Metuk (Iras) as an indicator of quality

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:39 AM

This is a part of a thread which started at the keris forum.
It concerns tombak. Therefore it is continuid inthis section
Underneath a quote of Alan Maisey on the enclosed tombak. This tombak has mentuk iras.

When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules.

Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons.

But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior.

On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways.

In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past.

Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards?

My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual.

The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved.

The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:43 AM

This is a part of a thread which started at the keris forum.
It concerns tombak. Therefore it is continuid in this section
Underneath a quote of Alan Maisey on the enclosed tombak. This tombak has mentuk iras.

When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules.

Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons.

But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior.

On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways.

In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past.

Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards?

My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual.

The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved.

The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:47 AM

So to get this straight I've added three tombak.
One with a missing mentuk, one with a mentuk iras and one with a seperately made mentuk. Correct? Is the one with the 'missing'mentuk intended to go without?

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:50 AM

Hello K!

Regarding the tombak with kinatah, it looks like the pamor might be continuing onto the metuk - could this be iras construction, too? (The kinatah obscures the lamination a bit and closely examining this tombak should help to resolve this.)

Regards,
Kai

kai is offline Report Bad Post Reply With Quote

Old 22nd December 2016, 04:35 PM #36

Kulino

Member

Join Date: Aug 2010

Posts: 34

Default

Hi K!
Looks like it. The kinatah looks genuine. The tombak looks like a quality object. Wutuh, sepuh and maybe even a bit tanggu. If this is the case this could support the idea that there might be tombak of quality with mentuk iras. The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah.

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:52 AM

Hello Kulino,

Quote:

The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah.
(Maybe less intricate)

The center motif seems to correspond, indeed. I'd agree that the iras metuk looks nicer than the separate one in these 2 examples (even when ignoring the kinatah).

Without wanting to hijack Paul's thread - great to see some tombak here for a change!

Regards,
Kai

Kulino · 24th December 2016, 10:56 AM

Dear all,

I tried to move the thread about tombak as best as I could. Hope I didn't leave out significant parts. If so, please excuse and correct.

Looking the tombak, my question still stands. Is the seperate mentuk an indication of quality?

David · 24th December 2016, 05:49 PM

Kulino, i am moving this over to the Ethno Forum since it is not about keris specifically.

A. G. Maisey · 24th December 2016, 09:23 PM

Separate METUK.

The word is "metuk", not "mentuk"

I did not previously attempt to correct this, because we were just exchanging a few comments in a discussion relating to keris, but if we now have a full-blown, legitimate thread about tumbak, let's get it right:-

metuk

kai · 25th December 2016, 06:24 PM

I believed the or the main reason for keris gonjo iras of decent quality was to counter magick against the wearer of such keris. Granted, there are many gonjo iras blades which fall way short of any kratons' standards; however, there are also heaps of keris with separate gonjo that are of low level quality.

I'd have expected pusaka tombak to follow the same basic symbolism as keris (originally linga/yoni, etc.) with possibly the same, rare exceptions to the rule (i. e. usually with separate metuk but a few quality examples with metuk gonjo iras). Out on the left field on this one?

Regards,
Kai

kai · 25th December 2016, 06:54 PM

QUOTE from Ensiklopedia Keris:
"Kalau dibuat menyatu dengan bilah dan pesinya disebut metuk iras. Yang memakai metuk iras biasanya adalah tombak-tombak tangguh lama, atau tombak-tombak yang mutunya tidak begitu tinggi."

=

If made with blade and nya [integral?] pesi, it is called metuk iras. Spears from old tangguh typically exhibit metuk iras and their quality is not so high.

(Please do correct me if my attempts at translation are too gruesome!)

Regards,
Kai

A. G. Maisey · 25th December 2016, 09:24 PM

Kai, "nya" on the end of a word should be read as "the", or "its", so:- "the pesi", but this of course is quite wrong if read in isolation, there should be another phrase or sentence before the quoted text that makes it clear that this sentence refers to the metuk.

"biasanya" is better as "usually" or "normally"

"atau tombak-tombak yang mutunya tidak begitu tinggi." = (literally) "or spears which quality its not so high" = "or spears which are not of a high quality".
Many more ways to express this idea in English, no need to be a perfect translation to get the general idea.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kai, a lot of the "mystical/magical" beliefs associated with keris are in fact very recent, superficial research indicates that many such beliefs are no more than a couple of hundred years old, and date from colonial times, I have heard many Javanese people express the opinion that in fact many of these beliefs were generated in one way or another by the presence of the Dutch.

My personal opinion for the existence of keris that are gonjo iras is that dependent upon available material and the degree of technological advancement, it is much quicker, much, much easier, and enormously cheaper to make a gonjo iras keris than it is to make a keris with a gonjo. I have made several keris, and I can assure you, the time involved in making and fitting a gonjo is far in excess of the time it would have taken me to forge the gonjo into the blade.

The metuk iras probably followed the idea of the gonjo, mostly after relevant symbolism started to be attached to keris construction. In Bali I don't think the separate metuk ever became popular, in fact I cannot recall having seen a Bali tombak with a separate metuk.

Make no mistake about it:- the keris is a magical object, but that magic in its true sense has almost nothing to do with the popular idea of magic that is associated with the keris. This popular idea seems to have its roots firstly in the influence of Sufic beliefs that took root in Central Jawa during the 1500's, and secondly in the influence of the Dutch colonialists. We need to look to Bali to understand the true magic of the keris.

