New keris?

Rick · 25th August 2008, 10:43 PM

We must also remember that keris pamor Buntil Mayit is also generally a coreless blade .

Bad or good ?

A. G. Maisey · 25th August 2008, 11:35 PM

When we talk about blades with cores, and blades with no cores, we need to keep a few things in mind.

First is the age of the blade. Is it old? Current era? Brand new?

If it is an old blade, and it has a manipulated pamor, it will most certainly have a core.

However, a new or current era blade might have a core, or might not.

The blade with the core will be the superior blade to the one with no core, however, the blade with no core could well be a superbly made blade, with no weld flaws, and with beautifully executed pamor.

What you get, should be reflected in the value of the blade.

The new or current era blade with no core should cost less than an equally well made new or current era blade that has been constructed with a core.

Now, if we talk about older blades, and we look at manipulated pamors, those blades will often not be as well made as the more recent blades, they will certainly be in a lesser state of preservation, and if they are any good at all, the value will be multiples of the new or current era blade.

We need to be realistic in the appraisal of a keris.

Its no good simply saying that something is "good", or "bad", or anything else for that matter.

We need to appraise the blade within its applicable parameters.

This blade that Scratch has shown us is a current era blade; it appears not to have a core, however, the pamor has been well managed, and I cannot see any obvious flaws in the welding; the garap (coldwork) is good. Overall this is a good example of its type.

Yes, I agree, if it had been made on a core it would better. If it was pre-WWII it would also be better.

However, I'll put money on it that Scratch did not pay the price of a current era keris made on a core, nor did he pay the price of a pre-WWII keris.

This is a good example of its type, and it should not be criticised for being what it obviously is not.

PenangsangII · 26th August 2008, 03:17 AM

Thanks for your lengthy clarification Alan. Actually I was not trying to critisize Scratch's keris as being bad as I was rather trying to point out that nerjah landep is generally considered bad - aesthetically and esoterically. Furthermore, though of Jawanese ethnicity, I live in within Malay culture that considers keris first & foremost a weapon. So, I cannot imagine this type of keris being actually used..... I guess it is my bad

A. G. Maisey · 26th August 2008, 04:32 AM

Penangsang, its nobody's "bad"---whatever that might mean.

My comments were general, and not aimed specifically at you, had they been, I would have made it clear.

May I suggest a little less sensitivity?

As to the question of suitability of Scratch's keris as a weapon, again, we need to be realistic in the appraisal of a keris. This is a current era keris, made as art, not as weaponry. It is unrealistic to apply standards to this keris which the maker did not apply.

Were it an old keris, made with probable intent to be used as a weapon, it could be criticised for failing to satisfy this function. As a current era keris, made as artistic expression, such criticism cannot be applied.

Agreed, if the pamor enters the edge of a blade, or even enters its gusen, that is evidence of less than wonderful skill---or perhaps care--- on the part of the maker, however, in Javanese and Madurese keris, this deficiency will be found 9 times out of ten. The only blade form where we can almost certainly rely upon this fault failing to occur is the Bugis, and often the Peninsula forms, and this can be easily understood, as these blade forms have prioritised weapon functionality above artistic expression; the manner in which these blades are carved virtually guarantees that the pamor will not enter the gusen.

Realism in appraisal calls for standards specific to the blade identity being applied to the blade in question.

We do not appraise a keris of Pajajaran classification according to the same standards that we apply to a keris of Surakarta classification.Nor do we apply the standards of a Javanese keris to a Bugis keris--- or vice versa.

scratch · 30th August 2008, 01:01 PM

G'Day Gentlemen,

I lost a more detailed reply, sorry for brevity of post.
Thank you Rick, PanangsangII, A G Maisey for your communication, candor and clarity.
I have found discussion and photo of quality new keris very useful.
I have acquired a small keris collection unexpectedly. It may or may not have been a foolish decision

I do like the collection and am enjoying learning more from all the informative posts and threads

Thanks to All for sharing.
A G Maisey Thanks for sharing cengkrong info and visuals in my first post. Looking at the photos you povided and the picture in Kris Gli Invincibili, pg 41, I believe I have an example. are these uncommon? 18 5/8 blade, 24 3/4 in scabbard. Quality wise/weapon wise this is at the higher end I feel.
I am enjoying the posts, past and present very much. Thank you to All for sharing. I hope to post a few pieces to get other opinions and try to guage what I have.

