Bugis Keris

[Spunjer]

here's my first bugis keris. the handle is ivory, and i believe the mendak is gold, but i haven't had it tested yet. i do love the pattern on the scabbard, and i realize it needs some cleaning. as far as the blade, it needs to be stain (i think), but after reading Alan's link on a previous post, i think i'll leave that alone. i would love to hear everyone comments on this particular keris, though!

[Jean]

Very nice and rare ivory hilt, the scabbard does not look very old but I could be wrong (check inside the slot), the blade with strong gusen (bevels) on the edges has an odd ganja (iras?) but which seems original. From the pics the selut seems to be from brass but again I can be mistaken. A very good kris anyway, congratulations!
Regards

[Spunjer]

thanks for the comment, Jean! my apologies on the terminologies. so what's the difference between a selut and a mendak? nevertheless, i will have it tested.
i looked inside the scabbard and it appears to be older: uniform dark patina all the way as far as i can see.

[Jean]

The selut (javanese term) or pedongkok (Sumatra/ Malay term) is the cup inserting the base of the hilt while the mendak is the conical piece inserted between a javanese hilt and the blade.
Regards :)

[Sajen]

Hi Ron,

agree, very nice keris. I could be wrong but I think that your keris coming from North Sumatra, maybe Gayo. The scabbard missing maybe it's foot.

Regards,
Detlef

[Spunjer]

thanks for the comment, Detlef! that was my initial thought, that the foot (buntut?) was missing, but upon closer look, the patina is uniform throughout with no sign of having anything attached to it. of course there's a possibility that it might have one at certain point, but if it did, it must have came off early in its life.

[David]

I really like this keris. The hilt is both beautiful and unusual. The blade is quite nice as well. As Jean stated in his second reply, pendokok is probably a better term than selut for the hilt cup. Of course one could always just say "hilt cup". ;) While we are discussing terminology i am not sure i would refer to the bevelled surfaces here as gusen. Again this is Javanese terminology, but AFAIK gusen refers to a rather narrow bevel right at the very edge of the blade. The classic Bugis bevel here seems too broad to be referred to in this way, but maybe i am mistaken on that front.
I'm not sure if there was ever a buntet on this sheath stem or not. A shot from the bottom might clear that up. I wouldn't worry about the age of the sheath as much as i would the quality. Dress on Indonesian keris are often changed throughout the life of the blade. One would not really expect to find an original sheath on an old blade. Looks like nice wood. Nothing fancy in the carving, but certainly competent. If it also fits the blade well than i would say it is a good marriage. Would love to hear if the hilt cup turns out to be gold.

[A. G. Maisey]

It is perfectly legitimate to refer to the blade bevel as a "gusen" -- if we are to use Javanese terms to describe this blade, and since we use the word "keris" to describe the overall blade, then we probably should be OK to use "gusen" as well.

In fact, "gusen" is variation of "kusen", which is a variation of "kosen".

"kosen" is a frame, as in a window frame or a door frame.

the blade bevel frames the blade, thus "gusen", or "kusen", or "kosen".

In Central Jawa you will see signs outside businesses along the street that advertise that they make "gusen", or "kusen", or "kosen". These places make window and door frames, as well as other joinery.

A lot of the words that we use to describe parts of a keris are perfectly ordinary words, in many cases ordinary words used in order to hide the true names, because the true names are select knowledge.

One keris term I've always got a smile out of is "sogokan" --- this is pronounced "sogo'an", the "k" is a glottal stop.

A sogokan is a poker, as in a stick, or a pipe or similar used to poke something else, for instance, if your storm-water outlet was blocked, you'd use a sogokan to clear it.

I like David's "blade bevel" actually:- its fine to know the indigenous terms, but often the English term is more easily understood by English speakers.

[Spunjer]

thanks for the lesson in terminology! "Buntet" sounds easy enough to remember: in tagalog "buntot" means tail, so i'm assuming the toe on the scabbard has a similar connotation?
here's the close up of the bottom. as mentioned earlier, the patina is uniformed throughout

[David]

It is perfectly legitimate to refer to the blade bevel as a "gusen" -- if we are to use Javanese terms to describe this blade, and since we use the word "keris" to describe the overall blade, then we probably should be OK to use "gusen" as well.

In fact, "gusen" is variation of "kusen", which is a variation of "kosen".

"kosen" is a frame, as in a window frame or a door frame.

the blade bevel frames the blade, thus "gusen", or "kusen", or "kosen".

In Central Jawa you will see signs outside businesses along the street that advertise that they make "gusen", or "kusen", or "kosen". These places make window and door frames, as well as other joinery.

