coments on this...a help

[blacklacrau]

I´m a new member on this forum and I would like to have some information about this keris; its shape, pamor and so on.
Could any of you give me some idea as to possible age, origin, is it a tourist item…a fake…. or authentic?, etc : :confused:
I would appreciate any comments or information you may have.
Thanks in advance for any comments.

[Emanuel]

Hey there, welcome to the forum!

You can be at ease, this is an authentic keris. It seems to be from Solo, dapur Tilam Upih I think, could be Brodjol. The pamor could be wos wutah.
No way to tell the age, but it looks old to me. I like the ukiran and wrongko a lot. Too bad the gandar is damaged though.
I'm sure you'll get more accurate answers from the many knowledgeable folks here.

Regards,
Emanuel

[PenangsangII]

Strange ukiran for a Solo piece, almost like a hybrid of Jawa & Solo :confused:

[Emanuel]

Hmm, Rahardjo (2003) has a similar one listed as Yogya, and yet another one as Surakarta, so maybe Solo not far off :confused: In any case I always thought this type of ukiran looked a bit Balinese, so eastern Java would perhaps do it?

[PenangsangII]

Hmm, Rahardjo (2003) has a similar one listed as Yogya, and yet another one as Surakarta, so maybe Solo not far off :confused: In any case I always thought this type of ukiran looked a bit Balinese, so eastern Java would perhaps do it?

Even Lombok's origin cannot be ruled out, I think.

[sipakatuo]

It seems old to me. If I am not mistaken, your keris is dapur tilam upih, pamor beras wutah. It could be Mataram but more likely Padjajaran if looking at the gandik and ganja (small and a bit rounded). Warangka made of Kayu Timoho with Gayaman Solo style. Handle made of Kayu Timoho. Your mendak and Handle could be from Eastern part of Java.

[Henk]

This keris has in my opinion dapur brodjol. The tikkel alis, necesarry for dapur tilam upih, is as far as I can see not present on the pictures.

Origin is probably East Java, at least the ukiran and mendak point in that direction. The wrangka has a Solo look.

The pelet drawing on the front of the wrangka puzzles me a bit. I think it is painted on the wrangka and also on the ukiran. It is not uncommon and often seen. Pelet wood is expensive so a cheaper solution is to paint the pelet motiv on the wood. On the picture of the backside of the scabbard you can see that this keris was dressed with a pendok.

An authentic keris with age, but certainly not Lombok or Bali.

[Emanuel]

Hello Henk :)

I had not realized that the Pelet was false, even though the dark patches are only visible on one side. Is it done with simple wood stain?

All the best,
Emanuel

[A. G. Maisey]

I cannot disagree with what you have written, Henk.

But I will add this:- this style of gayaman wrongko can originate from many places, with minor variations. It tends to lack the refinement we usually see in a Solo wrongko, and all other things considered, I would be inclined to give it as East Jawa. I doubt that the gandar ever had a pendok fitted.

My personal opinion is that it is a mistake to try to classify in accordance with the principles of tangguh in a case where a blade is not of reasonably high quality. It is extremely difficult, almost impossible to try to classify a blade lacking distinctive features, and it is even more difficult than extremely difficult to try to classify a blade without seeing the top of the gonjo. To try to classify even an excellent blade from a photograph is something that I often find beyond my abilities.

The classification of blades according to tangguh has become almost a stock joke in recent years. It has become thus precisely because it has become almost universal practice to try to hang a tangguh on any blade, no matter whether the tangguh system was designed for such a blade or not.

Where a tangguh is given for a blade, the reasons for assigning that classification should be able to be given, and if necessary, explained.

[RobT]

Hi All,
Frey in his book on page 49 lists the ukiran as "Surakarta Eastern".
Sincerely,
RobT

[sipakatuo]

This keris has in my opinion dapur brodjol. The tikkel alis, necesarry for dapur tilam upih, is as far as I can see not present on the pictures.

Origin is probably East Java, at least the ukiran and mendak point in that direction. The wrangka has a Solo look.

The pelet drawing on the front of the wrangka puzzles me a bit. I think it is painted on the wrangka and also on the ukiran. It is not uncommon and often seen. Pelet wood is expensive so a cheaper solution is to paint the pelet motiv on the wood. On the picture of the backside of the scabbard you can see that this keris was dressed with a pendok.

An authentic keris with age, but certainly not Lombok or Bali.

After second look, I think I have to agree with you Henk. The warangka look a bit suspicious, and I think it was painted.

[Alam Shah]

This keris has in my opinion dapur brodjol. The tikkel alis, necesarry for dapur tilam upih, is as far as I can see not present on the pictures....
An authentic keris with age, but certainly not Lombok or Bali.I agree with Henk, for the dapur. I especially like the blade... simple, robust looking... lots of abstract patterns. ;)

[Henk]

Alan,

You're completely right about the gayaman wrongko. The gayaman style originates from many places indeed with minor variations. I do remember the thread about the maduran wrongko's.
When I look at the last picture of the scabbard on the place where the wrongko changes into the gandar I see a line and discolloring. Same for the picture of the frontside of the wrongko. Also there I think to see a discolloring. That gave me the idea of a missing pendok. But I could be mistaken by the light in the picture.

