Keris identification
 

Hi All

Let us play a game to identify the possible original sources of making for this modern made keris, from dress to bilah. There is a purpose for this game and I will share it later.

Identification mainly on:

Bilah source
Warangka source
Painting source
Pendok source

What I know is that the components can be sourced throughout out Indonesia. Except the blade. Blade is very most likely Madura. Common sources IMHO:

Blade - Madura
Sheath - Can be anywhere, but probably Lombok. Timoho from Lombok is spread everywhere in Java. Many Jogja craftsmen have them.
Pendok/silverworks - probably Lombok or Jogja
Sunggingan - Maybe Bali, Solo, Jakarta

There are thousands of craftsmen throughout Indonesia. From the lowest quality to the best. The best usually work only for a few paymasters. Even dealers do not know all craftsmen. Even in Solo some craftsmen are unknown to some dealers. But I could be wrong though.

I agree with the take Ras has on this piece.

So many possible sources for the different parts of this keris ensemble. One element from here, one element from there.
It's all new work. :rolleyes:

And..?

You are right in many aspects in your reply. Let wait for more members to guess before I give out the final answers.

Blade is Madura. I think I know which pande made it.
No idea on the others.

I agree that these days the origin of the parts of such a keris can be gathered from numerous sources. I could guess and say, yeah, the blade is probably from Madura, the sunggungan looks Javanese to me, etc., but the problem here is that for newly made keris, as we move more and more forward in time, the separations of cultures seems to become more and ore generic. Certainly this keris is intended to represent Balinese form and aesthetic, the the crafts people who make all these parts are no longer restricted to their own corner off the archipelago. What you have here is a nice modern art keris that could have been assembled from parts created in a number of different places.

I love your answer :D

My answer is as below:


1: Bilah source: Forge in Madura by a reputable smith.

2: Warangka and Hulu source: In Lombok.

3: Painting source: In Java.

4: Pendok source: In Lombok.



The reason for doing so as those best craftsmen are located around Indonesia and therefore it is sent to individuals to make the keris.

**Therefore I am not surprise that some antique keris might be 'made' and or adjust as time goes by in this manner as well.
Even in the past, craftsmen travel around.

I think the practice of sourcing the parts for a keris is completely normal even in the past. The reason that old keris usually have a locally sourced parts is probably due to cost restrictions. For higher level keris, people that can afford it will look for quality thus we can see an ensemble of high-quality parts and blade probably made in different locations put together for a royal keris.

I think people in the past do not really care too much if their keris reflects their birthplace/nationality; they just want quality keris /parts for their keris. The practice of having a geographical identity for keris probably develops in later times where the beliefs surrounding a keris has evolved and spread to different areas, and people tend to have more “tribal pride” (rather than just a sense for quality) and/or when royal houses started to have standardised dress codes for their courts.

It is like the present-day pride of owning a German car. (If I can use this analogy) A lot of people appreciate and are proud of owning a German car because of its quality and legacy regardless of where the owner originates. I think probably nobody (or not many) in Yugoslavia will insists on only driving an all-original Yugo when they can afford a better car just because the Yugo originates in their country.

I don't know how true that is Rasdan. My point about how modern keris are becoming more generic with time i don't think really applies to the past. Keris styles, especially of dress, which is the outward appearance of the keris that was presented to society, i believe were rather formalized, at least when we are discussing keris on a court level. As for people within that specific culture on the village level, those folks probably didn't have a level of income that would permit them to seek high end craftspeople in different parts of the archipelago to create their keris parts. When we see elements in village keris that don't quite meet the standards set by the keraton or puri it is not due to workmanship done outside if the culture, but rather the common folks doing the best they can to emulate what the higher classes are doing.
When i look at this keris, yes, it presents itself as a Bali keris, but for many it is really easy to see that certain aspects of it just don't seem quite right for a true Balinese keris. I think that is fine for a modern "art" keris like this, however, for the social functioning of a keris as element of formal dress in cultural situations i am not so sure this was something that would have been embraced by members a specific keris culture back in the day.

