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.

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:

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.

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:

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.

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:

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.