Classifying a blade to a tangguh is the most difficult thing to do. I also prefer not to make such statements.

Emanuel,

A false Pelet is made with paint or a kind of ink. I'm not quite sure what is used for it. I do own a keris of which the scabbard is also painted in Pelet. On both sides :) When I cleaned the scabbard with wax remover to remove the dirt and old wax layers the cloth colored in the color of the Pelet spots. Using a clean cloth and rubbing over the wood nothing happened, rubbing over the pellet spot the cloth picked up the color of the Pelet.

[A. G. Maisey]

Henk, I can see the discolouration on the back of wrongko too, but in my experience, this is not consistent with the previous fitting of a pendok. When a pendok is fitted the gandar is left as raw timber, and very often finished to a very crude standard; it is advantageous for a gandar fitted with a pendok to be a bit rough, because it helps to retain the pendok; additionally the tip of the gandar is often left square, or open, it is rarely finished to a smooth curve; often the transition from gandar to atasan is less than neat. This keris has a fully finished, and perfectly shaped gandar, which bears a finish showing about the same degree of patina as the atasan, the transition from gandar to atasan would have been neat when this wrongko was made. In brief, the gandar simply has not been made in the way that a gandar to be fitted with a pendok is made. Yes, at some time somebody might have thought that it would look better with a pendok, but it is never possible just to pick up a pendok and push it onto the gandar, it needs to be fitted, and that fitting removes wood.

There are several possibilities for the discolouration:- the gandar has been reglued and the discolouration was caused by the cleanup; the keris has been suspended by a cloth loop or similar for a lengthy period; at some point in its life the wrongko joint was covered with a cloth or a metal band.

Regarding false pelet. I do not know what is used to create the stain, however it was very widely used in both Jawa and Bali, and sometimes it is so good that it is almost impossible to detect.

[Henk]

Alan,

Thank you for your explanation.
Looking a little bit further I have to agree with you. The gandar is in a good condition and the scabbard on the backside has a matching patina between gandar and wrongko.
Probably the discolouration is a result of one of the possibilities you mentioned.

[ferrylaki]

Alan,

Thank you for your explanation.
Looking a little bit further I have to agree with you. The gandar is in a good condition and the scabbard on the backside has a matching patina between gandar and wrongko.
Probably the discolouration is a result of one of the possibilities you mentioned.

The pelet motive on the gayaman seem too bright, pelet motive usually comes darker. I also agree about the gandar is a match with the gayaman.
thia is an example of my old timoho gayaman. the motive is not a favorite one, but still nice though. a very dark pelet timoho.
Some friends told me it is a east java gayaman style.

I've seen some modification on pelet motive. mostly they were found on " pelet kendhit" ( belt pattern pelet) in order to make the pattern they some kind of put something hot on the gayaman ( wood) the burnt wood left a dark
pattern...they made a circular ( horizontal) pattern around the gayaman, and a pelet kendit it is. but unfortunately I dont have the picture of the fake pelet kendhit.

FERRY

[Marcokeris]

Could the two sarong be from Madura area?

[Emanuel]

Thanks Henk and Ferry for the explanation. I had not seen this done before.

Emanuel

[blacklacrau]

This type of hilt is not very usual? I do not remember to have seen images like this one...
Thanks

[Alam Shah]

This type of hilt is not very usual? I do not remember to have seen images like this one...
ThanksThe hilt seems without the usual patras on the front portion of the hilt. Shape of the hilt resembles the stylistic semar type... :confused:

[ferrylaki]

The hilt seems without the usual patras on the front portion of the hilt. Shape of the hilt resembles the stylistic semar type... :confused:

This is another picture of the hilt. not a specific one, but this is a better picture .
The hilt has some differences from the usual hilt tipe.
may be east java style ( I dont know) .
Please....

regardds,
Ferrylaki ( Indonesia)

[Alam Shah]

This is another picture of the hilt. not a specific one, but this is a better picture .
The hilt has some differences from the usual hilt type.
may be east java style ( I dont know) .
Please....Actually I was referring to blacklacrau's piece.
Your piece is nice too... ;)

[ferrylaki]

Actually I was referring to blacklacrau's piece.
Your piece is nice too... ;)

my mistake...sorry.

[Henk]

This type of hilt is not very usual? I do not remember to have seen images like this one...
Thanks

As Alam Shah said it resembles the stylistic semar type without the usual patras on the front side. I've seen these ukirans more often. If I'm not mistaken this kind of ukiran is more usual in East Java.
I must admit that I really appriciate this type of ukiran.

[asian-keris]

Keris to my opinion From Madura area 1900 piece.