Silver Keris

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Jean

As you have my book you can find a rather similar silver pendok on pic 3.15, page 201.

Hello Jean,

yes, so far I can see it it could be indeed the same workshop.

BTW, great book from you, congrats!

Regards,
Detlef

[David]

Originally Posted by Sajen

yes, so far I can see it it could be indeed the same workshop.

I don't know. From what i can see of the pendok in Jean's book (there is no detail shot of it) it would seem a bit of a leap to identify it as coming from the same workshop. Both the stem of this sheath and Jean's pendok use a vegetal pattern, but from what i can see it does not appear to be the same foliage motif. They could very well use the same silver working technique, but i would have to see Jean's example closer to tell. I do agree with Kai that if we are to make such comparisons it would be nice if Jean could upload a photo or two of his pendok to make that easier.
It is interesting though that both these works in silver seem to appear on what we would otherwise assume were Bali keris even if the workmanship of the dress appears otherwise. Is it possible this silver work could be a product of Lombok? Could that explain the other flavors we are detecting in these forms of dress?

[Jean]

Originally Posted by David

I don't know. From what i can see of the pendok in Jean's book (there is no detail shot of it) it would seem a bit of a leap to identify it as coming from the same workshop. Both the stem of this sheath and Jean's pendok use a vegetal pattern, but from what i can see it does not appear to be the same foliage motif. They could very well use the same silver working technique, but i would have to see Jean's example closer to tell. I do agree with Kai that if we are to make such comparisons it would be nice if Jean could upload a photo or two of his pendok to make that easier.
It is interesting though that both these works in silver seem to appear on what we would otherwise assume were Bali keris even if the workmanship of the dress appears otherwise. Is it possible this silverware could be a product of Lombok? Could that explain the other flavors we are detecting in these forms of dress?

Hello David,
I am not at home so I can only show this pic of my pendok. Athough I see some similarities with the one from Roland (buntut), the style of floral engraving and silver quality are different indeed. I got this piece separately from the kris itself but it was fitted on another Bali/ Lombok scabbard. I would also place the origin of my piece to Lombok or Sumbawa (Bugis influence).
Regards

[mariusgmioc]

Hello guys,

There was much discussed about the dress of the keris but very little about the keris itself.

To me, this keris looks very new (max 10 years) and very Javanese and definitely not Balinese.

Am I right?! Am I wrong?!

PS: I find the hilt absolutely fascinating with respect to artistic craftmanship, albeit I am aware it is not in the traditional style.

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

To me, this keris looks very new (max 10 years) and very Javanese and definitely not Balinese.

Am I right?! Am I wrong?!

Hello,

The pictures were made with a modern DSLR, the Nikon D7000 plus a high quality lens. Every picture has seen different automatic algorithms to increase the picture quality, without any possibility of influence by the user. The D7000 doesnt allow to use the raw-data. What I try to say is that pictures of old artifacts taken with a modern DSLR like this are always looks more modern than they are, always!

1: The scabbard of this Keris has been worn without any question with the typical signs of strain in the middle of the scabbard. Who was wearing such a big Kris ten years ago?

2: The blade itself has a mirror surface finish and a mild Waranga but there is corrosion everywhere and it takes some decades until a blade is corroded like this.

During the last cleaning the "foot" of the scabbard became loose and the resin inside the foot and also the wood from the core seem to be much older than 10 or 25 years.


If I see a artifact which is of unknown style to me, I would never judge the age of the piece by pictures. Especially if they are had been taken by an DSLR and if the artifact is made from gold or silver.

Without any question, this Keris is non traditional but this fact alone is no evidence for a recent production. What shall I say, my collection is full of unusual blades, I'm a kind of magnet for unusual artifacts


Regards,
Roland

[Jean]

I do not wish to speculate about the age of this piece from the pics but would like to make the following observations:
. The silver color looks very clear, there is not much dark patina in the cavities which is typical of old silver artefacts. The silver quality seems excellent.
. I don't see much corrosion on the blade but some artificial pitting made by punching on the ganja and the pudak sategal on the sides of the blade around the kinatah.
. The kinatah fully covers the Ganesha figure but around the axe which he holds in one of his left hands there is a trace of gluing or welding which could indicate that the figure was added later.
. From my observations the "studs" on top of the ganja seem to be a recent javanese fashion.
. I have some quite recent silver krisses in which the wood core appears old and dry as this one.