A lot of the words that we use to describe parts of a keris are perfectly ordinary words, in many cases ordinary words used in order to hide the true names, because the true names are select knowledge.

One keris term I've always got a smile out of is "sogokan" --- this is pronounced "sogo'an", the "k" is a glottal stop.

A sogokan is a poker, as in a stick, or a pipe or similar used to poke something else, for instance, if your storm-water outlet was blocked, you'd use a sogokan to clear it.

I like David's "blade bevel" actually:- its fine to know the indigenous terms, but often the English term is more easily understood by English speakers.
Thanks Alan. I wasn't so much arguing whether a Javanese term was appropriate here, but whether the bevel aspect of this classic Bugis blade form really qualifies to be described as a "frame for this style of blade. The bevelled aspects of this blade are the majority of the entire blade so i find it harder to see it as a "frame" for the blade in this case. :shrug:

[David]

Thanks for the bottom view Ron. My person view is that a bunter would probably be proper here, but that doesn't mean one was ever there. But regardless of patina it does appear to me at least that the bottom did not receive the same staining treatment as the rest of the stem. A thin piece of ivory here would possibly have been a nice finishing touch. :shrug:

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for your clarification David.

Yes, from a Javanese perspective there is absolutely no doubt that the blade bevel on this keris is correctly termed gusen --- or whatever of the variations we're comfortable with.

The profile of the blade is classic Bugis. The Surakarta classification system does recognise a Bugis classification, and the notes I have in respect of cross section translate as:-
"there is no ada-ada, the blade is flat and has a wide gusen".


Regarding the term we use for the cap at the end of the gandar. In Javanese terminology this is "buntut".

The word "buntut" can be used in a few different ways, it means a tail, it means the rear end of anything, it also means the result or consequence of something. So the little cap that we sometimes see on the end of a gandar is named thus because of its position:- it’s the tail of the gandar --- just as Ron guessed. Buntut is a noun.

There is also a word "buntet", this means that one end of something is closed. Buntet is an adjective.

There are other related words that have different meanings, like "buntu"= deadend, clogged, blocked; "bunting"= cut off; "bunuh"= confused (your thoughts are mixed up, so you cannot progress in thought, same idea as a deadend); "bunting" & "buncit"= youngest person in a family(the family line does not extend past the youngest); "buntas"=last part or end; "buntar"=the end of a tombak shaft, also the end of a ditch.

That "bun" syllable carries the idea of something being finished, the examples I've given are just a few that come readily to mind, but I'm sure there are a whole heap of words that begin with "bun" that the idea of closure can be seen in. I guess even the word for a wrapping --- "buntel" --- carries the same sense of being the end of something --- inside the wrapping is substance, outside the wrapping is nothing.

As I said previously a lot of keris words are just ordinary words. Perhaps one of the biggest gains that could be made in keris understanding might be to learn just a little bit of Bahasa Indonesia, and/or Javanese.

I'm no linguist, and in truth I have very limited ability in languages other than English, but I believe that if we looked at languages across SE Asia, and even into the Pacific, we would find a strong connecting thread. I've often heard Tagalog spoken, I do not understand it, but listening to it I always feel that I am on the edge of understanding what is being said, it has a very similar tone and cadence to Javanese, and the words taken individually sound comprehensible.

[David]

Thanks for the additional info Alan. Of course when i was writing auto-correct changed "buntut" to "bunter", which i can only assume is baseball terminology…
:rolleyes: :)

[A. G. Maisey]

Oh yeah --- auto correct.

What a pain!!!

I have tried to find out how to turn it off and I cannot.

It would be nice if I could get something that would check text on request, identify words it thinks are wrong, and let me decide if they are wrong or not.

[Spunjer]

yes, there seems to be a lot of commonality between javanese and tagalog. you mentioned "buncit"; in tagalog, it's bunso. the similarity goes way back, as illustrated by the Laguna Copper plate, which was inscribed in 900 AD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laguna_Copperplate_Inscription

Thanks for everyone's input!

[David]

Oh yeah --- auto correct.

What a pain!!!

I have tried to find out how to turn it off and I cannot.

