Old Tajong or Coteng???

Alam Shah · 8th March 2006, 04:30 AM

VVV, your's looks like an 18th Century coteng hilt. But your sheath form is unusual.

Reference:
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm

BSMStar, your's is a coteng...a pretty one.

Some write-up on Tajong and Coteng
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ion/patani.htm

Some other examples...
http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...bum.php&page=9

Hope it helps...

VVV · 8th March 2006, 11:00 AM

Thanks Alam Shah,

I forgot to look in the article of Cédric le Dauphin that is referred to on the great reference site you linked to. I will do so later tonight.
At first glance the conclusions of the hilt evolution in the Le Dauphin article seems to differ from the ones in Spirit of Wood?
But I have to check if that's the case later.

Below is an additional picture of the blade to Nechesh.
No visible pamor as you can see (dapur Pandai Saras?).

I also have the silver Coteng version but I have heard that the oldest hilts are made of wood.
Is that correct?

Michael

BluErf · 8th March 2006, 03:28 PM

Hi,

VVV's keris is a coteng. The hilt does not have a beard, and has a very 'flat' head. Tajongs have boxier heads and a beard. This coteng is unusual in that it has that highly exaggerated garuda mungkur at the back of its crown. The sheath is of a very old form. Its amazing it survived. Please take extreme good care of it because it is very rare. Try not to do anything drastic to it please. The blade is of the pandai saras form. However, most cotengs I've seen do not come with pandai saras blades. They come with this sort of blade:

http://pachome1.pacific.net.sg/~dspf/

Hence, there is a possibility (I'm not 100% sure) that this piece may be 'put together'. Even then, its well-fitted, so it still looks good. Some Bugis-influenced blades can also be found in coteng kerises.

Cotengs and tajongs are very closely related. In some cases, they are almost hard to tell apart:

http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...view_photo.php

The above hilt is boxy like a tajong, but has no beard. Even more confusing - the sheath form is usually associated with cotengs.

BSMStar's hilt is probably a modern reproduction made in Indonesia. The beak is not too correct, and the "front-view" proportions is not quite correct. The hilt was probably made based on a photo, because the proportions are more or less correct when viewed from the side, but not from the top. Plus, the motifs on the hilt looks very S. Sumatran, not N Malayan.

VVV · 8th March 2006, 04:05 PM

Hi BlueErf,

Thanks for your comments.
I agree with your way to differ the Coteng from the Tajong but after reading Spirit of Wood I am confused. Do you have the book?
The Tajong 1 in their evolution of Hulu Tajong is just like a Coteng, even called Tajong 1 Hulu Coteng, but still is described as a Tajong.

On the blade I also agree but can assure you that I at least haven't fiddled with it.

It fits perfect in the scabbard so if some exchage has been done maybe it's a change of only the hilt?
But in this interesting thread I noticed a Coteng (DA Henkel's) that have a similar blade as mine?
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001218.html

So maybe it could be original?

Michael

VVV · 8th March 2006, 06:05 PM

I have now been able to check the source of the link that Alam Shah shared

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm

It's seems to my eyes as if the article from Cédric Le Dauphin is using the pictures from the old web site of D A Henkel on Peninsular Keris as illustration on the evolution of the Tajong?
BUT one hilt is then mislabeled and that's the one resembling mine which is dated 17th C at DA Henkel's site and 18th C in the article of Le Dauphin?
In the book Spirit of Wood it's dated pre 18th C.
I presume the change of dates is based on C Le Dauphin's own research and that he disagrees with the conclusions of D A Henkel, Nik Rashidin Nik Hussein as well as the authors of the book?
The article of Le Dauphin is very well written and impressive so I guess he has his reasons for changing the dating?

Michael

PUFF · 9th March 2006, 02:56 AM

This construction 's not very famous. That 's why you gouy can't find it from documents published in the west.
According to an kris expert this piece might be "Sonkhla-Nakorn(SriDhamMaRaj)" (northern Malaya) design. The hilt is "streight beak Coteng". This construct mostly held by buddhist people in the class of artist or shaman medic.

