Javanese keris for comment

Adni Aljunied · 13th January 2005, 01:40 AM

Just to share as a comparison, a recently made keris by Empu Jeno Harumbrodjo.

nechesh · 13th January 2005, 02:42 AM

That is sweet!

Empu Djeno is one on the last true empus left. I don't know enough to know if he has been training his sons or anyone. He is getting on and years and won't be with us forever. Let us hope he passes his skill and knowledge on.

BluErf · 13th January 2005, 09:23 AM

Ok, since we are talking about Madura Muda pieces, here's one more. They have their attractions, but the main problem with them is that they do not conform totally to traditions. Its like a hotch-potch keris pulling together bits and pieces from various origins and putting it together. Its like a stitched-together chimera. I suppose that puts off collectors with a more traditionalist preference. This piece for example, has a dapur with Solo origins (I believe), a Madurese gayaman sheath which was not originally made for it, but refitted well enough. The mendak is not Madurese in style, for sure. The ukiran is Madurese, and with some age, but this style is most commonly found on Madurese or E Javanese ladrang sheaths. There you have it -- the cons, but then, take a step back and look at the keris for what it is.

I think the present-day Madura smiths had been concentrating on pamor in the past. Only recently have they put in more efforts into the dapur. But still, their kerises have the 'stiff' look. Also, because time and money features heavily in their production, 'shortcuts' are taken, and they show, like pamor lines that can go broken half-way through the blade. With a traditionally-made keris, I believe this would not happen. And because time spent is limited, the smith does not have time to comtemplate the really minute details and lines that makes the keris truly graceful. But I think they are slowly picking it up. Who knows, maybe they are reading this forum right now and taking down all that we are saying.

tom hyle · 13th January 2005, 12:04 PM

There's still too much English in the posts; they can't understand them yet.....

empu kumis · 13th January 2005, 07:36 PM

Hi Kerislovers,

yeah, the pictures becomming better and better. Thanks to Ria and Blue i like to see that, here you still can differentiate between the iron and pamorlayers. Both pamor are well executed and the surface is not etched to much. Only about 18 layers. with nice contrast and no pamorfree patches. Its a pamor of the order nginden and the name of this pamor PB X. The lower part just above the sor-soran seems to me to small and the greneng are not nice. But anyway if somebody collecting new Kerisses on this standard i`m happy. Please go on. The garapan is also much better but there is still a lot to improve.

Blues keris is nice but also not perfect ( to my experience i always say under 10,000 blades, there is one good blade and i can just sorry for my high standards) i always say there is blade with sheet seems to me very high and the tlamaan (aereal of connection between ganja and blade) is bend in the wrong direction. The outer lis of the tikel alis should not meet with the tampingan and the janur should be more bended. The lambe gajah ahd the jalen is nice too but the buntut and greneng to wide. The sogokan could bee better. The bangkekan is ok but the waduk of the blade is to close to the point. The wrangka seems nice but i would prefer a pendok. The wrangka seems to be new but nice and the handle ? old ?.

The Madurese pande`s has a long break of almost 20 years and its really time their quality improves.

Several month or weeks ago there has been a Megantaro close to this style.

But i`m not sure who made them. Somebody remember ?
Has somebody seen the work of Sukoyo from Surabaya ?

For some time i haven`t been in Madura but i see it will be important to go there again. My next voyage will be soon (hopefully !) and i will have stopover in Singapore wether incoming or on the way back Europe. So i hope to see you in Singapore. For sure I wiil give you a notice by email.

Probably the blade attributed to Ki Jeno is not made by himself but from his pupils. Ki Jeno has already given over to his adopted son. But its not a masterpiece because of the proportions of the blades lenght and ganja. To me the gandik is to short and the buntut to long. But most disturbing are the pamorfree pachtes on the sor-soran and on the wilah. Overall i would say i can`t feel the personalty of this blade. He don`t speak to me.

About the pudak sategal normally sticking two thorns out of the sharpnes and to my knowledge if they look like yours (picture keris Malaysia) has the name pudak sategal bungkem, so far i remember. Lis-lisan is the frame between the landep and the kruwingan. Between you have the gusen. In your picture the pudak sategal and the lis-lisan are connected just where the sor-soran is ending.

Empu Kumis

BluErf · 16th January 2005, 03:21 AM

Just read through some of the posts more carefully and I thought I should say some more things:

To Nechesh -- sorry for not answering your question when you asked. I was starting to question my own understanding of the pudak setegal at that point in time, so I did not want to say anything potentially wrong.

To Empu Kumis -- the gang (Paul, Dave, Adni and myself) here in Singapore looks forward to seeing you again, and I'm sure we have many things to discuss over coffee or dinner.

nechesh · 16th January 2005, 05:45 AM

No Problem Blu.

It wasn't omly directed at you. There were a few others who could have answered as well. So i guess what i currently understand after E.K.s explanation is that it is NOT necessary for this feature to pertrude from the blade profile. I guess i had assumed this was necessary because in all the diagrams that DO show this feature it always does stick out.

