Javanese keris for comment

Jan · 10th January 2005, 08:39 PM

The exact origin of the fittings confuses me a bit - the sheath is a gayaman surakarta, but the handle looks Yogya style to me. Not really the most common combination. So at least one of these might have been changed once after production and first fittings.

nechesh · 10th January 2005, 09:37 PM

I would agree with Jan. The ukiran is definitely Yogyakarta while the wrongko is Surakarta. I would be interested in seeing a top shot to see how well the blade fits the sheath. The ukiran is a fine example, with pieced areas and well carved cecekan. Could be 19thC or early 20thC. Nice ricikan and well controlled pamor. I would stop short at saying this keris was worn by royalty (dressed a bit plain for that) or a high ranking kraton official without any provenance to that case, but all and all a very nice keris.

rasdan · 11th January 2005, 01:44 AM

Just to add, i think the pamor is blarak ngirid rather than ron genduru.

nechesh · 11th January 2005, 02:11 AM

That was my first impression as well Rasdan.

BluErf · 11th January 2005, 03:05 PM

Just to point what something potentially obvious -- this keris has a pretty well-done pudak setegal which adds to the 'sweetness' of the piece. Little things on the keris makes a huge difference in the overall aesthetics.

ronpakis · 11th January 2005, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rasdan

Just to add, i think the pamor is blarak ngirid rather than ron genduru.

After looking into the literature i agree with you about the pamor. Any ideas about the material of the pendok?

nechesh · 11th January 2005, 09:44 PM

Just to add to the confusion of origins, i might suggest that the wilah itself isn't Javanese at all, but perhaps Maduran. The pendok looks like mamas to me.
Sorry Kai Wee, but you lost me with the terminology. Is pudak setegal a peninsula term?

empu kumis · 11th January 2005, 11:49 PM

Hi Kerislovers,

it seems its necesary to made a comment because there is nothing to congratulate on this blade, even I´m contrary of all my fellow forumites and all yelling on me.

First I´m sure this is an new or let`s say not more then 5 years old blade of typical Maduran origin and not the work of an Empu but a Pande.
Important to say is: blades with a pamor miring without a slorok (steelcore) are always in danger of breaking. Especially if the iron used is a modern material and this is the case for blades like this. The reason is the smith starts with 11 layers of 1 to 2 mm thick iron plates and 10 layers of nickle plated rim stripes of a thickness of about 1 mm. In two welding the result is 20 layers of pamor. From one welded staff sometimes the make two keris blades. So you save time and material (charcoal is expensive) and labour expences. Its an economical calculation because ther are many Pandes in Madura and every Pande is under pressure of his colleagues.

Note:
1. the strong etching, typical for new Maduran blades
2. the very thin pamorlayers (made of rims with some microns of nickle on the surface)
3. the greneng looking weared off, but made for looking old
(here comes the question of faking again)
4. If you looking closer you still see the marks of chisels (in the tikel alis and pejetan)
5. the angle between the centerline (straight line from tip to tumpengan or bungkul, not the ada ada) and the ganja. To stiff (typical for Madura)
6. the direction of the handle or better of the pesi (typical for Madura)
7. the outer ridges of the sogokan and tikel alis are to sharp for an old blade.
8. the form of buntut is also strange.

All togther this has nothing and really nothing to do with any kraton (maby this blade has been closest to palace in the shops of the alun alun, there are things like this sold also in wellknown electronical auctions. This might be the only connection to any palace. With the aestethics of a kerisblade has this also nothing to do.
In my eyes this are is no pudak sategal but only lis-lisan because I see the lis-lisan continue from the connection of the blade and ganja further the normal for the pudak sategal. This are not weared off pudak sategal. There do exist special pudak sategal which has no thorn out of the sharpness but their name I have not present at the moment.
I think its useless to discuss the handle or sheet because the are objects of changes by the owner or dealer many times. They could be old which is not uncommon.

I`m sorry if I do not meet what you have expected but as an eyewitness who has studied on the spot may tell the truths even it hurts.

Empu kumis

Rick · 12th January 2005, 12:48 AM

Empu Kumis has brought this subject up .

I got the initial impression of 'new' about this blade myself , and have had it since I first saw the pictures .

I can't speak to the rest of the dress .

I believe the pendok may be white brass / German silver, I have a similar example , it is fairly heavy gauge material and tends toward yellow in color when left unpolished .

nechesh · 12th January 2005, 01:21 AM

I am inclined to follow Empu Kumis' lead here. Even though i was willing to concede to an earlier 20thC date as this type of keris has been made in Madura since at least then, i believe E.K.'s expertise in this matter is certainly far greater than mine. I thank you for your detailed explanation as to why you date this keris as you do. This is just the type of information that is often lacking in people's assessments and is crucial to our understanding and learning of this very complex subject.
All other terms are clear to me, but i am still not quite clear on pudak sategal.

