Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - Keris

A. G. Maisey · 12th December 2012, 09:06 AM

Henk, I have already stated that I am quite comfortable in my opinion that this is not a keris that was made in Jawa.

I am very seldom positive in my opinions unless I have good reason to be so, however, it is an opinion I have given, and any opinion from any person can be incorrect.

The link between various areas in Sumatra and Jawa is well known; the political links between Palembang and the House of Mataram is well known; the trade in Javanese blades throughout South East Asia is well known; the propensity of local smiths in areas outside Jawa to copy Javanese workmanship is well known. Nothing new in any of this.The trade in Javanese blades was well established by the 16th century, and is mentioned in the Book of Duarte Barbosa.

But when we look at a keris, we need to be able to do a lot better than just say:- "oh yes, its Javanese", or "oh yes, it could be Javanese".

We need to be able to say from where in Jawa it originated and at approximately what time. We need to be able to give it at the very least an approximate classification.

With the blade in question, although there are certain characteristics that have a Javanese quality to them, such as the gonjo, and a Madurese quality, such as the kembang kacang, the sogokan is not Javanese in nature, and especially the poyuhan is very uncharacteristic of Javanese garap. The pawakan is not characteristic of Javanese work, and the greneng, most especially the ron dha looks as if it has been cut by a blind man with palsy. It is terrible --- if we consider it as Javanese --- but for many of the other places where greneng and ron dha appear it is quite a usual representation. This is because in those other places the makers did not really understand the iconography of the greneng and the ron dha:- like virtually all people outside the pande clan, all they saw was a series of notches.

However, we can ignore all of that, and just look at the nature of the pamor and the exposure of the core of the blade. The way in which this has been done is something I have never seen in a Javanese blade, this has distinctly Bugis characteristics.

As I have said:- I have given an opinion, and any opinion can be wrong, but in this case I would need one hell of a lot of convincing that this opinion of mine is wrong.

12th December 2012, 09:06 AM	#24
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Henk, I have already stated that I am quite comfortable in my opinion that this is not a keris that was made in Jawa. I am very seldom positive in my opinions unless I have good reason to be so, however, it is an opinion I have given, and any opinion from any person can be incorrect. The link between various areas in Sumatra and Jawa is well known; the political links between Palembang and the House of Mataram is well known; the trade in Javanese blades throughout South East Asia is well known; the propensity of local smiths in areas outside Jawa to copy Javanese workmanship is well known. Nothing new in any of this.The trade in Javanese blades was well established by the 16th century, and is mentioned in the Book of Duarte Barbosa. But when we look at a keris, we need to be able to do a lot better than just say:- "oh yes, its Javanese", or "oh yes, it could be Javanese". We need to be able to say from where in Jawa it originated and at approximately what time. We need to be able to give it at the very least an approximate classification. With the blade in question, although there are certain characteristics that have a Javanese quality to them, such as the gonjo, and a Madurese quality, such as the kembang kacang, the sogokan is not Javanese in nature, and especially the poyuhan is very uncharacteristic of Javanese garap. The pawakan is not characteristic of Javanese work, and the greneng, most especially the ron dha looks as if it has been cut by a blind man with palsy. It is terrible --- if we consider it as Javanese --- but for many of the other places where greneng and ron dha appear it is quite a usual representation. This is because in those other places the makers did not really understand the iconography of the greneng and the ron dha:- like virtually all people outside the pande clan, all they saw was a series of notches. However, we can ignore all of that, and just look at the nature of the pamor and the exposure of the core of the blade. The way in which this has been done is something I have never seen in a Javanese blade, this has distinctly Bugis characteristics. As I have said:- I have given an opinion, and any opinion can be wrong, but in this case I would need one hell of a lot of convincing that this opinion of mine is wrong.