Authenticity Of Keris

nechesh · 26th January 2005, 03:29 AM

Here are some more interesting photos and info: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ishistory1.htm

Sakhti777 · 26th January 2005, 04:08 AM

Nechesh, I must thank you for being so helpful in extracting these pictures. The keris buda in that extract will surely face the same fate as others. I am not convinced at all. Lets have a real picture taken from an internationally recognised Keris Buda. You have any?

Here is a fake keris buda that has undergone HCL acid treatment. Hope you can see the difference.

nechesh · 26th January 2005, 04:35 AM

Sakhti, are you saying that you don't believe that the two keris buda that Alan Maisey presents in his article are authentic?

Sepang · 26th January 2005, 05:46 AM

Hello dear all,

I'll try to joint in this thread 'cause need to discus about Keris Budho. So far, I never heard from Indonesian or Malay people that they can give some reason about Keris Budho. Yes..., many people have it, but they don't know about their keris, old or new made.
Look at the Muzium Siber, www.kerisjawa.tk, etc, you can see some image about Keris Budho. But, if I ask them, they can't give a guarantee that their keris is old.
In this thread, I look that some image demonstrate a new keris, although modificated like old keris.
TQ.

Alam Shah · 26th January 2005, 06:27 AM

From the site, most piece looks new. But, I'm not an expert. Just my opinion.

Sakhti777 · 26th January 2005, 06:56 AM

Nechesh, I like you man. Not that we would not believe its authenticity. As Rasdan said earlier, anything that comes from a reliable source, we tend to take it for real even the keris is not. If that source comes from a newcomer, then we may have many assumptions in this forum. More problems would arise when keris is not undressed of its warangan during identification. Let it be clean until you could see fine grains of the blade.

Look at that. Thanks Sepang. Sure, a similar quality of blade as posted by Ria for his k.buda. Try undress the warangan, then you would see the reality.

Sepang · 26th January 2005, 11:14 AM

Nechesh, one of two keris Budha that Alan Maisey presents in his article is a good piece. Knaud keris is a good work from 1342AD, but Budha period, I think before 900AD, or VIII - IX Century. Knaud keris made at 1342AD, same with a Majapahit (in Jawa), so that, the keris (in Jawa) can be called Tangguh Majapahit, Jenggala, Dhaha, Segaluh etc, not Kabudhan.
Tangguh Kabudhan kerisses, more simple with no pamor and any carved or relieve.
I agree with Shakti that the keris Budha posted by Ria in Muzium Siber is a new made. If I look clooser, the iron in that keris have no fibrous, although it made with a kelengan iron (no pamor).
This is just my oppinion, maybe I have wrong, forgive me.
Regards,

nechesh · 26th January 2005, 11:46 AM

Sepang, which of the two keris buda in the Maisey article would you say is good and which is false? Why? BTW, what does TQ mean?

nechesh · 26th January 2005, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sepang

Nechesh, one of two keris Budha that Alan Maisey presents in his article is a good piece.

Sepang, perhaps you made an error. The keris of Knaud is not pictured in the Maisey article. There are 4 keris there, 2 buda and 2 later developments in keris. Are you confusing articles? Did you mean imply that only one of the keris buda presented here is as described or were you thinking of one of the other links?

26th January 2005, 04:08 AM	#2
Sakhti777 Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Penang Posts: 14	Nechesh, I must thank you for being so helpful in extracting these pictures. The keris buda in that extract will surely face the same fate as others. I am not convinced at all. Lets have a real picture taken from an internationally recognised Keris Buda. You have any? Here is a fake keris buda that has undergone HCL acid treatment. Hope you can see the difference. Attached Images Last edited by Sakhti777; 26th January 2005 at 04:36 AM.

26th January 2005, 05:46 AM	#4
Sepang Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 33	Keris Budho Hello dear all, I'll try to joint in this thread 'cause need to discus about Keris Budho. So far, I never heard from Indonesian or Malay people that they can give some reason about Keris Budho. Yes..., many people have it, but they don't know about their keris, old or new made. Look at the Muzium Siber, www.kerisjawa.tk, etc, you can see some image about Keris Budho. But, if I ask them, they can't give a guarantee that their keris is old. In this thread, I look that some image demonstrate a new keris, although modificated like old keris. TQ.

26th January 2005, 11:14 AM	#7
Sepang Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 33	Many photos of Keris Budha but.... ??? Nechesh, one of two keris Budha that Alan Maisey presents in his article is a good piece. Knaud keris is a good work from 1342AD, but Budha period, I think before 900AD, or VIII - IX Century. Knaud keris made at 1342AD, same with a Majapahit (in Jawa), so that, the keris (in Jawa) can be called Tangguh Majapahit, Jenggala, Dhaha, Segaluh etc, not Kabudhan. Tangguh Kabudhan kerisses, more simple with no pamor and any carved or relieve. I agree with Shakti that the keris Budha posted by Ria in Muzium Siber is a new made. If I look clooser, the iron in that keris have no fibrous, although it made with a kelengan iron (no pamor). This is just my oppinion, maybe I have wrong, forgive me. Regards,

26th January 2005, 03:29 AM	#1
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Here are some more interesting photos and info: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ishistory1.htm

26th January 2005, 04:35 AM	#3
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Sakhti, are you saying that you don't believe that the two keris buda that Alan Maisey presents in his article are authentic?

26th January 2005, 06:27 AM	#5
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	From the site, most piece looks new. But, I'm not an expert. Just my opinion.

26th January 2005, 06:56 AM	#6
Sakhti777 Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Penang Posts: 14	Nechesh, I like you man. Not that we would not believe its authenticity. As Rasdan said earlier, anything that comes from a reliable source, we tend to take it for real even the keris is not. If that source comes from a newcomer, then we may have many assumptions in this forum. More problems would arise when keris is not undressed of its warangan during identification. Let it be clean until you could see fine grains of the blade. Look at that. Thanks Sepang. Sure, a similar quality of blade as posted by Ria for his k.buda. Try undress the warangan, then you would see the reality.

26th January 2005, 11:46 AM	#8
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Sepang, which of the two keris buda in the Maisey article would you say is good and which is false? Why? BTW, what does TQ mean?