Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

A. G. Maisey · 27th June 2011, 11:52 PM

Gentlemen, in my hilt collection I have in excess of 44 ivory Madura hilts of the donoriko and squirrel type, in addition to about an equal number of wooden ones. I have perhaps twenty or so more that are fitted to keris. If we look at a considerable number of hilts of the same type, what we find is that elements of design vary considerably, as does quality of execution.

Certainly, there are hilts where design is repeated, almost cut for cut, but as we move from these more expertly carved hilts, what we find is that the carver will very often improvise, in accordance with his degree of ability, or the extent of his knowledge.

Bear this in mind:- in the past, just as at the present time, not all keris dress was produced by master carvers, and not all keris dress was produced in accordance with the requirements of karaton formal dress.

In fact, in Madura, the only Karaton was in Sumenep, the other major school of design, Pamekesan was only a kabupaten, and although in Pamekesan there was a distinguishable difference in both design and execution from the styles of Sumenep, within the Pamekesan genre, there is also very considerable variation in both elements of design and execution.

In between Pamekesan and Sumenep there is a lengthy stretch of rural lands, that even today is a literal pain in the rear end to traverse. Before the sealed road went in, it must have been hell to go from one place to another, very probably the major contact was by boat, but when somebody was living more than a day's walk from the nearest port, how often do think they might have visited any major center of population? Were the carvers living in rural areas as au fait with accepted design elements and motifs as were the masters living within the karaton, or within the city of Pamekesan? Of course not. How could they be? Then we have the fact that many people would carve their own keris dress. Not every item of keris dress was always made by a man paid to do the job, and even the master carver had one or more apprentices.

Now, don't ask me for photos. Photos take time, a lot more time than the 5 minutes it has taken me to write this, and to be frank, I really don't care if what I say is accepted or not. Believe what you will. However, I would offer the caution that we should not base our judgements and opinions concerning objects from times long past, and their production, upon ideas conceived in the 21st century and from a cultural and societal foundation firmly rooted in Europe.

In respect of this particular hilt that is under discussion.

Does anybody truly believe that this hilt was carved with the intention of fitting a Bugis/Malay style pendongkok to it?

Have a look at what it looks like:- the hilt is stuck on top of the pendongkok like a pimple on a pumpkin. Its plain , pure, downright ugly.Totally kaku and obviously not intended to be seen together. Surely anybody with even minimal experience of keris aesthetics can see this.

The hilt is nice, the pendongkok is nice, but together they're a disaster.

Have a look at post #3 in this thread:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13989

here we have another donoriko that has been fitted with an incorrect selut, but have a look at how it has been fitted, now compare with the hilt we are discussing.

If anybody wishes to move origin of this hilt to a location other than Madura, I feel that it will be very necessary to come up with some concrete evidence of such a hilt having been produced in a location other than Madura. Perceived variations in design and execution based upon an insignificant statistical base are simply not sufficient.

But as I have already said:- believe what you will; most of the field of kerisology is based upon belief rather than fact in any case. A bit more belief probably won't do any irreparable damage.

27th June 2011, 11:52 PM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,713	Gentlemen, in my hilt collection I have in excess of 44 ivory Madura hilts of the donoriko and squirrel type, in addition to about an equal number of wooden ones. I have perhaps twenty or so more that are fitted to keris. If we look at a considerable number of hilts of the same type, what we find is that elements of design vary considerably, as does quality of execution. Certainly, there are hilts where design is repeated, almost cut for cut, but as we move from these more expertly carved hilts, what we find is that the carver will very often improvise, in accordance with his degree of ability, or the extent of his knowledge. Bear this in mind:- in the past, just as at the present time, not all keris dress was produced by master carvers, and not all keris dress was produced in accordance with the requirements of karaton formal dress. In fact, in Madura, the only Karaton was in Sumenep, the other major school of design, Pamekesan was only a kabupaten, and although in Pamekesan there was a distinguishable difference in both design and execution from the styles of Sumenep, within the Pamekesan genre, there is also very considerable variation in both elements of design and execution. In between Pamekesan and Sumenep there is a lengthy stretch of rural lands, that even today is a literal pain in the rear end to traverse. Before the sealed road went in, it must have been hell to go from one place to another, very probably the major contact was by boat, but when somebody was living more than a day's walk from the nearest port, how often do think they might have visited any major center of population? Were the carvers living in rural areas as au fait with accepted design elements and motifs as were the masters living within the karaton, or within the city of Pamekesan? Of course not. How could they be? Then we have the fact that many people would carve their own keris dress. Not every item of keris dress was always made by a man paid to do the job, and even the master carver had one or more apprentices. Now, don't ask me for photos. Photos take time, a lot more time than the 5 minutes it has taken me to write this, and to be frank, I really don't care if what I say is accepted or not. Believe what you will. However, I would offer the caution that we should not base our judgements and opinions concerning objects from times long past, and their production, upon ideas conceived in the 21st century and from a cultural and societal foundation firmly rooted in Europe. In respect of this particular hilt that is under discussion. Does anybody truly believe that this hilt was carved with the intention of fitting a Bugis/Malay style pendongkok to it? Have a look at what it looks like:- the hilt is stuck on top of the pendongkok like a pimple on a pumpkin. Its plain , pure, downright ugly.Totally kaku and obviously not intended to be seen together. Surely anybody with even minimal experience of keris aesthetics can see this. The hilt is nice, the pendongkok is nice, but together they're a disaster. Have a look at post #3 in this thread:- http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13989 here we have another donoriko that has been fitted with an incorrect selut, but have a look at how it has been fitted, now compare with the hilt we are discussing. If anybody wishes to move origin of this hilt to a location other than Madura, I feel that it will be very necessary to come up with some concrete evidence of such a hilt having been produced in a location other than Madura. Perceived variations in design and execution based upon an insignificant statistical base are simply not sufficient. But as I have already said:- believe what you will; most of the field of kerisology is based upon belief rather than fact in any case. A bit more belief probably won't do any irreparable damage.