Here 's a similar piece with the same construct...

Another piece...

nechesh · 9th March 2006, 03:42 AM

Sorry Puff, but i just don't see it. The only similarities here are in the hilts and even those have many subtle differences. The blades are very different dapurs and the sheaths are also very different styles and also lacks the bands. Is the hilt the only thing that determines the identity of this keris as coteng? How can you ID this keris as Sonkla-Nakor when it is so structurally different from the examples you present?

BluErf · 9th March 2006, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VVV

Hi BlueErf,

Thanks for your comments.
I agree with your way to differ the Coteng from the Tajong but after reading Spirit of Wood I am confused. Do you have the book?
The Tajong 1 in their evolution of Hulu Tajong is just like a Coteng, even called Tajong 1 Hulu Coteng, but still is described as a Tajong.

On the blade I also agree but can assure you that I at least haven't fiddled with it.

It fits perfect in the scabbard so if some exchage has been done maybe it's a change of only the hilt?
But in this interesting thread I noticed a Coteng (DA Henkel's) that have a similar blade as mine?
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001218.html

So maybe it could be original?

Michael

Hi Michael,

Yes I have the spirit of wood book. The tajong and coteng are very closely related. It is almost certain that they arose from the same original form, but for some reason evolved differently. The coteng form would seem to be the more primitive form. I think it really depends on how one wants to classify such hilts. I know there are people who consider cotengs a form of tajong. Well, I'd just leave it as 'they're closely related'. I can't say much about the dating except that there's a lot of guess-work and gut feel in those.

Blade-wise, the old cotengs do not have pandai saras blades. Dave's blade is not a pandai saras. Its a form of bahari blade. Note that it has no kembang kacang, and does not have the diamond profile that extends through the ganja. And yes, bahari is the other form of blade found in cotengs.

Your sheath form is the same as Paul's example (the ivory hilted one with the broken nose). Your sheath has suffered some damage to the dauns (the 'leaves' at both end to the sheath), but it is still in quite good condition.

The cotengs are found in the Songkhla/Singora area in present day southern Thailand. They are generally found in areas North of where Tajongs would be found. Crudely speaking, North yields more cotengs, South yields more tajongs. It's not a very big area, hence making cotengs one of the rarest keris forms around. There are quite a fair bit of variation in blade and sheath forms that are not properly documented, so we are quite 'in the dark'. The amount of variations almost suggest that each district may have a slightly different form of the keris.

And finally, yes, your coteng could be original. At any rate, please maintain it well for posterity! Remember to use wood oil (with oil like "Old English") a few times a year, and clean the blade with light neutral oil (wipe the blade dry of the oil). Sorry for nagging, but you are in possession of a very rare specimen (even amongst the rare cotengs).

BluErf · 9th March 2006, 03:18 PM

Thanks to PUFF for posting the coteng pics! I appreciate that! Any more pics of those examples please (especially the 2nd one)?

VVV · 9th March 2006, 06:00 PM

Thanks all for your comments and posting of examples.
Be assured BluErf, I will take good care of this Keris.
And thanks also for explaining more about the different blade forms.

How different was the old cultural traditions in the neighbouring states of Songkhla/Singora and Pattani?

Michael

BSMStar · 10th March 2006, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

BSMStar's hilt is probably a modern reproduction made in Indonesia. The beak is not too correct, and the "front-view" proportions is not quite correct. The hilt was probably made based on a photo, because the proportions are more or less correct when viewed from the side, but not from the top. Plus, the motifs on the hilt looks very S. Sumatran, not N Malayan.

I believe my ignorance is so bad that I do not have to plead ignorance in this area...

It may be my understanding or my definition of "reproduction"... but it seems that this Hulu certainly was not made to "fool" anyone into thinking this is an old Tajong or Coteng. I have never seen any thing like it before or since, so I am not sure what is being reproduced (or faked). It would seem to be something that was custom made? (It is made of silver, covering over a gray-black horn material.) Do you see a lot of this exact Hulu around? Or is it something more unique?

