Sumatran Mystery?

GIO · 7th December 2014, 05:08 PM

Hi David,
very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris. I think that the blade has no pamor, but, before using warangan, you can easily check if you apply a mild acid (lemon juce or acetic acid) on the blade: a faint design of the pamor should appear.
Looking forward to see the result on the forum, I hope to read the opinions of other members more experienced than I.

Jean · 7th December 2014, 06:36 PM

Hi David,
I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows:
To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra.
The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra.
The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent.
So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members...
Regards

David · 7th December 2014, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Hi David,
I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows:
To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra.
The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra.
The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent.
So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members...
Regards

Thanks for your response Jean. I don't think this has been reshaped, just not very well shaped in the first place (see my suggestion in my response to Gio). I think the file marks remain because the keris wasn't very well finished in the first place. I agree with both you and Gio that there is most probably no pamor in this keris.
I can't tell when the horn may have been added to the ivory hilt, though as Kai suggested it may be a means to continue the life of an old valued ivory hilt that became deteriorated at the base. The pendokok seems the most out of place part so i might be looking for suggestions on what to replace it with. Since this one seems hard to place geographically exactly what the pendokok should look like is difficult to determine.
To your knowledge is the "V" shaped buntut used in any part of Sumatra? I believe Kai suggested perhaps a peninsula origin.

Jean · 8th December 2014, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

Thanks for your response Jean. I don't think this has been reshaped, just not very well shaped in the first place (see my suggestion in my response to Gio).
To your knowledge is the "V" shaped buntut used in any part of Sumatra? I believe Kai suggested perhaps a peninsula origin.

Hi David,
Your blade is only 9 inches long while the one shown by Kai is 13 inches long.
The horn buntut may not be original as it looks very shiny and not well proportioned IMO (too short). It may have been added at the same time as the one at the base of the hilt? Yes, some krisses Panjang attributed to Bangkinang include this V-shaped buntut (see Zonneveld page 64), however these krisses may actually originate from Malaysia...
You will also see some Sumatrese scabbards with V-shaped buntut in the Krisdisk from K.S Jensen in Chapter 9.3 (Krisses from Sumatra), but none in the Malaysia chapter.
Regards

David · 8th December 2014, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Your blade is only 9 inches long while the one shown by Kai is 13 inches long.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Kai has suggested that this keris may have been intended to be a keris bahari. My understanding of those blades is that they are usually around 10 in. long. Kai's example is 13 in. which might be a little long for that form. Mine is a little short for that form (and why i first wondered if it was intended as a patrem. But if you are implying that my blade has been reshaped and shortened because Kai's example is 4 in. longer i would have to respectfully disagree. I see no evidence that this blade was ever any longer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

The horn buntut may not be original as it looks very shiny and not well proportioned IMO (too short). It may have been added at the same time as the one at the base of the hilt? Yes, some krisses Panjang attributed to Bangkinang include this V-shaped buntut (see Zonneveld page 64), however these krisses may actually originate from Malaysia...
You will also see some Sumatrese scabbards with V-shaped buntut in the Krisdisk from K.S Jensen in Chapter 9.3 (Krisses from Sumatra), but none in the Malaysia chapter.

I suspect that the horn buntut was also original to this sheath. While it may be a bit too short in comparison to similar sheaths i believe that the wider stem necessary to accommodate this broader (for it's length) blade may have dictated that. Also, like this blade, not all sheaths are made in outland areas to the specifics of the court.

Jussi M. · 12th December 2014, 09:31 PM

For what it´s worth I actually really like the blade...

For some reason it strikes a chord in me. - Something very "Indian" about it.

Just a subjective opinion, that´s all.

J.

David · 12th December 2014, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jussi M.

For what it´s worth I actually really like the blade...

For some reason it strikes a chord in me. - Something very "Indian" about it.

Just a subjective opinion, that´s all.

J.

