Keris--Looking for info--its from 6/13/1758

nechesh · 31st December 2004, 09:33 PM

Well MrGee, with all due respect to the Deyoung Museum, i am afraid they don't know what they are talking about. Being a museum does not make you knowledgable on ALL matters. I did visit their web site and check out their keris (kris) collection. http://search.famsf.org:8080/search.shtml?keywords=kris
They appear to have only three examples and none are complete (i.e. none have sheaths and the two Bali keris have no hilt rings [mendak]). One of the three is actually a Moro kris, and they seem to make no distinction to the differences here, nor do they ID the others as Bali keris. They don't appear to know there is an importance to the actual origins here. To them i guess all keris are the same.
The glue on you sheath may very well be from the 1700s, but i can assure you, the sheath itself is not.

The museum might be interested in you keris because it does appear to have a rather nice ivory handle, but the blade you have is inferior to any of the three they have in their collection. If by some chance this is not an altered blade, it is not a very good keris naga original. Though i would bet the naga was carved at a latter date to increase the sellablity of the keris. It would probably be helpful for you to look at a lot of other keris to fully understand what we are talking about.
As for your sheath, again, you need to see other examples. There used to be a tail section that swooped up on the back end or your sheath. Try doing a google search and look at other examples and you will see what i mean. There is still a bit of wood that juts out where this piece would have begun. It may have broken off long ago and been sanded and refinished, but this is not the original condition of your sheath.
As for the seal, the European look is not unusual. You must remember that the Dutch were in this area for centuries and certainly left some influence. The "K" probably represents Kasunanan, which is the royal kraton (palace) of the Surakarta kingdom built in the mid 1700 by Pakubuwono II. But this seal would more likely be a commemorative, like the minting of the first Washington quarter in 1932 to celebrate 200 yrs. since the birth of George Washington. This sheath was not made in 1753. Sorry.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

31st December 2004, 09:33 PM	#5
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Well MrGee, with all due respect to the Deyoung Museum, i am afraid they don't know what they are talking about. Being a museum does not make you knowledgable on ALL matters. I did visit their web site and check out their keris (kris) collection. http://search.famsf.org:8080/search.shtml?keywords=kris They appear to have only three examples and none are complete (i.e. none have sheaths and the two Bali keris have no hilt rings [mendak]). One of the three is actually a Moro kris, and they seem to make no distinction to the differences here, nor do they ID the others as Bali keris. They don't appear to know there is an importance to the actual origins here. To them i guess all keris are the same. The glue on you sheath may very well be from the 1700s, but i can assure you, the sheath itself is not. The museum might be interested in you keris because it does appear to have a rather nice ivory handle, but the blade you have is inferior to any of the three they have in their collection. If by some chance this is not an altered blade, it is not a very good keris naga original. Though i would bet the naga was carved at a latter date to increase the sellablity of the keris. It would probably be helpful for you to look at a lot of other keris to fully understand what we are talking about. As for your sheath, again, you need to see other examples. There used to be a tail section that swooped up on the back end or your sheath. Try doing a google search and look at other examples and you will see what i mean. There is still a bit of wood that juts out where this piece would have begun. It may have broken off long ago and been sanded and refinished, but this is not the original condition of your sheath. As for the seal, the European look is not unusual. You must remember that the Dutch were in this area for centuries and certainly left some influence. The "K" probably represents Kasunanan, which is the royal kraton (palace) of the Surakarta kingdom built in the mid 1700 by Pakubuwono II. But this seal would more likely be a commemorative, like the minting of the first Washington quarter in 1932 to celebrate 200 yrs. since the birth of George Washington. This sheath was not made in 1753. Sorry.