Being modern, that's OK (although, it took a good cleaning to get all of the oxidation off, some being copper based oxides at the "wing" joints - so it has been around a little while, a few hairline cracks, dents) ... it would seem that if this is a "typical" modern reproduction, one would expect to see more of them. Or is this just a custom piece that was made awhile back, that is not a "true" Tajong or Coteng. It could not have been "cheap" to make... I have seen some real pieces of junk out there, this one fairly nice (and fairly large too).

I like VVV's Hulu too!!!

Love these bird hilts!

nechesh · 10th March 2006, 09:09 PM

I am with you on this one B, i don't think it is correct to refer to your hilt as a "reproduction", just another in the vast myiad of variations to be found in the art of the keris and keris dress. And it is a very nicely crafted hilt indeed.

BluErf · 11th March 2006, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSMStar

I believe my ignorance is so bad that I do not have to plead ignorance in this area...

It may be my understanding or my definition of "reproduction"... but it seems that this Hulu certainly was not made to "fool" anyone into thinking this is an old Tajong or Coteng. I have never seen any thing like it before or since, so I am not sure what is being reproduced (or faked). It would seem to be something that was custom made? (It is made of silver, covering over a gray-black horn material.) Do you see a lot of this exact Hulu around? Or is it something more unique?

Being modern, that's OK (although, it took a good cleaning to get all of the oxidation off, some being copper based oxides at the "wing" joints - so it has been around a little while, a few hairline cracks, dents) ... it would seem that if this is a "typical" modern reproduction, one would expect to see more of them. Or is this just a custom piece that was made awhile back, that is not a "true" Tajong or Coteng. It could not have been "cheap" to make... I have seen some real pieces of junk out there, this one fairly nice (and fairly large too).

I like VVV's Hulu too!!!

Love these bird hilts!

Well, 'reproduction' does not mean it is mass produced. It could be a custom reproduction. If one looks at the traditional forms and place of origin, this silver hilt would be an 'oddity'. True, it could be be the 'first of a new genre', but until we see this sort of hilt widely adopted, it would continue to be an 'oddity'. Its not to say that this hilt is bad quality or anything, but just to make it clear to everyone what we are looking at, especially if we are talking about the archetypal cotengs and tajongs.

BSMStar · 14th March 2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Well, 'reproduction' does not mean it is mass produced. It could be a custom reproduction. If one looks at the traditional forms and place of origin, this silver hilt would be an 'oddity'. True, it could be be the 'first of a new genre', but until we see this sort of hilt widely adopted, it would continue to be an 'oddity'. Its not to say that this hilt is bad quality or anything, but just to make it clear to everyone what we are looking at, especially if we are talking about the archetypal cotengs and tajongs.

Hi BluErf...

First, I want to be sure that you know that I fully appreciate and value your knowledge and opinion... and I thank you for your help!

You have keep in mind the definition I am accustom to (from collecting military awards)... is that a reproduction is a fake, something designed to look like the real thing but is not the real thing.

I believe you are saying that this is a reproduction because it is based on the shape of a classic or old Coteng or Tajong... it reproduces the style of the older designs.

For me, reproduction may be a strong word… in the sense that it would suggest that the item is an exact copy, or an attempt to make an exact copy of the item (to reproduce it). In this context, I have to agree with nechesh, it would seem that this is just another variety of a (Garuda) bird hilt that has strongly borrowed its design from the Tajong and possibility Coteng types. A custom hilt. However, there are too many differences for it to be a Coteng or a Tajong (for example, the base is all wrong… being sphere shaped and it setting on a silver ring mendak… as well as the other differences you have pointed out). When looking at the market place, usually reproductions tend to show up all over the place (in trying to make a buck, they make more than just one). But please correct me if I am wrong… there may be a “high end” market of fakes for the unsuspecting… and the poor person figured it out, and dumped this as a piece of junk.

VVV’s Hulu is a Coteng and much is known and shared about it. With the one I have, it is a challenge to find any information about it since is seems to be relatively different and unique. But that is the fun of collecting…

One person's junk is another person's treasure.

