Keris Minangkabau by

A. G. Maisey · 5th September 2021, 10:09 AM

Yes Jean, I do understand your standards well. I used pretty much the same standards until I was, let us say. "re-educated". In fact I still very much appreciate nice, and even not so nice older keris fittings.

But I think you have missed my point, this preference for old keris in old dress all of a style originating from the same geographic location is thoroughly European, it is not a part of Javanese keris tradition, and possibly not a part of the keris culture in other keris bearing societies.

Whilst it is true that some people might replace existing keris dress for "prestige reasons", this is not the dominant reason, and in fact I do not know first hand of any case, outside of some collectors in Indonesia, who replace simply for "prestige".

The dominant reason for replacement of dress is social necessity. There is another reason also which is not as uncommon as might be supposed, and that is a message, or request, or demand that is brought in a dream.

As for the mating of blade & dress to a geographic location of common origin, this again is a European initiated standard.

Keris that are in actual use as family heirlooms or as items of dress very often do not have dress that matches the blade. People in what is now Indonesia did not stay put in just one place, they moved around, and they took their keris with them.

Bugis, Madurese, Balinese men were highly regarded by the Javanese and the Dutch, and rulers in other locations, as warriors, soldiers, guards. Often these men would remain in Jogja or Solo, or somewhere else, when their period of service finished. They would marry, settle into the community and their keris were sometimes passed through the family as heirlooms. In Bali, very many of the old keris are in fact Javanese.

I personally like the idea of having Javanese keris in Javanese dress, Bugis keris in Bugis dress, and so forth, but my personal preference is based in Western collector standards & values. It is not reflected in the communities where a Javanese gentleman of today might wear the pusaka keris in Javanese dress that was passed down from many generations in the past.

Thus, if our author should choose to do the blingy thingy with his keris one should, I believe, appreciate this as evidence of the continuing observance of long standing tradition.

It is an indisputable fact that the people who belong to any particular culture do own that culture. It may be regretted by some of us that they do not necessarily share the same standards that collectors from outside that owning culture have, but well, that's just the way it is.

I sort of think of this preference for "old keris in old, original dress" as an offshoot of antique collecting rather than of keris study.

The defining line between the student of the keris and the collector of the keris.

This is not to say that either the collector is superior to the student, or vice versa, it is to say that these two groups of people apply different parameters.

Jean · 24th September 2021, 10:23 AM

My curiosity was piqued by our discussion (how could somebody write a book with more than 450 pages about these scarce Minangkabau krisses?).
I feel particularly interested by these krisses after my visit to Padang and Bukittingi in 1997 (during which I could see and handle many Minang krisses), so I decided to buy the book and just received it, and my comments are as follows:
The book is attractively presented with many excellent kris pictures, but most of these krisses are not from Minang origin in my opinion, so the book title is confusing. Some krisses are correctly attributed to other areas such as Palembang, Riau, Jambi, Sulawesi, Borneo, West Java, etc. but many others classified as Minang and "influenced by krisses from other areas" are actually originating from these regions IMO.
According to my observations and the descriptions from Jensen in his Krisdisk, I share the opinion that the original Minang krisses are of either of the 2 following types, with some variations of course:
. Average size kris with alang/ bahari type blade without pamor or with pamor sanak.
. Small size kris with anak alang blade generally with 3 luks, and possibly worn by women.
I attach 2 typical specimens of these krisses for your reference and discussion.
In spite of my questioning about the krisses attribution in the book, it constitutes a very good picture reference for many types of Indonesian krisses (especially from Sumatra) so I do not regret my purchase....
I will take more time for reviewing the text later.
Regards

24th September 2021, 10:23 AM	#2
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	My curiosity was piqued by our discussion (how could somebody write a book with more than 450 pages about these scarce Minangkabau krisses?). I feel particularly interested by these krisses after my visit to Padang and Bukittingi in 1997 (during which I could see and handle many Minang krisses), so I decided to buy the book and just received it, and my comments are as follows: The book is attractively presented with many excellent kris pictures, but most of these krisses are not from Minang origin in my opinion, so the book title is confusing. Some krisses are correctly attributed to other areas such as Palembang, Riau, Jambi, Sulawesi, Borneo, West Java, etc. but many others classified as Minang and "influenced by krisses from other areas" are actually originating from these regions IMO. According to my observations and the descriptions from Jensen in his Krisdisk, I share the opinion that the original Minang krisses are of either of the 2 following types, with some variations of course: . Average size kris with alang/ bahari type blade without pamor or with pamor sanak. . Small size kris with anak alang blade generally with 3 luks, and possibly worn by women. I attach 2 typical specimens of these krisses for your reference and discussion. In spite of my questioning about the krisses attribution in the book, it constitutes a very good picture reference for many types of Indonesian krisses (especially from Sumatra) so I do not regret my purchase.... I will take more time for reviewing the text later. Regards Attached Images

5th September 2021, 10:09 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Yes Jean, I do understand your standards well. I used pretty much the same standards until I was, let us say. "re-educated". In fact I still very much appreciate nice, and even not so nice older keris fittings. But I think you have missed my point, this preference for old keris in old dress all of a style originating from the same geographic location is thoroughly European, it is not a part of Javanese keris tradition, and possibly not a part of the keris culture in other keris bearing societies. Whilst it is true that some people might replace existing keris dress for "prestige reasons", this is not the dominant reason, and in fact I do not know first hand of any case, outside of some collectors in Indonesia, who replace simply for "prestige". The dominant reason for replacement of dress is social necessity. There is another reason also which is not as uncommon as might be supposed, and that is a message, or request, or demand that is brought in a dream. As for the mating of blade & dress to a geographic location of common origin, this again is a European initiated standard. Keris that are in actual use as family heirlooms or as items of dress very often do not have dress that matches the blade. People in what is now Indonesia did not stay put in just one place, they moved around, and they took their keris with them. Bugis, Madurese, Balinese men were highly regarded by the Javanese and the Dutch, and rulers in other locations, as warriors, soldiers, guards. Often these men would remain in Jogja or Solo, or somewhere else, when their period of service finished. They would marry, settle into the community and their keris were sometimes passed through the family as heirlooms. In Bali, very many of the old keris are in fact Javanese. I personally like the idea of having Javanese keris in Javanese dress, Bugis keris in Bugis dress, and so forth, but my personal preference is based in Western collector standards & values. It is not reflected in the communities where a Javanese gentleman of today might wear the pusaka keris in Javanese dress that was passed down from many generations in the past. Thus, if our author should choose to do the blingy thingy with his keris one should, I believe, appreciate this as evidence of the continuing observance of long standing tradition. It is an indisputable fact that the people who belong to any particular culture do own that culture. It may be regretted by some of us that they do not necessarily share the same standards that collectors from outside that owning culture have, but well, that's just the way it is. I sort of think of this preference for "old keris in old, original dress" as an offshoot of antique collecting rather than of keris study. The defining line between the student of the keris and the collector of the keris. This is not to say that either the collector is superior to the student, or vice versa, it is to say that these two groups of people apply different parameters.