Hello Séverin,
Quote:
For me, the gold band is original. The work seems typically Minang because it is identical to what is observed on Mingangkabau bracelets.
But it seems indeed that there has been a repair of the Buntut, the black spot that we see on one of the two faces seems to be a weld repair.
|
The buntut seems to be in line regarding age (of course more prone to damage - it may have had a more ovoid shape originally). I was wondering whether the band might be part of the repair work (it might be old or recycled) - its borders seem too roughly worked for a quality piece like this though IMHO.
I wasn't precise with my last comment: The motif and it's variants do seem to be genuine Minang; as you mention, they are found on antique Minang jewellery and will have been distributed fairly widely throughout the Minang expat communities. However, these are crafted from strong bands rather than thin wire - what I'm not aware though is the latter being utilized on fittings of early keris Minang. This may be a later development or indicating different levels of skill though - let me look for more examples...
Quote:
For the stone, for me it lacks a touch of pink in the color for it to be ruby.
The auction house said garnet, but it can also be spinel or glass because I do not know if they really check the stone.
|
I don't know of any auction house which does critically test gems on all antique pieces (they don't guarantee their descriptions, anyway). If it does really matter for a high-end sale, auction houses tend to supply certificates from vetted external experts. In cases like this keris, it probably is a more or less educated guess or even merely based on the consignor's opinion.
As already mentioned, I don't think it doesn't matter much, anyway!
Regards,
Kai