keris bali

nechesh · 18th September 2005, 06:09 PM

Well, i'm surprised none of the kerisopiles have come foward with a comment yet, but just so you don't think we are ignoring the "new guy"

i'll throw in my two cents. It looks like you have a fairly nice late 19thC Bali keris there with the fairly full feature ricikan which are common for this type. I would love to see you restain this blade to raise the pamor a bit better. I would think that in the Netherlands there should be a few people capable of doing this for you if you are not into doing it yourself.
I am also not too sure about the origin of your sheath. It looks like it might be Madurese work as it looks similar to the Madura Ladrang style sheath, but then for some reason i think i remember seeing a Bali keris in this form of sheath before.
It would be helpful if you posted a full length picture of the blade along with the close-ups.

simatua · 18th September 2005, 06:56 PM

thanks for the opinion,

Especially about the date, I also had the same thinking about the 19th century.

I know about the cleaning / marangi and sometimes i do it myself.
Sometimes i think its better to leave the keris like it is; I saw in the history at this forum a balinese keris absolute magnifcant, before and after washing it.
Sometimes after cleaning indeed the pamor comes more out... but gives a look too shiny and bright for my taste.

It is indeed nice to get some comment, and helped me a lot.
But i also will show a part of my collection to eveybody who is interested.
Not for showing off....I only have a humble collection, and i know there are others with far more higher colections. Besidese taste can always
be different.

i will place some more pictures this week.... after that i will be goiing for 4 weeks to the land of kerises: Indonesia

BluErf · 21st September 2005, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nechesh

Well, i'm surprised none of the kerisopiles have come foward with a comment yet......

Hey Nechesh, I think you qualify as a kerisophile. Look at your choice of avatar!

BluErf · 21st September 2005, 02:12 PM

And btw, its a real nice Balinese keris here. Can Simatua please post more pictures of the top sheath please? A straight shot of the top sheath would be nice.

nechesh · 21st September 2005, 10:07 PM

No Kai Wee, i'm a kerisofanatic! There's a difference!

simatua · 22nd September 2005, 12:13 PM

Here some more pictures. For a Balinese infact it is a very short blade
about 44 cm.
For myself i think the sheath is made from some kind of root/ wortel?

purwacarita · 23rd September 2005, 04:32 PM

Hi simatua. I think that if you see the keris from beauty perspective, you would not care even if it is not originally from places as said. If you see from yoni perspective, you would not care if the keris is either 1 year old or 1000 years old. Just remember that what people say as kadutan, or pusaka, or pertimi, is not because the keris has those properties, but because people see it as such. For example, I'd love to say a pusaka as a historical pertimi or historicable pertimi. But somebody else can say his keris, pusaka, because the kadutan has saved his life (CE:from getting biten by his neighbor's dog), and I could not blame him for saying his keris so. Because he is 100% right. So Be Careful.

nechesh · 24th September 2005, 01:30 AM

You know Martin, Purwa might have a point here. I mean, why should we bother to try and determine anything about our keris when they can be anything we want them to be if we can see them from the yoni perspective. So when an unscrupulous keris dealer mahars a keris to you at $1000 and tells you it is a powerful pusaka when in fact it was made yesterday by a skilled craftman in Madura it shouldn't matter, right, because "what people say as kadutan, or pusaka, or pertimi, is not because the keris has those properties, but because people see it as such."???

18th September 2005, 06:56 PM	#2
simatua Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 69	thanks thanks for the opinion, Especially about the date, I also had the same thinking about the 19th century. I know about the cleaning / marangi and sometimes i do it myself. Sometimes i think its better to leave the keris like it is; I saw in the history at this forum a balinese keris absolute magnifcant, before and after washing it. Sometimes after cleaning indeed the pamor comes more out... but gives a look too shiny and bright for my taste. It is indeed nice to get some comment, and helped me a lot. But i also will show a part of my collection to eveybody who is interested. Not for showing off....I only have a humble collection, and i know there are others with far more higher colections. Besidese taste can always be different. i will place some more pictures this week.... after that i will be goiing for 4 weeks to the land of kerises: Indonesia

22nd September 2005, 12:13 PM	#6
simatua Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 69	Here some more pictures. For a Balinese infact it is a very short blade about 44 cm. For myself i think the sheath is made from some kind of root/ wortel? Attached Images

18th September 2005, 06:09 PM	#1
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Well, i'm surprised none of the kerisopiles have come foward with a comment yet, but just so you don't think we are ignoring the "new guy" i'll throw in my two cents. It looks like you have a fairly nice late 19thC Bali keris there with the fairly full feature ricikan which are common for this type. I would love to see you restain this blade to raise the pamor a bit better. I would think that in the Netherlands there should be a few people capable of doing this for you if you are not into doing it yourself. I am also not too sure about the origin of your sheath. It looks like it might be Madurese work as it looks similar to the Madura Ladrang style sheath, but then for some reason i think i remember seeing a Bali keris in this form of sheath before. It would be helpful if you posted a full length picture of the blade along with the close-ups.

21st September 2005, 02:12 PM	#4
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	And btw, its a real nice Balinese keris here. Can Simatua please post more pictures of the top sheath please? A straight shot of the top sheath would be nice.

21st September 2005, 10:07 PM	#5
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	No Kai Wee, i'm a kerisofanatic! There's a difference!

23rd September 2005, 04:32 PM	#7
purwacarita Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 54	Hi simatua. I think that if you see the keris from beauty perspective, you would not care even if it is not originally from places as said. If you see from yoni perspective, you would not care if the keris is either 1 year old or 1000 years old. Just remember that what people say as kadutan, or pusaka, or pertimi, is not because the keris has those properties, but because people see it as such. For example, I'd love to say a pusaka as a historical pertimi or historicable pertimi. But somebody else can say his keris, pusaka, because the kadutan has saved his life (CE:from getting biten by his neighbor's dog), and I could not blame him for saying his keris so. Because he is 100% right. So Be Careful.

24th September 2005, 01:30 AM	#8
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	You know Martin, Purwa might have a point here. I mean, why should we bother to try and determine anything about our keris when they can be anything we want them to be if we can see them from the yoni perspective. So when an unscrupulous keris dealer mahars a keris to you at $1000 and tells you it is a powerful pusaka when in fact it was made yesterday by a skilled craftman in Madura it shouldn't matter, right, because "what people say as kadutan, or pusaka, or pertimi, is not because the keris has those properties, but because people see it as such."???