BTW, i understand E.K. holds keris to a very high standard. I still think this is a nice keris, it is just not a kraton piece.

12th January 2005, 12:48 AM	#9
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,347	Now That ...... Empu Kumis has brought this subject up . I got the initial impression of 'new' about this blade myself , and have had it since I first saw the pictures . I can't speak to the rest of the dress . I believe the pendok may be white brass / German silver, I have a similar example , it is fairly heavy gauge material and tends toward yellow in color when left unpolished .

10th January 2005, 08:39 PM	#1
Jan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Hamburg, Germany Posts: 8	The exact origin of the fittings confuses me a bit - the sheath is a gayaman surakarta, but the handle looks Yogya style to me. Not really the most common combination. So at least one of these might have been changed once after production and first fittings.

10th January 2005, 09:37 PM	#2
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	I would agree with Jan. The ukiran is definitely Yogyakarta while the wrongko is Surakarta. I would be interested in seeing a top shot to see how well the blade fits the sheath. The ukiran is a fine example, with pieced areas and well carved cecekan. Could be 19thC or early 20thC. Nice ricikan and well controlled pamor. I would stop short at saying this keris was worn by royalty (dressed a bit plain for that) or a high ranking kraton official without any provenance to that case, but all and all a very nice keris.

11th January 2005, 01:44 AM	#3
rasdan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Kuala Lumpur Posts: 369	Just to add, i think the pamor is blarak ngirid rather than ron genduru.

11th January 2005, 02:11 AM	#4
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	That was my first impression as well Rasdan.

11th January 2005, 03:05 PM	#5
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Just to point what something potentially obvious -- this keris has a pretty well-done pudak setegal which adds to the 'sweetness' of the piece. Little things on the keris makes a huge difference in the overall aesthetics.

11th January 2005, 09:44 PM	#7
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Just to add to the confusion of origins, i might suggest that the wilah itself isn't Javanese at all, but perhaps Maduran. The pendok looks like mamas to me. Sorry Kai Wee, but you lost me with the terminology. Is pudak setegal a peninsula term?

11th January 2005, 11:49 PM	#8
empu kumis Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 17	Hi Kerislovers, it seems its necesary to made a comment because there is nothing to congratulate on this blade, even I´m contrary of all my fellow forumites and all yelling on me. First I´m sure this is an new or let`s say not more then 5 years old blade of typical Maduran origin and not the work of an Empu but a Pande. Important to say is: blades with a pamor miring without a slorok (steelcore) are always in danger of breaking. Especially if the iron used is a modern material and this is the case for blades like this. The reason is the smith starts with 11 layers of 1 to 2 mm thick iron plates and 10 layers of nickle plated rim stripes of a thickness of about 1 mm. In two welding the result is 20 layers of pamor. From one welded staff sometimes the make two keris blades. So you save time and material (charcoal is expensive) and labour expences. Its an economical calculation because ther are many Pandes in Madura and every Pande is under pressure of his colleagues. Note: 1. the strong etching, typical for new Maduran blades 2. the very thin pamorlayers (made of rims with some microns of nickle on the surface) 3. the greneng looking weared off, but made for looking old (here comes the question of faking again) 4. If you looking closer you still see the marks of chisels (in the tikel alis and pejetan) 5. the angle between the centerline (straight line from tip to tumpengan or bungkul, not the ada ada) and the ganja. To stiff (typical for Madura) 6. the direction of the handle or better of the pesi (typical for Madura) 7. the outer ridges of the sogokan and tikel alis are to sharp for an old blade. 8. the form of buntut is also strange. All togther this has nothing and really nothing to do with any kraton (maby this blade has been closest to palace in the shops of the alun alun, there are things like this sold also in wellknown electronical auctions. This might be the only connection to any palace. With the aestethics of a kerisblade has this also nothing to do. In my eyes this are is no pudak sategal but only lis-lisan because I see the lis-lisan continue from the connection of the blade and ganja further the normal for the pudak sategal. This are not weared off pudak sategal. There do exist special pudak sategal which has no thorn out of the sharpness but their name I have not present at the moment. I think its useless to discuss the handle or sheet because the are objects of changes by the owner or dealer many times. They could be old which is not uncommon. I`m sorry if I do not meet what you have expected but as an eyewitness who has studied on the spot may tell the truths even it hurts. Empu kumis

12th January 2005, 01:21 AM	#10
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	I am inclined to follow Empu Kumis' lead here. Even though i was willing to concede to an earlier 20thC date as this type of keris has been made in Madura since at least then, i believe E.K.'s expertise in this matter is certainly far greater than mine. I thank you for your detailed explanation as to why you date this keris as you do. This is just the type of information that is often lacking in people's assessments and is crucial to our understanding and learning of this very complex subject. All other terms are clear to me, but i am still not quite clear on pudak sategal. BTW, i understand E.K. holds keris to a very high standard. I still think this is a nice keris, it is just not a kraton piece.