It would be nice if I could get something that would check text on request, identify words it thinks are wrong, and let me decide if they are wrong or not.
Well you can teach new words to the auto-correct so that it doesn't change them. I have done this with a few keris related terms, but there are so many more. :eek: :)

[Jean]

Thanks for the bottom view Ron. My person view is that a bunter would probably be proper here, but that doesn't mean one was ever there. But regardless of patina it does appear to me at least that the bottom did not receive the same staining treatment as the rest of the stem. A thin piece of ivory here would possibly have been a nice finishing touch. :shrug:

From the pics it would seem that the bottom piece is not more recent than the scabbard itself but it is not in Sulawesi nor East Sumatra Bugis style IMO, see a typical old Sulawesi scabbard for comparison.
Regards

[Sajen]

From the pics it would seem that the bottom piece is not more recent than the scabbard itself but it is not in Sulawesi nor East Sumatra Bugis style IMO, see a typical old Sulawesi scabbard for comparison.
Regards

Hello Jean,

like said before, the keris could be from North Sumatra, have a look to Jensens Kris Disk, the stars around the bottom from the handle are typical for Gayo. This would explain also the somewhat unusual scabbard style.

Regards,
Detlef

[Rick]

Anyone beside me wondering how the heck they achieved that ganja iras ?? :confused:

[Jean]

Anyone beside me wondering how the heck they achieved that ganja iras ?? :confused:

Yes Rick, I am also wondering and expected somebody to raise it... The pamor pattern on the blade is mlumah (pamor lines parallel to the blade lenght) while on the ganja they are miring (perpendicular to the blade lenght). To me one way to achieve it would be to cut the ganja and to weld it perpendicular to the blade lenght? I can see a trace of a welding line between the blade and the ganja but I am not sure. This is the first time I see such an odd ganja.
Regards :)

[Jean]

Hello Jean,

like said before, the keris could be from North Sumatra, have a look to Jensens Kris Disk, the stars around the bottom from the handle are typical for Gayo. This would explain also the somewhat unusual scabbard style.

Regards,
Detlef


Hello Detlef,
The diamonds at the base of this hilt have a peculiar shape and they are not exclusive to Gayo hilts IMO, see this one from West Sumatra for instance. The Gayo hilts are generally in Jawa Demam or bawar style, but not Bugis? And the scabbard is not at all typical of Gayo krisses? Any opinion about the possible origin of this kris will be welcome. :)
Regards

[David]

To me one way to achieve it would be to cut the ganja and to weld it perpendicular to the blade length? I can see a trace of a welding line between the blade and the ganja but I am not sure. This is the first time I see such an odd ganja.
Perhaps, but that would seem an odd way to create a gonjo iras blade AFAIK since i always thought such blades were made all in one piece, not welded together afterwards. First time i have see such a thing as well. :shrug:

[Jean]

Perhaps, but that would seem an odd way to create a gonjo iras blade AFAIK since i always thought such blades were made all in one piece, not welded together afterwards. First time i have see such a thing as well. :shrug:

I hope that Alan will enlighten us :)
Regards

[kai]

Yes, this ganja seems to have been welded back onto the blade. I doubt this is practised in Jawa - probably pretty ideosyncratic craftmanship...

I wouldn't call this a ganja iras blade either since the esthetics are obviously different.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ron,

Congrats, a really nice keris!

While the blade is obviously influenced by "Bugis" style, the flow of lines does not seem to support an origin from Sulawesi; it does look Sumatran/Malay to me.

The gorgeous hilt is special and may be an unique one-off - at least I haven't seen any that seem to be related or with similar features. The star-like decoration at the base is carved differently from what is usually associated with Gayo and possibly neighboring highland areas. (The pendokok looks also brass/bronze to me.)

The scabbard is of an old type associated with central coastal Sumatra and the neighboring Melacca Straits area (Riau archipelago), quite possibly Jambi.

For convenience, I'm attaching a few examples from Gavin's site. Please note the silver buntut in the first example - I believe Ron's keris may have had a similarly worked scabbard tip (if the scars visible in the wood are on both sides, a now lost silver buntut seems very likely IMHO). Also note the wood which is very similar.

Regards,
Kai

[Sajen]

Hello Detlef,
The diamonds at the base of this hilt have a peculiar shape and they are not exclusive to Gayo hilts IMO, see this one from West Sumatra for instance. The Gayo hilts are generally in Jawa Demam or bawar style, but not Bugis? And the scabbard is not at all typical of Gayo krisses? Any opinion about the possible origin of this kris will be welcome. :)
Regards

Hello Jean,
what let you be sure that your hilt is from West Sumatra?

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

The gonjo question.

Simple answer:- don't know.

If I had it in hand I would examine closely under magnification, and I think I'd probably find that it had been welded in position, but what sort of weld?

Gas? Electric? Forge?

What was done, when was it done, and why?

Don't know.

[Jean]

Hello Jean,
what let you be sure that your hilt is from West Sumatra?

