Some questions about Balinese hilt cup.

[Gustav]

Sometimes we encounter a Selut/Mendak construction on Bali Keris, which consists of a stem and a cup. Some questions about it.

Is it an older style, which perhaps had an integrated ring, like South Sumatran Selut or slightly similar constructions from East Java?

Was this style typical for some certain regions in Bali?

There are some older Uwer rings with a short stem. Would they have been parts of such stem/cup construction?

[Gustav]

Yes/perhaps/not likely?

Or no information at all?

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Gustav

Yes/perhaps/not likely?

Or no information at all?

Hello Gustav,

I've noticed this construction a few times before but I can't answer your question, sorry.

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, I did not reply to your questions immediately because I wanted to speak with two Balinese friends who know far more than I do about Balinese keris.

I now have their input.

In your posted image, the keris on the right does look as if it could be Balinese, however, I have never seen this cup-selut arrangement on any Balinese keris. Both my friends were of the opinion that this cup-selut feature was definitely not Balinese, one suggested that somebody who did not understand Balinese keris culture might have had it fitted.

There are some Balinese uwer that have a rather short stem. This short stem is intended to fit up inside the hilt.

I have seen similar cup-stem fittings on South Sumatera keris.

I cannot recall having seen this cup-stem feature, nor anything like it, on Javanese keris, East Javanese nor otherwise.

I have seen a cup fitting without stem on both Bugis & Peninsula keris, one of these cup fittings was a silver coin hammered to a cup shape to fit the bottom of the hilt.

[Gustav]

Sajen, thank you for you response!

[Gustav]

Alan, thank you for your response!

There is a Keris in Jensen's Krisdisk, which I at the beginning thought is a bit strange, with parts of perhaps different age and provenance mixed together.

Some time ago I came across a Keris with similar stem/cup construction, and by chance it has a similar Pendok. The whole thing is most likely from East-Java, but perhaps from Balinese people there, judging by the blade and Kinatah on it.

Then there is a picture of a Sunda(?) Keris, but the fit of hilt and Selut is poor, and the look of that hilt is recent or refurbished.

[A. G. Maisey]

Quite strange.

[sirek]

Hello, I can only say that a kris I have, also came with a stem and cub construction like the keris on the right, but I don't know if this was original but it came in this composition at the time and because it was also mentioned in the krisdisc I have left it like this all this time (on page 16 of the krisdisk )

[Gustav]

This particular combination from Krisdisk looks odd indeed, the Selut clearly doesn't fit the hilt. If something like that existed, it clearly embraced the whole base of hilt

[A. G. Maisey]

Balinese keris hilts that have a selut-like fitting or a cup that encloses the lower end of the hilt are not uncommon, what is uncommon, to the point of not being known by a couple of very experienced Balinese collectors is one of these cup type fittings with a longish stem.

I think enough examples of this fitting have been posted to verify that the fitting did exist at some time, & in some place, in the past, but we might have a bit of difficulty in nailing down exactly when & where.

One thing that is of interest in the photos in post #6. The lighter coloured sarung is a jejamprahan form, in olden times, this sarung form was the prerogative of people who were priests or religious leaders, & it needed to be paired with a kusia hilt --- a hilt form that was also the prerogative of priests & religious leaders.

The hilts in the photo posted are not kusia, they are bebondolan of the South Bali form. The bebondolan hilt is the common man's hilt used for everyday wear, it was improper to pair a bebondolan hilt with anything other than a batun poh or kajongan sarung, further, no common man could legitimately use a jejamprahan sarung.

The darker coloured sarung in post #6 is a kekandikan form. In olden times the kekandikan sarung form was the prerogative of rajas & nobles and it could not be paired with a bebondolan hilt. In modern times the kekandikan form is classified as a formal type of dress, only for use in formal or official circumstances, say, something like a wedding, or maybe attendance at a governor's party. Again, as a keris intended for formal wear, a bebondolan hilt should not be fitted. A kekandikan sarung should never be paired with a bebondolan hilt.

