The hilt has a broken nose, so we can only imagine what it looks like complete. The nose probably would not be as long as latter-day coteng hilts, or it would look aesthetically funny, imho.

Anyway, it's a very exceptional hilt. Thank you for showing.

Well detlef you already start searching for the blade, aren't you? :)

Some people say coteng will fit best with Chenok blade. I only know that the name is taken from the village in southern Thai, and supposedly it is the oldest blade ever made in Pattani keris range.

Do anybody know about this kind of blade? How it looks like?

Yes, I keep my eyes open but at first I want to restore the sheat and i am very unsure if I shall replace the broken tip with wood or let it like this.

What is your opinion?

Regards,

Detlef

With slightest knowledge of woodwork myself, I can offer you no professional advice. But if you gonna remade the broken tip personally I think it's going to be a nice sight to the eye.

As for me, I tried my best to be puritans by trying not to meddle with minor damages.

I found recently this blade and I think it's a Peninsula blade. Unfortunately is the kembang kacang broken but apart from this it's a very nice one in my eyes and it fit nearly perfect inside the sheath without any woodwork.
What do you think, will it be a good blade to complete my Coteng sheath?

Thank you very much in advance,

Detlef

Detlef, I cannot answer this question with any claim to certainty, I'll leave that to somebody else with more knowledge in this specific field --- rather suspect it would be incorrect, but I do not know the acceptable variations.

However, here are some images of a blade that has suffered the same, or similar, damage as has yours, and the repair that was carried out in the place of origin.

Hallo Alan, at my blade tried someone also to repair the kembang kacang or it was repaired and broke again.

Yes, it looks as if a similar repair may have been carried out, and has since failed.

I guess you could always do it again if you wished.

But how? I have never handled a blade with a repair like this so I am clueless.
:shrug:

Neither have I, but if you look carefully at both the repair that has failed on your blade, and the repair that is still in place on my blade, I'm sure you will see how it has been done.

You know what they say:- a picture is worth 1000 words.

We have two pictures here, and I think it would take maybe 2000 words to explain in detail how this was done.

Just spend the time and look carefully. You'll work it out.

Thank you for sharing this blade, Alan. I find it remarkable. There is a frankness and a practicality to the method of repair that is quite compelling in its own aesthetic right. I'm reminded of an image of a jawa demam hilt where the broken beak had been replaced with a metal one (with visible pin joints), although I cannot recall where I saw the image now.

Sheath form
 

Does anyone have any idea where does this keris originated from, especially the sheath?

That is sweet....and unusual.
Based on nothing but instinct i'm going to suggest Sumatra, but what part i am uncertain...
of course some closer photos wouldn't hurt... :)

Whoa, the sheath almost looks like some sort of axe. Sharp! This looks contemporary and could come from anywhere, though the intention seems to be Straits-style keris. :)

This piece, belongs to a friend up north.. I was told that the crosspiece is made from ivory and the piece is from Nias.. I doubt that it's from Nias.. there's a remote mixture of tajong and minang on the upper crosspiece curl.. I'm thinking that the ivory might be stained to look older..
I do have my doubts on the authenticity of this piece..

Yes, the sheath remind me to the small Minang keris but special the buntut and the blade let have me also some doubts if this is an authentc piece. But when it's old it is an outstanding piece. :shrug:

Yes, it is that minang flavor that had me thinking Sumatra.
Now when it comes to "authentic" i think we need to define our terms. I would like to think that in some respects the keris arts are still active and evolving. If this sheath were to be presented as an old and classic form we might be right to question it's "authenticity". However, if it is recognized as a new sheath form i would have to say that it seems a beautiful and well executed expression of contemporary keris arts and in that it would be quite "authentic". :)
The blade, of course, is another matter...

Allow me to define it further.. it was presented as an old authentic piece from Nias.. with supposedly age cracked ivory with patina.. Afaik, Nias does not have a keris culture, although to some extent, imported keris blades were used within certain Nias communities. ;)

If the sheath is presented as a new contemporary or a re-worked item, I'm ok with that too.. but if modified and indicated as old, now that's a different story..

Does the ivory have age crack's? Wrong description (here Nias) is very common.

I've not seen the piece in hand.. based on the single picture presented.. if you look at the shaft, there seems to be a long crack along the line to one side.. that's what I mean..
:)

The long crack I've seen but this is not exactly what I understand under age crack.

Thanks for the clarification Shahrial. If presented as such i too would question "authenticity". We have been around the block a little bit on the search for a true Nias keris. I see a little bit of Nias influence in the sheath's profile, but also have a hard time excepting this as an authentic Nias keris. I can't see the blade very well in the pics, but would be more likely to place it's origins in contemporary Madura.

BTW, I have got an old Coteng hilt (together with a keris) for my sheath.

Look here:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...K%3AMEWNX%3AIT

And here the pictures from the well known seller. :) ;)

Sajen, this comment is not specifically directed at the hilt you have purchased, however, I've had a look at the items this seller lists for sale, and I was wondering exactly what sort of time span permits the description "old".

+100 years?

+ 50 years?

+ 20 years?

+ 5 years?

+ 12 months?

+24 hours?

Anybody have any ideas on what length of time makes "old" an acceptable description?

I read that you are not directing your comment specifically at this hilt, but given it's placement do you have reason to believe that this hilt does not have any significant age?

In respect of Sajen's hilt, I do not know, because I cannot see it clearly enough.

What generated my question was the the other "old" items I have seen on this site, which are not necessarily keris related.

The comment is not about Sajen's hilt, it is about the concept of old.

A few months ago a friend bought an "old" keris hilt from an ebay seller in Queensland. He showed it to me and asked my opinion. It was about as old as last weekend's Sydney Morning Herald.

When he queried the description of "old" with the seller he was told it was most certainly old, in that it was no longer "new" --- whatever that might mean.

So now I'm asking for opinions on what we might think "old" means.

In regards to keris i wouldn't refer to anything that isn't at least pre-WW2 as "old", though that certainly isn't "really old".
In common practice something isn't considered "antique" until it is at least 100 years old, but i think it is fair to use the term old for items that don't quite qualify for "antique". :shrug:

I'd accept 80 yrs as old ; antique is another matter; must be 100 yrs old .

Good question on what is considered old. I'd go with 50-100yrs = vintage, 100yrs+ = antique. As for old, I realized even I use it loosely such that it could mean anything 20yrs or older. I'd consider <20yrs contemporary.