Regards,
Detlef


Hello Detlef,
I am not sure of course as this style of hilt is very rare. I rely on the information given by Vanna Ghiringhelli on pages 146/147 of her book "The Invincible krisses 2" which shows a similar hilt (without the stars) fitted on a Minangkabau kris bought near Padang, and another hilt shown on page 105 of her first book "Kris Gli Invincibili" (without definite origin).
Regards

[Jean]

Hello Ron,

While the blade is obviously influenced by "Bugis" style, the flow of lines does not seem to support an origin from Sulawesi; it does look Sumatran/Malay to me.

Kai

Hello Kai,
I agree with you, another point is that to my best knowledge these wide bevels are never (or at least very rarely) seen on Sulawesi Bugis blades, for instance this ricikan is not mentioned in the reference book "Senjata Pusaka Bugis" and none of the blades shown in the book includes this feature. This type of odd ganja is not commonly used in Sulawesi as well.
Regards

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm having a little bit of difficulty in understanding exactly where this discussion is going, and I would appreciate it if somebody could clarify for me the following:-

1) Do we accept that the designation of "Bugis", as applied to a keris blade, and to keris dress, refers to a style of blade that is associated with the Bugis people?

2) Do we accept that the diaspora of the Bugis people, which began in the 17th century, and continues until today, has seen the spread of Bugis cultural style and values, as well as Bugis genetic inheritance, to areas far removed from the homeland of the Bugis people in South West Sulawesi?

3) Do we accept that the characteristics displayed in items of material culture originating from a common cultural source can vary for many reasons ?

4) Do we accept that the existence of the dominant characteristics of any item of material culture determine the culture to which that item is to be assigned?

5) Do we agree that the designation of "Bugis" when applied to a keris blade is a cultural, rather than a geographic classification?

If we are in agreement in respect of the above, then there can be no doubt at all that the keris under discussion here is a Bugis keris.

My opinion is that this is not a Bugis "influenced" keris, nor is it a keris of Bugis "style".

It is a Bugis keris.

However there are several questions that remain unanswered:-

A) What is the geographic point of origin of the various components of this complete keris?

B) Is there a possibility that the peculiarities noted in the fabrication of the blade are the result of a blade revision?

C) If the response to B) is that this conjecture is a possibility, then where & when was this revision carried out?

The more I look at the images of this keris, the more I feel that I am looking at a marriage.

Is there the possibility that the edges of this blade were filed or ground to remove imperfections, and when this work was done, the width of the gusen increased?

If I look closely at the texture of the face of the blade and I compare it with the texture of the bevels of the blade, these bevels do not seem to share the same texture as is found on the face of the blade.

During my life I have handled thousands of keris of all types.

I have never seen a keris with a separately made gonjo that has been permanently fixed to the body of the blade.

There is a possibility that that this permanent fixture of the gonjo was the result of one man's idea for improvement, either the maker, or the man who placed the order with the maker, or some later owner.

When I consider all the questionable aspects of this complete keris, my present feeling is that this is a marriage that took place far away from the geographic point of origin of any of the components of this complete keris.

[kai]

Hello Alan,

1) Do we accept that the designation of "Bugis", as applied to a keris blade, and to keris dress, refers to a style of blade that is associated with the Bugis people?
Yup, peoples originating in SW Sulawesi: Bugis, Makassarese, etc. (Not including the Toraja from central Sulawesi, of course.)


2) Do we accept that the diaspora of the Bugis people, which began in the 17th century, and continues until today, has seen the spread of Bugis cultural style and values, as well as Bugis genetic inheritance, to areas far removed from the homeland of the Bugis people in South West Sulawesi?
Yep.


3) Do we accept that the characteristics displayed in items of material culture originating from a common cultural source can vary for many reasons ?
Sure.

4) Do we accept that the existence of the dominant characteristics of any item of material culture determine the culture to which that item is to be assigned?
Define dominant and Bugis... ;)


5) Do we agree that the designation of "Bugis" when applied to a keris blade is a cultural, rather than a geographic classification?
Yes. However, once cultures start to mix, the "pure" origin is lost and it may be preferable to speak of influences, cross-over styles, etc.


If we are in agreement in respect of the above, then there can be no doubt at all that the keris under discussion here is a Bugis keris.

My opinion is that this is not a Bugis "influenced" keris, nor is it a keris of Bugis "style".