24th December 2016, 10:39 AM	#1
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	Metuk (Iras) as an indicator of quality This is a part of a thread which started at the keris forum. It concerns tombak. Therefore it is continuid inthis section Underneath a quote of Alan Maisey on the enclosed tombak. This tombak has mentuk iras. When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules. Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons. But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior. On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways. In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past. Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards? My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual. The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved. The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded. Attached Images Last edited by Kulino; 24th December 2016 at 10:42 AM. Reason: Wrong section. This should go to Ethnic.

24th December 2016, 10:43 AM	#2
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	Mentuk (Iras) as an indicator of quality This is a part of a thread which started at the keris forum. It concerns tombak. Therefore it is continuid in this section Underneath a quote of Alan Maisey on the enclosed tombak. This tombak has mentuk iras. When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules. Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons. But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior. On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways. In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past. Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards? My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual. The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved. The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded. Attached Images Last edited by Kulino; 24th December 2016 at 10:57 AM.

24th December 2016, 10:50 AM	#4
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	Next post in this thread Hello K! Regarding the tombak with kinatah, it looks like the pamor might be continuing onto the metuk - could this be iras construction, too? (The kinatah obscures the lamination a bit and closely examining this tombak should help to resolve this.) Regards, Kai kai is offline Report Bad Post Reply With Quote Old 22nd December 2016, 04:35 PM #36 Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 34 Default Hi K! Looks like it. The kinatah looks genuine. The tombak looks like a quality object. Wutuh, sepuh and maybe even a bit tanggu. If this is the case this could support the idea that there might be tombak of quality with mentuk iras. The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah. Attached Images

24th December 2016, 10:52 AM	#5
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	Next post in this thread Hello Kulino, Quote: The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah. (Maybe less intricate) The center motif seems to correspond, indeed. I'd agree that the iras metuk looks nicer than the separate one in these 2 examples (even when ignoring the kinatah). Without wanting to hijack Paul's thread - great to see some tombak here for a change! Regards, Kai

24th December 2016, 10:56 AM	#6
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	question still stands... Dear all, I tried to move the thread about tombak as best as I could. Hope I didn't leave out significant parts. If so, please excuse and correct. Looking the tombak, my question still stands. Is the seperate mentuk an indication of quality?

24th December 2016, 10:47 AM	#3
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	sequel in the discussion So to get this straight I've added three tombak. One with a missing mentuk, one with a mentuk iras and one with a seperately made mentuk. Correct? Is the one with the 'missing'mentuk intended to go without? Attached Images

24th December 2016, 05:49 PM	#7
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,051	Kulino, i am moving this over to the Ethno Forum since it is not about keris specifically.

24th December 2016, 09:23 PM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,752	Separate METUK. The word is "metuk", not "mentuk" I did not previously attempt to correct this, because we were just exchanging a few comments in a discussion relating to keris, but if we now have a full-blown, legitimate thread about tumbak, let's get it right:- metuk

25th December 2016, 06:24 PM	#9
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,236	I believed the or the main reason for keris gonjo iras of decent quality was to counter magick against the wearer of such keris. Granted, there are many gonjo iras blades which fall way short of any kratons' standards; however, there are also heaps of keris with separate gonjo that are of low level quality. I'd have expected pusaka tombak to follow the same basic symbolism as keris (originally linga/yoni, etc.) with possibly the same, rare exceptions to the rule (i. e. usually with separate metuk but a few quality examples with metuk gonjo iras). Out on the left field on this one? Regards, Kai

25th December 2016, 06:54 PM	#10
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,236	QUOTE from Ensiklopedia Keris: "Kalau dibuat menyatu dengan bilah dan pesinya disebut metuk iras. Yang memakai metuk iras biasanya adalah tombak-tombak tangguh lama, atau tombak-tombak yang mutunya tidak begitu tinggi." = If made with blade and nya [integral?] pesi, it is called metuk iras. Spears from old tangguh typically exhibit metuk iras and their quality is not so high. (Please do correct me if my attempts at translation are too gruesome!) Regards, Kai

25th December 2016, 09:24 PM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,752	Kai, "nya" on the end of a word should be read as "the", or "its", so:- "the pesi", but this of course is quite wrong if read in isolation, there should be another phrase or sentence before the quoted text that makes it clear that this sentence refers to the metuk. "biasanya" is better as "usually" or "normally" "atau tombak-tombak yang mutunya tidak begitu tinggi." = (literally) "or spears which quality its not so high" = "or spears which are not of a high quality". Many more ways to express this idea in English, no need to be a perfect translation to get the general idea. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Kai, a lot of the "mystical/magical" beliefs associated with keris are in fact very recent, superficial research indicates that many such beliefs are no more than a couple of hundred years old, and date from colonial times, I have heard many Javanese people express the opinion that in fact many of these beliefs were generated in one way or another by the presence of the Dutch. My personal opinion for the existence of keris that are gonjo iras is that dependent upon available material and the degree of technological advancement, it is much quicker, much, much easier, and enormously cheaper to make a gonjo iras keris than it is to make a keris with a gonjo. I have made several keris, and I can assure you, the time involved in making and fitting a gonjo is far in excess of the time it would have taken me to forge the gonjo into the blade. The metuk iras probably followed the idea of the gonjo, mostly after relevant symbolism started to be attached to keris construction. In Bali I don't think the separate metuk ever became popular, in fact I cannot recall having seen a Bali tombak with a separate metuk. Make no mistake about it:- the keris is a magical object, but that magic in its true sense has almost nothing to do with the popular idea of magic that is associated with the keris. This popular idea seems to have its roots firstly in the influence of Sufic beliefs that took root in Central Jawa during the 1500's, and secondly in the influence of the Dutch colonialists. We need to look to Bali to understand the true magic of the keris.