Kikik added to an older blade?

[A. G. Maisey]

Bjorn, based upon the evidence of the photos, I am not able to give a solid opinion on this matter. I would need to handle the keris, and examine it under magnification.

But I can give a tentative opinion, and in that opinion I will say that this singo barong was not added to the blade at some time after its original manufacture.

I have seen and owned several keris where either a singo barong or a naga had been added after the original manufacture. In all cases the way in which this had been done was to forge weld a small piece of compatible material into place, and to make the border of the singo or naga the border of the added material. I owned one such keris for a long time, 20 years or more, before I noticed the joint.

According to one point of view, the adding of a singo barong, or naga, or other motif to a keris is not something that detracts from a keris, but rather something that enhances the keris in the sense that it reveals something of the history of the keris and a previous owner. If a man were to be raised to a position where the addition of a SB to the keris that he wore would be a positive re-enforcement, but he wished for one reason or another to continue to use his habitual keris, then his course of action would be to have an empu add the SB motif and to do so with proper ritual.

The commonly encountered attitude amongst collectors who are not a part of Javanese keris culture is that such an addition must have been done in order to raise the value of the keris so it can give bigger profit. In my opinion this is very often a misguided opinion that has been formed by somebody who does not understand the economics of such an alteration, nor the economics of the market place.

I feel that perhaps the irregularity in pamor distribution that is shown in your keris is the result of some layers of pamor having lifted and peeled away from the core.