It is a Bugis keris.
From an outside position this is an understandable POV. From what I understand from insiders of the main diaspora areas (southern Malay peninsula and Melacca Straits archipelago including ports of eastern Sumatra), there often is a clear difference of a "pure Bugis" blade as found in SW Sulawesi (and also often as trade blade or gift in other SEA areas) and blades commonly crafted in the Malay diaspora regions (obviously influenced by the SW Sulawesi style but with a different flow of lines due to added influences from other keris cultures). Even Bugis descendants in these diasporas seem to agree with this notion. Granted, there will have been expat Bugis bladesmiths who followed their traditional style - thus, we can expect to label some blades as Sulawesi style that were crafted elsewhere: it is a cultural definition rather than a strict geographic, indeed.


However there are several questions that remain unanswered:-

A) What is the geographic point of origin of the various components of this complete keris?
As posited above, IMHO the scabbard gives the best clue. Moreover, none of the other parts seem to contradict the Straits/Jambi notion. I agree, however, that this is a mere working hypothesis open to discussion/rebuttal considering the pretty unique nature of the components. Unless we find more examples with similar features, that is.


B) Is there a possibility that the peculiarities noted in the fabrication of the blade are the result of a blade revision?

C) If the response to B) is that this conjecture is a possibility, then where & when was this revision carried out?
Certainly possible. I don't see a need to invoke any revision though.


Is there the possibility that the edges of this blade were filed or ground to remove imperfections, and when this work was done, the width of the gusen increased?

If I look closely at the texture of the face of the blade and I compare it with the texture of the bevels of the blade, these bevels do not seem to share the same texture as is found on the face of the blade.
At the sorsoran area, the corrosion on the face/plateau is somewhat deeper than along the bevels; if you look further down the blade, this difference is much less pronounced. If a keris is kept in polish (with emphasis along the edges) but allowed to develop a topographical etch, this difference seems not too suspicious to me.

I understand that this keris comes from an older collection - Ron, do you know when it was acquired by the former owner?


During my life I have handled thousands of keris of all types.

I have never seen a keris with a separately made gonjo that has been permanently fixed to the body of the blade.
Yes, I guessed this being a pretty unique feature. If not done with modern techniques revealing a recent revision, this won't help us much though.


There is a possibility that that this permanent fixture of the gonjo was the result of one man's idea for improvement, either the maker, or the man who placed the order with the maker, or some later owner.

When I consider all the questionable aspects of this complete keris, my present feeling is that this is a marriage that took place far away from the geographic point of origin of any of the components of this complete keris.
Certainly a possibility. As is the opposite. I'm keeping an open mind, especially without having examined this keris in person.

What we haven't yet established, is how well the parts fit each other (not that this will allow any conclusive reasoning): Ron, could you please post close-ups showing how well the blade fits the scabbard? Did you (carefully!) tried to remove the hilt?

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Certainly possible. I don't see a need to invoke any revision though.
At the sorsoran area, the corrosion on the face/plateau is somewhat deeper than along the bevels; if you look further down the blade, this difference is much less pronounced. If a keris is kept in polish (with emphasis along the edges) but allowed to develop a topographical etch, this difference seems not too suspicious to me.

I understand that this keris comes from an older collection - Ron, do you know when it was acquired by the former owner?
I agree that while revision is possible, i see no reason to believe this blade has been reshaped at anytime.
I did not see this blade when i visited this collection. Ron was hiding this one from me. ;) :D But from the looks of the rest of the collection i believe most of these keris were collected some time ago in the late 1960s-80s. Not sure if Ron inquired about collection date from the guy or not, but hopefully he knows more or can ask the guy directly. :)

[Spunjer]

i'll see what i can find out about the history of this particular keris, meanwhile here are some more pictures that might help this very interesting discussion...

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, please accept my apologies for making this matter more difficult than it need be.

The blade of the keris under discussion bears characteristics that make it utterly impossible to be classified as anything other than a Bugis blade.

I doubt that I need to identify these characteristics, but if anybody does need further clarification, please feel free to PM me.

However, there is one noticeable variation in these characteristics that has generated some comment.

That variation is the width of the gusen.

Variation in gusen width in any keris blade can be due to a wide range of factors.

One of those factors is the accidental widening of a gusen when it has become necessary to remove nicks from the edges of a blade. This cleaning up of the edges of a blade is regarded as normal maintenance.

Some owners of keris, and other weapons for that matter, require that the edge of a blade be raised to a higher level of sharpness. The sharpness of the edge of a blade depends upon blade geometry:- the wider the edge bevel, the sharper the edge.

If we consider both these factors together, and then look closely at the blade in question, based upon what is visible in the photographs, it is perfectly obvious that the bevels of this blade have been worked or reworked whilst the body of the blade has not been reworked since its initial fabrication.