What I have seen, both in old & recent pieces is that where an area is under direct influence of a ruling class, possibly located in a kraton or other center of power, everybody in that area will follow the styles used by the elites. I do mean everybody where Jawa is concerned.

The further away from that power center people live, the weaker the influence of elite style. When we move into distant & isolated settlements the various components of a complete keris become very mixed.

I agree with Alan and David. I just observe sometime probably between the 1700s to 1800s there is a practice where gold kerises uses very similar style of sheath regardless of the “nationality” of the owner. Composite, but not a work a dealer. Photos below.

Lots of possibility, however. Probably that is the generic type of sheath of the time since western Java keris also uses the similar type of sheath.

Even hilts styles, hilt cups cross borders. Javanese blades or Javanese style blades seems to be a favourite. One thing that shows is that they go quality and the go for the bling.

Hello Rasdan,

I'd quibble with some details (i.e. some of the shown scabbards clearly exhibit local styles). However, the same root/origin is certainly quite visible with these examples.


This seems more of a thing with the Malay coastal cultures with local ports receiving lots of trade as well as (cross-)cultural influence from constantly migrating populations (including longer-distance expats like Bugis, Peranakan, etc.).


This also needs very close study: Some of these blades appear to be locally forged: While their overall appearance may seem Javanese on first sight, a real blade would need to be attributable to a specific culture and period. Mind you, gifts were also bestowed between the more important rulers and blades from Tanah Jawa (or Sunda) certainly show up in heirloom collections of local regents (as well as huge amounts of trade blades filtering through the archipelago).


The rulers were free to go for exotic/foreign toys.

However, keep in mind that - with some local nuances - blending in with the own community was the central goal of any mere mortals. While there certainly was some place and even the clear expectation to exhibit your status, sticking out or even over-representing your social standing was generally shunned and pretty much considered heresy! Apparently, there was a bit more leeway in the trading ports, especially when their economical importance started to challenge existing overlordships.

Regards,
Kai

Hi Kai,

The reason I made the above statement is because in current times sometimes people can be too obsessed with origin of things and too often does not even look at more important things such as quality. In the past, it seems to me that even royals does not seem to mind too much about local styling. They seemingly were more concerned about quality. And quality, in some sense and to some extent, can be quite objective. Yes, we can certainly argue more, but I am just stating a simple observation, not trying to prove anything academically.

Yes, I agree. The keris started as one thing in one location and later the belief, style etc. spread and evolved. The sheath style in question probably started its life in West Java (or anywhere else; it does not matter) and people in the archipelago seems to absorb the style - no problemo. If the people at that time really cared about their own tribal identity, like what is happening in our current time, I don't think the styles will spread out much. With that attitude, there is no way a Bugis king would wear a Cirebon style sheath. But that didn't happen.


Yes. (see below)



The keris started its life in Java and Java has been the forefront of keris knowhow and development. Thus Java was on the "giving end" and other places was on the "receiving end". Even if the blade was made locally in Sumatra for example, the technology and styling is very much likely from Java. Even in the 19th century, Palembang keris to a certain extent were made to Javanese specifications. I don't think there is any way that we can say the the blades above are not at least Javanese style. But the non-Javanese royals at that time does not seem to mind. They don't go for a fat penghulu blade.

Nowadays Madura is at the forefront. I will not be surprised if in the future, newer keris styles (for keris cultures that are still evolving) will be decided in Madura.

Yes, for normal people they need to blend in. But keris is first and foremost a royal culture. They are the ones that matter most when keris are concerned IMHO. All the localized styling I think are very new. And it evolved in the fringes of society. Not at the centre where it matters the most.

Clear & very perceptive Rasdan.

It is always the window through which we observe, we cannot observe earlier times by looking through a current window.

Thank you Alan. I agree with you totally.