BluErf · 15th March 2006, 01:51 PM

Hi BSMStar,

Ok, I see where you are coming from. We'll call your hilt a "coteng-styled keris hilt" in the future then.

At any rate, it certainly is not junk. The maker had a good measure of ability to make something 3 dimensional like this and cover it in repoussed motifs which are neat and consistent.

The world of keris is always evolving, even now. When we look at the keris hilts from the different regions, sometimes we can see that they obviously came from the same older form. Some hilts look like a distorted form of another (take the central Javanese 7-planar hilts and the variants from east Java). And we have seen how the tajong resembles the coteng, which also resembles the Tegal hilt, which in turn resembles the regular rashaksa (putri satu) hilts. And even amongst the rashaksa hilts, there are variations which have heads which look like bulging-eyed aliens (Adni has a couple of examples which I had wanted to acquire).

So how did all of that variety happen? Through cross-fertilization of ideas, outright (imperfect) copying, and variations due to the sense of aesthetics of people from a region. There are other contributing factors for sure, like trade and war and their knock-on effects on keris styles in affected areas. It is not far fetched to imagine that when traders and migrants moved from island to island in the S.E.A. archipelago, they would have brought their kerises, and when locals saw it, they wanted something similar too. With the 'real McCoy' in short supply, some local craftsmen could have made their own versions of the keris/keris part, and slowly it caught on and started evolving.

8th March 2006, 04:30 AM	#1
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	An 18th Century Coteng style... VVV, your's looks like an 18th Century coteng hilt. But your sheath form is unusual. Reference: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm BSMStar, your's is a coteng...a pretty one. Some write-up on Tajong and Coteng http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ion/patani.htm Some other examples... http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...bum.php&page=9 Hope it helps...

8th March 2006, 11:00 AM	#2
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Thanks Alam Shah, I forgot to look in the article of Cédric le Dauphin that is referred to on the great reference site you linked to. I will do so later tonight. At first glance the conclusions of the hilt evolution in the Le Dauphin article seems to differ from the ones in Spirit of Wood? But I have to check if that's the case later. Below is an additional picture of the blade to Nechesh. No visible pamor as you can see (dapur Pandai Saras?). I also have the silver Coteng version but I have heard that the oldest hilts are made of wood. Is that correct? Michael Attached Images Last edited by VVV; 8th March 2006 at 11:10 AM.

9th March 2006, 02:56 AM	#6
PUFF Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 30 miles north of Bangkok, 20 miles south of Ayuthaya, Thailand Posts: 224	This construction 's not very famous. That 's why you gouy can't find it from documents published in the west. According to an kris expert this piece might be "Sonkhla-Nakorn(SriDhamMaRaj)" (northern Malaya) design. The hilt is "streight beak Coteng". This construct mostly held by buddhist people in the class of artist or shaman medic. Here 's a similar piece with the same construct... Another piece... Last edited by PUFF; 9th March 2006 at 04:20 AM.

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

8th March 2006, 03:28 PM	#3
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Hi, VVV's keris is a coteng. The hilt does not have a beard, and has a very 'flat' head. Tajongs have boxier heads and a beard. This coteng is unusual in that it has that highly exaggerated garuda mungkur at the back of its crown. The sheath is of a very old form. Its amazing it survived. Please take extreme good care of it because it is very rare. Try not to do anything drastic to it please. The blade is of the pandai saras form. However, most cotengs I've seen do not come with pandai saras blades. They come with this sort of blade: http://pachome1.pacific.net.sg/~dspf/ Hence, there is a possibility (I'm not 100% sure) that this piece may be 'put together'. Even then, its well-fitted, so it still looks good. Some Bugis-influenced blades can also be found in coteng kerises. Cotengs and tajongs are very closely related. In some cases, they are almost hard to tell apart: http://www.kampungnet.com.sg/modules...view_photo.php The above hilt is boxy like a tajong, but has no beard. Even more confusing - the sheath form is usually associated with cotengs. BSMStar's hilt is probably a modern reproduction made in Indonesia. The beak is not too correct, and the "front-view" proportions is not quite correct. The hilt was probably made based on a photo, because the proportions are more or less correct when viewed from the side, but not from the top. Plus, the motifs on the hilt looks very S. Sumatran, not N Malayan.