Did the owner want a sharper edge?
Or were there nicks in the blade edge that needed to be removed?
Or just perhaps, the blade was made with wider bevels initially, in order to achieve a higher level of sharpness.

At this remove it is impossible to know with certainty exactly why the blade bevels are wider than normal, but my opinion --- I stress "opinion" --- is that the wider bevels are most probably the result of the normal maintenance procedure of removing nicks from the blade edge.

David, to clarify further, when I use the word "revision" I am not talking about a reshaping of the blade, but only the normal maintenance procedure that involves removing edge nicks by re-filing the gusen.



When the Bugis people spread from South Sulawesi into the Malay Peninsula and established a Bugis state there, they took their culture with them. The same thing happened when they moved into Riau. Yes, they often took Malay women as wives, and this in turn weakened the societal structure that had applied in the original Bugis society of South Sulawesi, so in this sense the Bugis societies that were established outside the Motherland of South Sulawesi were not pure in either societal construct or in genetic inheritance.

However, what we are discussing here is one element of the material culture of the Bugis people, and that element is the blade of a keris.

Wherever the Bugis people are found, the blade of the keris that is found with them bears the same physical characteristics. This is not to say that all these keris are identical, but they are all of the same style although they do bear minor regional interpretations of that style.

So, I say again:- this keris is a Bugis keris.

It may pay to clarify something here for those who are not familiar with the way the word "keris" is understood by the people who wear them.

The word "keris" is used to refer to only the blade, and it is used to also refer to the complete weapon, ie, blade + scabbard + hilt.

When we are using the English language, this distinction can be achieved by referring to the blade as the "keris", and the complete weapon as the "complete keris".

In what I have written above I am only talking about the keris. I am not talking about the complete keris.

But I will now address the complete keris.

In keris study it is essential to evaluate each component part of a complete keris separately.

It is absolutely unacceptable to attempt to affix geographic point of origin of a keris blade by accepting that the point of origin of the blade is the same as the point of origin of the scabbard or the hilt. No student of the keris would countenance this approach for one second.

The keris under discussion has a Bugis blade. Geographic point of origin is unknown, and may never be known.

The scabbard of this keris is what I would call "generic Bugis"; others may call it something else. I have no idea at all of its geographic point of origin.

Similarly with the hilt:- it really quite a beautiful hilt, and I feel that it is from Sumatera, but exactly where in Sumatera? I don't know.

The pendongkok? I don't know.

And from what I can read in all the preceding posts, neither does anybody else know.

We can hypothesise till the cows come home, but is there any supportable argument for solid identification of a geographic point of origin for scabbard, hilt, pendongkok?

So far I haven't seen this.

The blade is Bugis, but all the other component parts of this keris are simply the component parts that are now surrounding the blade.

All these parts could well come from different places.

Now, the icing on the cake is a gonjo unlike any that I have seen in the thousands of keris that have been through my hands, or the vastly greater number of keris that I have seen.

When I consider all of these factors I am drawn to one conclusion:- this keris is a marriage, and quite possibly a marriage that was made outside its society of origin.

This is my opinion. I think I've stated it reasonably clearly, and frankly I have no interest in whether anybody agrees with me or not:- we are all entitled to our own opinions, one of the benefits of living in a free society.

Whilst I am not seeking agreement, I would welcome conclusive evidence that clearly demonstrates that my opinion is in error

[Jean]

Ouch, what is hidden under the piece of white cloth surrounding the"peksi"? :confused: It may give some clues about the welded ganja.
Regards

[David]

Ron, i would actually like to see a shot of the keris shot from the over top with the hilt and pesi wrapping material removed completely and the focus placed on the sirah-cecak (front bottom surface). I might be crazy, but to me it looks like the core of this blade actually extends all the way to the bottom and that additional material was then welded around the iras gonjo giving the appearance that an entire gonjo was welded on after the fact. Not sure if i am making sense with my description, but what i see in the part of the sirah-cecak that is visible looks very odd. If you are uncertain of the area i am asking you to photograph please see the gonjo diagram on Alan's website.
http://kerisattosanaji.com/kerisdiagram.html

[A. G. Maisey]

David, I feel that what we might see in the sirah cecak is that the layer of pamor has been taken back to leave just that odd looking island in the middle.

Ron, has the crack in the lower part of the hilt been filled with epoxy resin or a similar substance?

[David]

David, I feel that what we might see in the sirah cecak is that the layer of pamor has been taken back to leave just that odd looking island in the middle.

