of the gandhik, the puthut side, IMHO is too short to be an iras (one piece) type of betok. It is possible the ganja was missed. For comparison, you may look at this betok in this picture below.... Pls compare the proportion of the gandhik side of this "puthut kembar" (twin puthut)...

Karttikeya · 15th October 2011, 12:42 PM

Pak Ganja, thank you for the sharing pic. Actually, I've seen that keris type 2 times and both no ganja, I do not know whether it has lost ganja or original shape (we might call it iras). For your information, there are some thumbprints on the blade and very thin. But I noticed both iron and pamor of yours are different from mine, probably your keris comes from different period. Anyway, thank you for your explanantion, Pak Ganja.

Karttikeya · 1st November 2011, 07:31 AM

Pak Alan, I am wondering whether this betok putut is genuine or not. I have attach another photograph..How to identity genuine and rework puthut? I think below photograph is quite clear to be identified..
Thank you..

A. G. Maisey · 1st November 2011, 08:21 AM

Karttikeya, its not as easy as just looking at something, and most certainly not as easy as looking at an image on a computer screen.

There are very many considerations when we try to ascertain if a particular feature, or form, is original to the blade. Sometimes this is as easy as using a jeweller's loupe and good light, but more often it is a matter of looking and touching the blade, and feeling the surface, and comparing various areas on the blade.

To make any supportable determination I need to actually hold something in my hand to be relatively certain.

From an image I can often make a fairly good guess, but I can very seldom make a guess that is good enough for me to risk my own money on a purchase, nor to advise anybody else to risk their money.

Money is what it comes down to:- every blade ever made is worth something, doesn't matter if its genuine or a considered attempt at fakery, its still worth something, so when we discuss this sort of thing it really becomes the same, or at least similar to, advising somebody to buy or not to buy investment property of any kind --- stocks, shares, real estate.

Nobody who has any integrity gives advice in the area of investment unless they can support that advice. In fact, under the laws of some countries it is an offense to give advice in respect of investment if it can be shown that the advice was given in the absence of good reason to support it.

It is almost impossible to support advice in respect of keris alterations, and many other things concerning keris, from images on a computer screen.

If a guess that I am not in a position to support is of any interest to you, my guess is that this keris was made from an original, much larger keris, and the puthut was carved into an existing gandhik.

15th October 2011, 12:06 PM	#1
ganjawulung Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: J a k a r t a Posts: 991	Karttikeya, the proportion of the gandhik, the puthut side, IMHO is too short to be an iras (one piece) type of betok. It is possible the ganja was missed. For comparison, you may look at this betok in this picture below.... Pls compare the proportion of the gandhik side of this "puthut kembar" (twin puthut)... Attached Images Last edited by ganjawulung; 15th October 2011 at 11:53 PM.

1st November 2011, 07:31 AM	#3
Karttikeya Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 54	Pak Alan, I am wondering whether this betok putut is genuine or not. I have attach another photograph..How to identity genuine and rework puthut? I think below photograph is quite clear to be identified.. Thank you.. Attached Images

15th October 2011, 12:42 PM	#2
Karttikeya Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 54	Pak Ganja, thank you for the sharing pic. Actually, I've seen that keris type 2 times and both no ganja, I do not know whether it has lost ganja or original shape (we might call it iras). For your information, there are some thumbprints on the blade and very thin. But I noticed both iron and pamor of yours are different from mine, probably your keris comes from different period. Anyway, thank you for your explanantion, Pak Ganja.

1st November 2011, 08:21 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	Karttikeya, its not as easy as just looking at something, and most certainly not as easy as looking at an image on a computer screen. There are very many considerations when we try to ascertain if a particular feature, or form, is original to the blade. Sometimes this is as easy as using a jeweller's loupe and good light, but more often it is a matter of looking and touching the blade, and feeling the surface, and comparing various areas on the blade. To make any supportable determination I need to actually hold something in my hand to be relatively certain. From an image I can often make a fairly good guess, but I can very seldom make a guess that is good enough for me to risk my own money on a purchase, nor to advise anybody else to risk their money. Money is what it comes down to:- every blade ever made is worth something, doesn't matter if its genuine or a considered attempt at fakery, its still worth something, so when we discuss this sort of thing it really becomes the same, or at least similar to, advising somebody to buy or not to buy investment property of any kind --- stocks, shares, real estate. Nobody who has any integrity gives advice in the area of investment unless they can support that advice. In fact, under the laws of some countries it is an offense to give advice in respect of investment if it can be shown that the advice was given in the absence of good reason to support it. It is almost impossible to support advice in respect of keris alterations, and many other things concerning keris, from images on a computer screen. If a guess that I am not in a position to support is of any interest to you, my guess is that this keris was made from an original, much larger keris, and the puthut was carved into an existing gandhik.