Regards

[kai]

With precious metals any age estimation tends to be very tentative since newly pieces can be made to look old and genuine old pieces can look spanking new if repolished (or well preserved). Thus, we tend to look for a combination of craftsmanship, patina (if any), wear/damages, stylistic and other hints. However, none of these are really reliable since precious metals are fairly easy to be mended with...

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Originally Posted by Roland_M

The pictures were made with a modern DSLR, the Nikon D7000 plus a high quality lens. Every picture has seen different automatic algorithms to increase the picture quality, without any possibility of influence by the user. The D7000 doesnt allow to use the raw-data. What I try to say is that pictures of old artifacts taken with a modern DSLR like this are always looks more modern than they are, always!

While i will not speculate on the age of this piece at the moment i will make a few observations.
Firstly i would like to comment on your statements here Roland because as a professional photographer for 35 years who has worked with modern digital cameras (all Nikon) for almost 15 years your above remarks make absolutely no sense to me. I am familiar with the D7000 and it does indeed allow the use of RAW data. You have photographed a quality item with a fairly high quality camera. You did a technically accurate job and shot in reasonably good light producing sharp and detailed photographs that reveal both the craftsmanship and the wear. But i can think of no reason why the equipment itself would make your keris look newer than it does in person.
But even in hand we must be careful assessing age based solely on the appearance of wear and the over all condition of the piece. We know, for instance, that there are early examples of keris in European collections that have the appearance of being made yesterday. We must look carefully at the type of techniques that were applied to the crafting. Can we detect modern tools used? We must study the style of the embellishments. Does this appear to be an older style of kinatah? Can we recognize if this application and style of gold is distinctly Balinese or Javanese? Can we provide any other examples to support that opinion?
In trying to identify the origins of the blade, Marius thinks it looks Javanese? Is this a pamor that we are likely to see on a Javanese blade? What about the dhapur?
Lastly, could you add the dimensions of the keris to this discussion, both blade and sheath. The blade is obviously much shorter than the sheath. Thanks!

[kai]

Hello Roland,

The blade itself has a mirror surface finish and a mild Waranga but there is corrosion everywhere and it takes some decades until a blade is corroded like this.

In a tropical climate, the corrosion visible here can easily develop in much shorter time!

I'm uneasy with this blade. To me it looks like a larger blade got sacrificed for carving the "picture"/figural gandik as well as the open-worked kinatah on the blade (and raised kinatah on the gonjo); especially the cuts made into the base of the blade to demarcate the kinatah borders does not flow with traditional esthetics IMHO. While Ganesha is done akin Hindu style, the general craftsmanship looks almost Madura/Jawa to me; however, the warangan looks acceptable by Balinese standards - something I've not seen coming from Jawa/Madura mranggi yet...

While Madura as well as East Java received quite a bit of Balinese cultural input by expats, I'm inclined to believe these ensembles may be from Bali, possibly pre-independence attempts to sell keris to affluent European visitors?

Regards,
Kai

[Roland_M]

Hello,

More pictures and the measurements.
I hope that the Keris is still interesting and that I can add more good pics for the discussion.

The piece which I call "foot" was solid in place. It became loose recently, after I tried out a new cleaning method with sweet almond oil, which is very thin. The wooden core looks old. Even the the red wax-resin-mixture (?) doesnt looks new to me. And not to forget it was hermetically closed before I was using the almond oil.
The scabbard is full of small dents and one large one from which I think it could be caused by bending stress, the typically markings.
The piercing in the area above the greneng were made with great effort, not just simple drillings.
The Ganesha-figure is an integral part of the blade, no upgrade.

Really hard to say what it is. One possible old background could be, that it was made for the dutch VOC as a present for proved soldiers.


Regards,
Roland

p.s. all pictures are untouched, I reduced the size only.