Ron, has the crack in the lower part of the hilt been filled with epoxy resin or a similar substance?
Certainly a possibility which is why i thought more detailed photos might tell.
:)

[A. G. Maisey]

Agreed. We really do need to see the blade bare, this may not give us any more than we already have, but there are so many vague areas with this keris that every bit of clarification helps.

It is not unusual for a blade core to extend all the way through a blade, including to the tip of the pesi.

One scenario that that keeps recurring to me when I look at this complete keris is that at some time in the past, a dedicated but unschooled collector decided to "improve" what he had by permanently fixing the gonjo and upgrading the complete keris with the best components he could put his hands on.

In a way, this is more or less in line with indigenous keris ethics:- owners in all the keris bearing areas of SE Asia seem to have always upgraded their keris, and without paying much attention to the "correctness" or otherwise of the components. We tend to forget sometimes that the only place where it is essential to dress a keris correctly is in a formal palace situation.

Even in the palace situation I am certain that the "mix & match" principle sometimes took precedence. I know of a number of cases where members of the Surakarta Karaton hierarchy have combined keris components that were not strictly correct.

I have also handled keris that were WWII bring backs from SE Asia, and that were acquired in locations far removed from any central areas of authority, these have sometimes been quite peculiar in the combination of disparate components, and in two cases the combinations were ludicrous. But these were genuine, grassroots keris, straight out of a grassroots cultural setting.

To imagine for one instant that we can look at a complete keris that has been floating around for a while in places removed from its geographic point of origin and put a name/date/origin on it is rather optimistic to say the least.

What we can sometimes do is name possible geographic location of the various component parts of that complete keris, and we can often classify the blade in accordance with the accepted principles used by indigenous keris authorities.

[Spunjer]

best pics i can take tonite. hopefully this'll help.
Alan, it does look like there was a small crack and it was repaired using epoxy...

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Ron.

So, the hilt at least has been in the hands of somebody who has needed to improve upon what he had.

Looking at the final pic of the gonjo top, it seems that the gonjo was made separately and then welded into place.

There are a couple of ways that we could get this effect of the two different grain directions. The easy way for an indigenous craftsman using native technology would have been to forge weld a separate small forging across the end of the blade forging before shaping the blade.

If this was done, then the easy way to form the pesi would be to forge it out from that transverse piece of material.

However, this has not been done, the gonjo appears to be fitted in the normal way, by placing the pesi through the hole formed in the middle of the gonjo, but the difference here is that the gonjo is not mechanically fixed, it is welded into place.

It would be possible for a very highly skilled smith to forge weld a 90% finished gonjo into place. It would be a delicate operation, and with the forge technology available to indigenous smiths it would be extremely difficult. But it could be done.

The question is why would it be done? Why would any indigenous person want to deviate from 1000 years of normal practice and forge weld a gonjo rather than mechanically fix it?

The risk of damage to both the gonjo and the blade would be very, very high.

I simply cannot envisage any indigenous craftsman in his right mind undertaking such a job --- and that is even without considering the esoteric implications.

However, with the technology that has been available in the western world for a long time, it would not be such a daunting job. In fact, in a modern gas forge it could be forge welded fairly easily. Then we have all the other modern welding technologies.

My mind inevitably returns to the scenario of the very enthusiastic collector who has very little keris understanding.

In fact, let's take this one step further:- has the gonjo been welded into place, or has it been secured with something like one of the multitude of products that are marketed as "cold weld"? Once in place it could be very difficult to tell the difference between this sort of material and a real weld carried out with heat.

In Jawa for many years old blades with holes in them have been repaired with a mixture of iron filings and two part epoxy resin, when this is skilfully done it is well nigh impossible to see the repair, and my experience is that you need to suspect that a repair has been carried out, and then inspect the blade under magnification and direct sunlight in order to find the repair.

[Spunjer]

thank you for everyone's insight! really learning a lot about keris!
please pardon my naivete, Alan, but why would anyone go through all these trouble for something like this? do you think that whoever would have done this was trying to copy a particular type of keris? i mean, if he was gonna do this, why make it so subtle that it would take an expert to spot what he has done? normally, it would have to have some sloppy factor somewhere, but it sounds like whoever did this is really know what he's doing; from my newbie's eyes anyways :shrug:

[A. G. Maisey]

Ron, please read this as opinion only, yes, it is an educated opinion that is based upon handling thousands of keris and having been in contact with keris and keris collectors, as well as general arms collectors and makers for over 60 years, but it is still opinion and it is based on what I think I can see in the photos.

My feeling is that what we have here is a complete keris that has been assembled from unrelated parts. We call this a "marriage". It may have been done in Indonesia, or Malaysia or Singapore, it may have been done by a European antique arms dealer, it may have been done by a collector. Who did it we can only guess.