So, if we look at these keris & the way in which they have been dressed, in spite of the fact that they both show some age, the fact of the matter is that they are both dressed inappropriately for use in Balinese society, either in the past, perhaps prior to WWII, or in the current era.

If I see something like this, it does raise questions in my mind in respect of the authenticity of presentation of the keris concerned. Collectors & dealers have been playing around with keris from everywhere for a long time now, so if we see mismatched examples of dress it should automatically raise the question of where this keris might have been dressed.

In respect of post #6, the keris shown as "State keris Fig 87". Jensen names the area of origin for this keris as Bali/Blambangan, the Blambangan Kingdom ended in the 18th century, this area of far east Jawa is now the Banyuwangi Kabupaten. So what Jensen has said is that this keris is a "State Keris" from either Far West Bali or on the other side of the Bali Strait, Far East Jawa.

The dress of this keris does show Balinese influence, but it is very certainly not Balinese dress, it is Jawa/ Madura dress for people of Balinese descent.

Another thing it is not is that it is most definitely not any sort of "State Keris". It is the keris of a man who had no claim to either noble descent or royal descent, in other words, a keris that is dressed for use by a common man, but surely a very wealthy common man. There are several things about this keris that cause me to speculate that the entire keris might have been put together & then sold into Europe by a very well known Surabaya dealer who used to live in Jalan Ngagel Tama. I will not mention his name, he has moved to the Hidden World a long time ago.

If we look at Post #8, image showing Chapter 7, P.16 of "Kris Disc" , we are again looking at a "State Keris". This is not a "State keris", it is a keris for the common man, parts of it have some age, but parts of it are much more recent enhancements. Originally this would have been the keris of a man from the middle ranks of society, but with no claim to royal nor noble descent. It has had the dress upgraded from its proper style into a style that would permit a higher price tag & that would be more appealing to a buyer from outside Balinese society. As it is now presented, it has the earmarks of a dealer's montage. Again, possibly from Ngagel Tama, Surabaya.

[Gustav]

Alan, thank you very much for your detailed response.

Regarding the "Kekandikan" from #6 - it seems to be a form from the island if Java, and could share a common ancestor with Balinese Kekandikan. I never was completely sure if that form is from Sunda or East Java. Perhaps and most likely both.

I have one specimen, which is pre-1850 and
could be pre-1800. The Gandar is tapering and fluted, Kruwingan going almost until the tip. There is a name Salempang being attached to this sheath form in West Java, but I have no possibilities to check it. There can be found a name for everything, of course. Hilt is unusual too, a similar hilt is depicted in a photo of Raden Adipati Aria Wiranotokusumo.

Related sheath forms we encounter also in Central Java.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, I do not know a Javanese wrongko form that has the same or similar form to a Balinese kekandikan.

This is not to say that such a Javanese wrongko form has never existed, it is to say that I do not know of it, & have never seen any Javanese wrongko that is able to be classified as "kekandikan" using Balinese standards.

The kekandikan in post #6 would be classified as kekandikan in Bali, & I cannot see anything in the complete keris dress to indicate a Javanese origin.


The complete keris that you have shown in post #11 looks to be a mixture of component parts, I cannot relate it to any other keris I remember having seen.

Is it possible to detect a location of origin for the blade of the post #11 keris?

[Gustav]

Alan, yes, it differs from Balinese Kekandikan for sure, as differ the Central Javanese forms. But I am absolutely positive, that the sheath form shown in #6, which you called a Kekandikan, is of the same form as the one in #11.
My specimen as a whole was in Europe before 1850. The sheath parts belong together, and the sheath is original ensemble with the blade, which has sunken in a bit. It came together with the hilt, which has the same amount of patina, and likely is from the same region.

[Gustav]

The blade has some Pamor Akhodiat.

And an interesting detail of hilt - it is triangular, the top pentagonal.

