Is it a keris and from which island?
 

Dear members,

I have the option to buy this keris (?) and have the allowance to post the pictures here. Since it have a seperate gonjo even if it hasn't the overall look like a keris I post it here. The handle is from hippo ivory and the ferrule is from horn. I have never seen something like this and want to ask you if you have. The sheat looks sumatran so I think it's from there or maybe from Borneo.

All comments are very appreciated and welcome,

Detlef

I would say that it does have the "overall look of a keris". It looks to be a form of keris sepang to me, though the photos aren't clear enough to tell anything for sure. The hilt is quite unusual for a keris though. :shrug:

Based on what I can see in the pics, it looks old, it looks honest, and it looks like a very peculiar thing.

I'd call it a pedang suduk rather than a keris --- in spite of the scabbard.

hmmm....none of the pedang sudak i have seen have had a gonjo or such a keris-like asymmetric base... :shrug:

Thank you David, sepang have been also my thought but like you see by Alan's post I am not the only one who is unsure if it is a keris. And the handle affiremed me by this.:shrug: What do you think about the origin?

It's peculiar indeed! I am see-saw if it's a keris or not.

Hmmm
 

A cousin to ?
Transitional form ? :shrug:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=sadop

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=sadop

Maybe if we go back to the old form leads to function arguement, does this have a blumbangan (I cannot tell from the pictures). That is to say can it be held like a keris. If it cannot then we should probably not call it a keris
drd

I have seen, I have had, and I still have pedangs with gonjo, kembang kacang, and ron dha.

A keris can have a gonjo, but not all blades with a gonjo are keris blades.

This blade has some characteristics that we might expect to see in a keris blade, but it does not come close to any dhapur I can recall.

However, the alignment of hilt to blade angle is perfect for a pedang suduk, and the hilt itself, which appears to be contemporaneous with the blade and scabbard, is a pedang hilt, rather than a keris hilt.

Note also the curve of the blade, which is towards the wadidang side of the blade, rather than the front of the blade, now imagine if this were to be mounted as a keris:- the blade curve would be in the wrong direction; a keris blade curves away from the wadidang, not towards it..

This is a pedang suduk. Mounted in a unique and peculiar way, but a pedang suduk just the same.

For origin I tend towards Palembang area:- the scabbard has Palembang characteristics, the blade has Javanese characteristics, and Javanese characteristics also occur in better Palembang blades. The hilt has been carved in an archaic style that does occur in Jawa.

:eek: I would be very very happy to have one like this in my home :eek:

Very conclusive arguments. And the sheat has indeed Palembang characteristics. Thank you Alan.

Now I know why I have had in mind a possible origin from Borneo. But I think that Alan is mostly correct by his statements.

I expect he is .
We'll keep the thread here even though it's not a keris .

Looking in the books by Tammens i see pictures of a keris cundrik. Also a keris blade with sword features. Could it be something like that??

Just a thought.

Yes Henk, there is no doubt that the form of the blade alone does bear a resemblance to both the dhapur cengkrong and cundrik, however, when we are dealing with the keris we have rather stringernt and restrictive parameters within which to work. The fact that a blade bears a resemblance to a keris does not make it a keris. In the case of this blade it appears that apart from the formless gonjo, also we have those ill placed ron dha.

Quite simply this blade alone lacks the characteristics required to make it a keris blade.

And that's if we consider only the blade.

When we consider the entire weapon, which we must, because it is an entire weapon that has been presented for comment, we have the blade mounted with a pedang hilt, not a keris hilt.

Based upon what can be seen in these photos, this weapon cannot be classified as a keris, but can be classified as pedang.

Because it is a pedang for stabbing, it is a pedang suduk, or pedang tusuk. We can call it a keris-like pedang, but cannot call it a pedang-like keris.

Alan,

Thank you for your answer. Very clear.

Sajen,

I'm very curious to the tang of the blade. Can you remove the hilt and make a picture of the tang?

Hello Henk,

the item isn't in my hands (until now) and the pictures also not taken with my camera. But I contact the owner and he told me that the handle is very strong fixed to the blade and it's impossible for him to open it.

But you're right, a picture from the tang/pesi would maybe helpful.

Best regards,

Detlef

The tang could possibly give an indication as to the original mounting intent of this blade, however, whatever that original intent may have been, it cannot alter the nature of what we are looking at right now.

Additionally, if the tang were found to be other than round, this would confirm that the blade was not forged for mounting as a keris, however, if it were found to be round, this would not confirm that it was forged for mounting as a keris, because a pedang tang can be of either round section or flat side section.

It is not at all unusual to find this cross-over mounting of blades. I have had, and now have several examples of cross-over mounting, where a badik blade has been mounted as a keris, and where a keris blade has been altered to allow mounting as either a pedang suduk or a badik. This sort of thing is not common, but it is also not all that much of an oddity either.

Alan,

Completely true and i completely agree with you. Blades other than keris are found mounted as a keris and also keris blades mounted as another weapon. Also the shape of the tang or pesi can have several appearances. Although thusfar i never saw another shape of the pesis as round.
I expected to see a another form than a round tang if it was possible to remove the hilt. But the answer that the hilt is fixed very tight and that it is not a keris hilt confirms for me personally that this blade is not a keris blade.

Henk, to clarify, what I said about tangs was this:-

round tang:- it could be a keris blade, or it could also be a pedang blade

tang with flats:- it will not be a keris blade and it will be a pedang blade.

I apologise for using a complex construction.

Alan,

Now it is completely clear to me.

Thank you that you take the effort to explain again, what you ment.
Your lessons are as always very enlighting for me, and i suppose i may say for the most forummembers here.