8th March 2006, 04:05 PM	#4
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Hi BlueErf, Thanks for your comments. I agree with your way to differ the Coteng from the Tajong but after reading Spirit of Wood I am confused. Do you have the book? The Tajong 1 in their evolution of Hulu Tajong is just like a Coteng, even called Tajong 1 Hulu Coteng, but still is described as a Tajong. On the blade I also agree but can assure you that I at least haven't fiddled with it. It fits perfect in the scabbard so if some exchage has been done maybe it's a change of only the hilt? But in this interesting thread I noticed a Coteng (DA Henkel's) that have a similar blade as mine? http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001218.html So maybe it could be original? Michael

8th March 2006, 06:05 PM	#5
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	I have now been able to check the source of the link that Alam Shah shared http://perso.wanadoo.fr/taman.sari/k...ran_pekaka.htm It's seems to my eyes as if the article from Cédric Le Dauphin is using the pictures from the old web site of D A Henkel on Peninsular Keris as illustration on the evolution of the Tajong? BUT one hilt is then mislabeled and that's the one resembling mine which is dated 17th C at DA Henkel's site and 18th C in the article of Le Dauphin? In the book Spirit of Wood it's dated pre 18th C. I presume the change of dates is based on C Le Dauphin's own research and that he disagrees with the conclusions of D A Henkel, Nik Rashidin Nik Hussein as well as the authors of the book? The article of Le Dauphin is very well written and impressive so I guess he has his reasons for changing the dating? Michael

9th March 2006, 03:42 AM	#7
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Sorry Puff, but i just don't see it. The only similarities here are in the hilts and even those have many subtle differences. The blades are very different dapurs and the sheaths are also very different styles and also lacks the bands. Is the hilt the only thing that determines the identity of this keris as coteng? How can you ID this keris as Sonkla-Nakor when it is so structurally different from the examples you present?

9th March 2006, 03:18 PM	#9
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Thanks to PUFF for posting the coteng pics! I appreciate that! Any more pics of those examples please (especially the 2nd one)?

9th March 2006, 06:00 PM	#10
VVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,637	Thanks all for your comments and posting of examples. Be assured BluErf, I will take good care of this Keris. And thanks also for explaining more about the different blade forms. How different was the old cultural traditions in the neighbouring states of Songkhla/Singora and Pattani? Michael

10th March 2006, 09:09 PM	#12
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	I am with you on this one B, i don't think it is correct to refer to your hilt as a "reproduction", just another in the vast myiad of variations to be found in the art of the keris and keris dress. And it is a very nicely crafted hilt indeed.

15th March 2006, 01:51 PM	#15
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Hi BSMStar, Ok, I see where you are coming from. We'll call your hilt a "coteng-styled keris hilt" in the future then. At any rate, it certainly is not junk. The maker had a good measure of ability to make something 3 dimensional like this and cover it in repoussed motifs which are neat and consistent. The world of keris is always evolving, even now. When we look at the keris hilts from the different regions, sometimes we can see that they obviously came from the same older form. Some hilts look like a distorted form of another (take the central Javanese 7-planar hilts and the variants from east Java). And we have seen how the tajong resembles the coteng, which also resembles the Tegal hilt, which in turn resembles the regular rashaksa (putri satu) hilts. And even amongst the rashaksa hilts, there are variations which have heads which look like bulging-eyed aliens (Adni has a couple of examples which I had wanted to acquire). So how did all of that variety happen? Through cross-fertilization of ideas, outright (imperfect) copying, and variations due to the sense of aesthetics of people from a region. There are other contributing factors for sure, like trade and war and their knock-on effects on keris styles in affected areas. It is not far fetched to imagine that when traders and migrants moved from island to island in the S.E.A. archipelago, they would have brought their kerises, and when locals saw it, they wanted something similar too. With the 'real McCoy' in short supply, some local craftsmen could have made their own versions of the keris/keris part, and slowly it caught on and started evolving.