[Wijaya34]

Here is mine, it looks like it had a stem cup selut before itwas removed by a previous owner, the blade is from java. I was told that the the entire wrangka set originated in west java.
I also attach another keris that features a pendok +topengan similar to mine and a bebondolan like hilt from the met.
And also another keris that i came across a few years ago with a similar pendok, but no stem cup selut.

[Gustav]

Thank you, Wijaya34!

The middle one from previous post was given to MET in 1932, after owners death, so I doubt it also would have been put together by dealer from Jalan Ngagel Tama.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, I would greatly appreciate it if you would very carefully read my previous posts again. It would be rewarding if you would try to clearly understand what I have written, you might find that I am not in disagreement with anything that you have written.

If my writing is insufficiently clear, I apologise for this, but I do try.

I have not commented upon any keris in any images posted after my post #12.

What I have written in respect of your keris shown in post #11 is this:-

"The complete keris that you have shown in post #11 looks to be a mixture of component parts, I cannot relate it to any other keris I remember having seen."

I have no reason to doubt that it has considerable age, nor that it was removed from its original location a long time ago.

To my eye, this keris does look to be a mixture of parts, or perhaps styles, & in fact this is far from unusual when we look at old keris that originated in locations that were not under the influence of a major society or centre of culture.

My remarks in respect of a Surabaya dealer of some years past refer to the two keris that are illustrated in Mr. Jensen's Kris Disc, one keris is "Fig 87 State Keris", the other Jensen keris is "Chapter 7 Pag 16". My opinion in respect of these two keris has been formed by what I saw in the stock of the Surabaya gentleman concerned on those occasions when I visited his premises.

Your keris shown in post #11, and the keris with dark sarung & dark bebondolan hilt shown in post #6 are both classifiable as kekandikan forms if we apply Balinese terminology & standards.

One thing about this variation in the forms of keris scabbards is this:- in times past the islands of the Malay Archipelago were covered in many places by dense forest, travel & communication was difficult, rivers were used as roads, and the influence of style & fashion in major population centres was very constricted.

In locations that were not under the direct influence of kraton, or puri, or trading entrepot, the dress used for keris often varied considerably from the style or form that inspired it. In a small, and or remote town or village, it was not unusual for the local lord to initiate his own form of a major style.

In kraton society in Jawa, and puri society in Bali, the members of the ruling line of descent would sometimes commission their own keris dress styles that varied a little from the usual, sometimes this variant for would be copied by other members of the court. A very good example of this is the difference between South Bali style & North Bali style.

Over the years I have encountered many examples of keris dress that have been difficult to relate to the major forms in use today & during the immediate past. I have also encountered many examples of complete keris that combined components & styles from a number of different locations.

There is nothing unusual about this. But the major forms are known, whilst variant forms are not known, & in some cases a variant form may well be a "one-off".

[Gustav]

Alan, thank you very much for your detailed response.

Yes, regarding my Keris from #11 - mixture of styles sounds much more reasonable then mixture of parts. A mixture of styles from today's perspective, where such forms are rarely encountered and everything has boiled down to a few easily recognizable models.

What I was struggling to understand, is:

- in #12 you write, you "have never seen any Javanese wrongko that is able to be classified as "kekandikan" using Balinese standards".

- in #17 you write "Your keris shown in post #11, and the keris with dark sarung & dark bebondolan hilt shown in post #6 are both classifiable as kekandikan forms if we apply Balinese terminology & standards."

Here I oncemore would like to note, that Keris with dark Bebondolan from #6 most likely, my Keris from #11 surely are coming from island of Java, perhaps from land of Java. In "The Javanese Keris", 2009, a related form is depicted on p. 83 in a Central Javanese context.

Otherwise I agree with your last post, and of course not only the last one.

[Gustav]

irrelevant

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, please see my post #12, this is what I wrote relevant to the kekandikan form:-

"Gustav, I do not know a Javanese wrongko form that has the same or similar form to a Balinese kekandikan.