Well Jussi, that's what i though too…

David · 7th December 2014, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIO

Hi David,
very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris.

hmmm…well, i appreciate your response Gio, but personally believe that calling this a "keris-like-object" is perhaps taking it a bit far. No, this certainly isn't the work of an empu and does not seem to follow any known pakem. I have entertained the notion that perhaps this was created by a village smith without much previous experience in crafting keris who may have been working from memory without a clear example to copy from. I do realize that for some collectors anything that does not fall into a keraton pakem is not a legitimate keris, but from my perspective if it was created indigenously to serve the cultural purpose of a keris then it is a legitimate keris regardless of a lack of detailed excellence in execution. I tend to reserve the term "keris-like-object" for things like those nasty Bali tourist "keris" with the painted on pamors.
What is for certain is that somebody considered this keris important enough to spend the time and money to dress it well. I have no doubt that this sheath was created specifically for this blade.
Kai, i am attaching a shot up the hole of the hilt as you requested. To answer your question, the horn piece is indeed tightly attached to the ivory.

A. G. Maisey · 7th December 2014, 08:59 PM

I'm with you David:- this is a genuine keris, but it has been produced outside the area of influence of a major cultural center.

Yes, many people hold the opinion that any keris that does not follow a defined pattern that has been set down either by tradition, or in an authorised guide-book (pakem) is outside the guidelines and thus not a keris.

To a degree, this is legitimate point of view, and it is reasonable to apply this standard to those keris which are of superior workmanship of a level that indicates production by a knowledgeable and skilled maker.

However, we often tend to forget that there were vast areas of S.E.Asia that were not under the direct influence of any cultural center, or center of power, and these areas were occupied by ordinary people --- subsistence farmers, fishermen, forest workers. If one of these people needed a keris to be made, they would most likely turn to the nearest smith. If there was no existing keris available for the smith to copy, he had to work from memory. The result is most often a simple keris of rather pedestrian workmanship.

A similar thing happened with dress:- in the palace environment, or urban setting, it was essential that a man's keris should be dressed in the correct fashion, however, in a village setting away from a major center, the rules were (and are) not nearly so strict. If it was necessary to produce a scabbard, or a hilt, the owner himself would often produce these himself. In fact, in days long past, the production of all weapon dress was most probably done by the owner as a display of his skill in carving, the male balance to the female skill of weaving.

Skilled craftsmen lived in towns and cities and were paid for their work, but these skilled craftsmen were not available to everybody.

7th December 2014, 05:08 PM	#1
GIO Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 328	Hi David, very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris. I think that the blade has no pamor, but, before using warangan, you can easily check if you apply a mild acid (lemon juce or acetic acid) on the blade: a faint design of the pamor should appear. Looking forward to see the result on the forum, I hope to read the opinions of other members more experienced than I.

7th December 2014, 06:36 PM	#2
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Hi David, I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows: To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra. The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra. The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent. So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members... Regards

12th December 2014, 09:31 PM	#6
Jussi M. Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 235	For what it´s worth I actually really like the blade... For some reason it strikes a chord in me. - Something very "Indian" about it. Just a subjective opinion, that´s all. J.

7th December 2014, 08:59 PM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	I'm with you David:- this is a genuine keris, but it has been produced outside the area of influence of a major cultural center. Yes, many people hold the opinion that any keris that does not follow a defined pattern that has been set down either by tradition, or in an authorised guide-book (pakem) is outside the guidelines and thus not a keris. To a degree, this is legitimate point of view, and it is reasonable to apply this standard to those keris which are of superior workmanship of a level that indicates production by a knowledgeable and skilled maker. However, we often tend to forget that there were vast areas of S.E.Asia that were not under the direct influence of any cultural center, or center of power, and these areas were occupied by ordinary people --- subsistence farmers, fishermen, forest workers. If one of these people needed a keris to be made, they would most likely turn to the nearest smith. If there was no existing keris available for the smith to copy, he had to work from memory. The result is most often a simple keris of rather pedestrian workmanship. A similar thing happened with dress:- in the palace environment, or urban setting, it was essential that a man's keris should be dressed in the correct fashion, however, in a village setting away from a major center, the rules were (and are) not nearly so strict. If it was necessary to produce a scabbard, or a hilt, the owner himself would often produce these himself. In fact, in days long past, the production of all weapon dress was most probably done by the owner as a display of his skill in carving, the male balance to the female skill of weaving. Skilled craftsmen lived in towns and cities and were paid for their work, but these skilled craftsmen were not available to everybody.