Sincere thank and regards

Daniel

Henk · 30th August 2008, 02:47 PM

That's a nice balinese keris. Dapur cundrik if I'm not mistaken. The mendak is missing. The scabbard has a pendok.
Nice piece. Congrats!

scratch · 30th August 2008, 06:54 PM

Cheers Henk

I had thought this blade to be "straight but with an unusual slant". Piece has a seperate gongo. Balinese

26th August 2008, 04:32 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	Penangsang, its nobody's "bad"---whatever that might mean. My comments were general, and not aimed specifically at you, had they been, I would have made it clear. May I suggest a little less sensitivity? As to the question of suitability of Scratch's keris as a weapon, again, we need to be realistic in the appraisal of a keris. This is a current era keris, made as art, not as weaponry. It is unrealistic to apply standards to this keris which the maker did not apply. Were it an old keris, made with probable intent to be used as a weapon, it could be criticised for failing to satisfy this function. As a current era keris, made as artistic expression, such criticism cannot be applied. Agreed, if the pamor enters the edge of a blade, or even enters its gusen, that is evidence of less than wonderful skill---or perhaps care--- on the part of the maker, however, in Javanese and Madurese keris, this deficiency will be found 9 times out of ten. The only blade form where we can almost certainly rely upon this fault failing to occur is the Bugis, and often the Peninsula forms, and this can be easily understood, as these blade forms have prioritised weapon functionality above artistic expression; the manner in which these blades are carved virtually guarantees that the pamor will not enter the gusen. Realism in appraisal calls for standards specific to the blade identity being applied to the blade in question. We do not appraise a keris of Pajajaran classification according to the same standards that we apply to a keris of Surakarta classification.Nor do we apply the standards of a Javanese keris to a Bugis keris--- or vice versa. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 26th August 2008 at 05:02 AM.

30th August 2008, 01:01 PM	#5
scratch Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 96	G'Day Gentlemen, I lost a more detailed reply, sorry for brevity of post. Thank you Rick, PanangsangII, A G Maisey for your communication, candor and clarity. I have found discussion and photo of quality new keris very useful. I have acquired a small keris collection unexpectedly. It may or may not have been a foolish decision I do like the collection and am enjoying learning more from all the informative posts and threads Thanks to All for sharing. A G Maisey Thanks for sharing cengkrong info and visuals in my first post. Looking at the photos you povided and the picture in Kris Gli Invincibili, pg 41, I believe I have an example. are these uncommon? 18 5/8 blade, 24 3/4 in scabbard. Quality wise/weapon wise this is at the higher end I feel. I am enjoying the posts, past and present very much. Thank you to All for sharing. I hope to post a few pieces to get other opinions and try to guage what I have. Sincere thank and regards Daniel Attached Images

30th August 2008, 06:54 PM	#7
scratch Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 96	Another angle Cheers Henk I had thought this blade to be "straight but with an unusual slant". Piece has a seperate gongo. Balinese Attached Images

25th August 2008, 10:43 PM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	We must also remember that keris pamor Buntil Mayit is also generally a coreless blade . Bad or good ?

25th August 2008, 11:35 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	When we talk about blades with cores, and blades with no cores, we need to keep a few things in mind. First is the age of the blade. Is it old? Current era? Brand new? If it is an old blade, and it has a manipulated pamor, it will most certainly have a core. However, a new or current era blade might have a core, or might not. The blade with the core will be the superior blade to the one with no core, however, the blade with no core could well be a superbly made blade, with no weld flaws, and with beautifully executed pamor. What you get, should be reflected in the value of the blade. The new or current era blade with no core should cost less than an equally well made new or current era blade that has been constructed with a core. Now, if we talk about older blades, and we look at manipulated pamors, those blades will often not be as well made as the more recent blades, they will certainly be in a lesser state of preservation, and if they are any good at all, the value will be multiples of the new or current era blade. We need to be realistic in the appraisal of a keris. Its no good simply saying that something is "good", or "bad", or anything else for that matter. We need to appraise the blade within its applicable parameters. This blade that Scratch has shown us is a current era blade; it appears not to have a core, however, the pamor has been well managed, and I cannot see any obvious flaws in the welding; the garap (coldwork) is good. Overall this is a good example of its type. Yes, I agree, if it had been made on a core it would better. If it was pre-WWII it would also be better. However, I'll put money on it that Scratch did not pay the price of a current era keris made on a core, nor did he pay the price of a pre-WWII keris. This is a good example of its type, and it should not be criticised for being what it obviously is not.

26th August 2008, 03:17 AM	#3
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	Thanks for your lengthy clarification Alan. Actually I was not trying to critisize Scratch's keris as being bad as I was rather trying to point out that nerjah landep is generally considered bad - aesthetically and esoterically. Furthermore, though of Jawanese ethnicity, I live in within Malay culture that considers keris first & foremost a weapon. So, I cannot imagine this type of keris being actually used..... I guess it is my bad

30th August 2008, 02:47 PM	#6
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	That's a nice balinese keris. Dapur cundrik if I'm not mistaken. The mendak is missing. The scabbard has a pendok. Nice piece. Congrats!