This is not to say that such a Javanese wrongko form has never existed, it is to say that I do not know of it, & have never seen any Javanese wrongko that is able to be classified as "kekandikan" using Balinese standards.

The kekandikan in post #6 would be classified as kekandikan in Bali, & I cannot see anything in the complete keris dress to indicate a Javanese origin."

I have seen & handled truly thousands of wrongkos, I cannot recall having ever seen a single Javanese made wrongko that could be classified as kekandikan, using Balinese standards. Not one.

Of course, my memory could be at fault, but I honestly do not believe so --- true, these days I have to think really hard to remember what I had for lunch yesterday but I can recall things from 20, 30 70 years ago, & sometimes with golden clarity.

However, once again I would like to draw your attention to what I actually wrote. I have given my opinion that the two keris in question definitely & without question do qualify as the Balinese kekandikan form. But at no time have I questioned your own opinion of where they were collected.

How could I ever question this?

I was not there when they were collected, I was not there when you purchased them, & it is entirely possible that at the time of purchase you were given information by the seller that you choose to believe.

Where they came from before they appeared in Europe is not up for discussion, nor argument, I accept your opinion.

Given that there is no dispute about where these wrongkos were collected, there remains the question of where they were made. Since this form is associated with Balinese royalty & nobility, & since it is a formal style in Bali, it seems reasonable to assume that both these wrongkos were made in Bali.

It does seem to be highly unlikely that this style could have been worn by a Javanese man in Javanese society, but it could well have been worn by a Balinese man anywhere.

As I have commented, the keris in post #11 is a mix of parts or styles, I have not seen a Balinese keris with a gandar like the one on the post # 11 keris, but I have seen a similar gandar on a North Coast Jawa keris.

In olden times there were a lot of Balinese people working in Jawa. Bali was a major supplier of slaves, the women were highly prized as both wives & servants, the men were more robust than Javanese men & were prized for heavy labour & as guards. Moving up the social scale a bit from debt slaves, marriages between noble and royal families, and also between merchant families from Jawa and other places was not at all uncommon. Going back for more than 1000 years, Jawa & other places in SE Asia were not isolated from one another, people moved from one place to another, & they took their keris with them.

True, movement from one place to another was not as easy & not as fast as it is now, for this reason lower status people perhaps did not move more than a day's walk from where they were born, but people higher up the pecking order & people who were items of trade, did move or were moved.

In the Mangkunegaraan palace in Solo, there is an exhibition of keris that were worn by Balinese men employed as guards, the dress on these keris is a mix of Balinese style & Javanese style. I once owned a keris that had a Balinese bebondolan gambar & a Surakarta gandar & pendok, I had purchased this keris from a private seller in Solo, it had belonged to one of his ancestors who had been Balinese, but who had moved to Jawa Tengah some time before WWI.

The location where something has been collected is not any indication of where it originally came from, however, since the keris is both a societal icon & a personal identifier, that is to say it indicates the origin & status of the custodian and/or wearer, it can continue to function in a society other than its society of origin. The factor that indicates the origin of a keris, both the blade & the dress, is style, because it is the style that gives evidence of the place of production.

As for the photo in the book "The Javanese keris" the same reasoning as above applies equally to that keris, it may have been collected in Ngayogyakarta, but where was it made, & for whom? We do not know. All we know is where it was collected, & that is no indicator at all to its origin nor its previous ownership.

If this gambar style was indeed a Central Javanese style at, or prior to, the date of its collection, why is it that we do not regularly come across examples in Javanese markets? Thousands upon thousands of old Javanese wrongkos often broken beyond repair, in the garbage bins of market place sellers, but never have I seen an example of this kekandikan wrongko style in a garbage bin --- & yes, I used to regularly look in the throwaway stuff. Nor on a keris for that matter. Why is the style unknown to Javanese tukangs wrongko now?

These two kekandikans under discussion may have been collected in Jawa, I accept without question your opinion that they were, but this style is Balinese, & has a place in Balinese society, it has no place in Javanese society.