When we home in on only the blade there are two things that are out of the ordinary for any keris, not only the one we are discussing.

The first is the width of the blade bevels, what we know as gusen. To me, this width is perfectly able to explained and understood. A number of possibilities exist for this and all can be regarded as legitimate. To me, this blade bevel width is really not even worthy of a second glance or a question:- it exists, we already know the reasons why it can exist, end of story.

However, the fact that a separately made gonjo has been permanently attached to the body of the blade is so unusual as to be completely inexplicable, especially when considered from the indigenous perspective.

I very much doubt that this permanent fixing was done in SE Asia, if in fact it is a normal weld joint. The difficulty in doing this weld with native technology is simply too high, additionally, there are esoteric issues involved that I do not even want to discuss.

My feeling is that some previous owner, probably somewhere in the western world, noted the sloppy fit of the gonjo to the blade and decided that he wanted that gonjo to fit nice and tight and tidy.

If he himself had the necessary level of skill and the right type of forge, he may have done the weld himself, if he did not, it should not have been too big a problem for him to give the job to a custom knifemaker who could have done it for him.

However, there are much easier ways available that can be used to permanently fix a loose gonjo to the blade body.

There are various products that produce a "cold weld". This is in fact a super strong two part epoxy resin with (I believe) metal dust inclusion.

I have used it myself to repair the thread in the bottom bracket assembly of bicycles, to repair threads in other small items, and to fill a gonjo hole in an old, loosely fitting gonjo. I have one bike that I use regularly that I repaired the bottom bracket thread on more than 20 years ago, and it has never failed. Once in place this "cold weld" material is extremely difficult to identify, it looks like true metal. Oh yes --- I've also used it to bed a rifle action.

The brand I am familiar with is "QUIKSTEEL", but there are a number of other products that do the same thing.

As already mentioned, in Jawa they have mixed iron filings with two part epoxy for many years to repair badly damaged blades. You will never see a well done repair unless you know how it is done, what to look for, and you have the experience to identify it.

So, considered against this background, my opinion is that this gonjo might just have been permanently fixed to the body of the blade by one of these "cold weld" products.

In any case, the gonjo has been permanently fixed to the body of the blade by either a skilfully done hot weld of some type, or by use of a two part epoxy resin. However it was done, it was done a long time after the original fabrication of the blade.


Remember:- opinion.

[David]

The first is the width of the blade bevels, what we know as gusen. To me, this width is perfectly able to explained and understood. A number of possibilities exist for this and all can be regarded as legitimate. To me, this blade bevel width is really not even worthy of a second glance or a question:- it exists, we already know the reasons why it can exist, end of story.

I'm a little confused on this point. What are the general rules on this feature for Bugis keris with this type of dhapur. To my eye the bevels on Ron's example doesn't look particularly wider than a couple of Kai's examples in his post #25. :shrug:

[A. G. Maisey]

I haven't read back through the previous posts, but I think from memory that there were comments that the bevels were a bit wider than normal, and in terms of proportion, yes, they probably are.

However, the rules?

My understanding is simply that the faces of a Bugis blade are flat and the gusen is wide. How wide? nobody ever told me, and my own observations are that "wide" means wider than we would normally expect to see in a Javanese blade. To my mind the matter of width is really a non-issue. If the bevels are a bit wider than we would expect to see it really doesn't matter one way or the other.

[David]

To my mind the matter of width is really a non-issue. If the bevels are a bit wider than we would expect to see it really doesn't matter one way or the other.
Well that is my point Alan. I am not convinced that the bevels on this keris are any wider than we would expect to see. I have in fact seen numerous Bugis keris with bevels that seem to be as wide as this. I own a a keris with a very similar profile as this (though with more luks) that does not seem to show any evidence of ever having the bevels widened at a later time. This keris' shape does not seem particularly unusual for this style of blade. The gonjo is another story. :shrug:

[A. G. Maisey]

No argument David, this is purely a matter of opinion.

Based upon raw width the bevels are pretty much within normal parameters; based upon proportion of bevel to blade width, they are bit wider than we would normally expect to see.

Why are they a bit wider ?

Who knows?

There are a dozen possibilities from removal of edge knicks, to desire for increased sharpness, to the original maker's intent --- and all the other possibilities in between.

In fact, its much a given that every time we sharpen any sort of blade the bevel moves a bit higher up the blade than it was before we began to sharpen. The more times we sharpen, it seems that the wider the bevel gets.

But who cares?

It is not an issue.

The gonjo is.