Kiai Carita · 29th April 2005, 03:48 PM

All the new keris posted on this thread seem to be good ones to me. At least they are not trying to look old. I say that they are honest keris because they have the tungkakan where the edge of the wilah rests on the ganja it is shaped like a heel (tungkak). The tungkakan seems to have been invented in Solo in the late 19'th century after the Java War (1830). However the first photograph appeared to have a ganja that did not quite fit, this is almost always a sign of an inferior smith.

Salam Keris

nechesh · 13th January 2005, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom hyle

There's still too much English in the posts; they can't understand them yet.....

LOL! Well, that made me spit my coffee!

Haven't you received your English/Keris dictionary yet?
Be patient, i'm sure THEY will send you one.

Paul de Souza · 14th January 2005, 10:37 AM

Hello All,

Since we are on the topic of Blarak Nigirid, I have what I think is an old piece. The keris, while it has a Madura hilt, comes in a Malay sarong of good fit. The sarong shows age and good patina. I am not sure if it is a Peninsular/Riau/Bugis or Javanese blade. I took some pictures as best I could and you can see that the Blarak Nigirid pamor does not reach the edge - showing the steel core? or is it just wear? It will be nice to hear your comments on this enigma. I wonder how old it is. Empu Kumis - will be grateful for your comments.

BluErf · 14th January 2005, 12:29 PM

Just some thoughts: The dapur does not look like what the Madurese smiths usually make -- notice the way the upper half of the blade tapers to a narrow sharp point.

I have also seen an old bugis blade from the collection of our vey own Dave Henkel with very similar pamor. The corrosion is also very similar. The fact that the blade is so corroded yet the metal surface is still generally intact (i.e. no cracks or forging flaws showing) says a lot about the quality of the metal and the good fusion between the pamor and the steel core.

I am inclined to think this is an old blade.

13th January 2005, 01:40 AM	#1
Adni Aljunied Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: singapore Posts: 13	Just to share as a comparison, a recently made keris by Empu Jeno Harumbrodjo. Attached Images

13th January 2005, 09:23 AM	#3
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Ok, since we are talking about Madura Muda pieces, here's one more. They have their attractions, but the main problem with them is that they do not conform totally to traditions. Its like a hotch-potch keris pulling together bits and pieces from various origins and putting it together. Its like a stitched-together chimera. I suppose that puts off collectors with a more traditionalist preference. This piece for example, has a dapur with Solo origins (I believe), a Madurese gayaman sheath which was not originally made for it, but refitted well enough. The mendak is not Madurese in style, for sure. The ukiran is Madurese, and with some age, but this style is most commonly found on Madurese or E Javanese ladrang sheaths. There you have it -- the cons, but then, take a step back and look at the keris for what it is. I think the present-day Madura smiths had been concentrating on pamor in the past. Only recently have they put in more efforts into the dapur. But still, their kerises have the 'stiff' look. Also, because time and money features heavily in their production, 'shortcuts' are taken, and they show, like pamor lines that can go broken half-way through the blade. With a traditionally-made keris, I believe this would not happen. And because time spent is limited, the smith does not have time to comtemplate the really minute details and lines that makes the keris truly graceful. But I think they are slowly picking it up. Who knows, maybe they are reading this forum right now and taking down all that we are saying. Attached Images

29th April 2005, 03:48 PM	#8
Kiai Carita Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 91	Honestly New Keris All the new keris posted on this thread seem to be good ones to me. At least they are not trying to look old. I say that they are honest keris because they have the tungkakan where the edge of the wilah rests on the ganja it is shaped like a heel (tungkak). The tungkakan seems to have been invented in Solo in the late 19'th century after the Java War (1830). However the first photograph appeared to have a ganja that did not quite fit, this is almost always a sign of an inferior smith. Salam Keris

14th January 2005, 10:37 AM	#10
Paul de Souza Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 66	Hello All, Since we are on the topic of Blarak Nigirid, I have what I think is an old piece. The keris, while it has a Madura hilt, comes in a Malay sarong of good fit. The sarong shows age and good patina. I am not sure if it is a Peninsular/Riau/Bugis or Javanese blade. I took some pictures as best I could and you can see that the Blarak Nigirid pamor does not reach the edge - showing the steel core? or is it just wear? It will be nice to hear your comments on this enigma. I wonder how old it is. Empu Kumis - will be grateful for your comments. Attached Images

13th January 2005, 02:42 AM	#2
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	That is sweet! Empu Djeno is one on the last true empus left. I don't know enough to know if he has been training his sons or anyone. He is getting on and years and won't be with us forever. Let us hope he passes his skill and knowledge on.

13th January 2005, 12:04 PM	#4
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	There's still too much English in the posts; they can't understand them yet.....

13th January 2005, 07:36 PM	#5
empu kumis Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 17	Hi Kerislovers, yeah, the pictures becomming better and better. Thanks to Ria and Blue i like to see that, here you still can differentiate between the iron and pamorlayers. Both pamor are well executed and the surface is not etched to much. Only about 18 layers. with nice contrast and no pamorfree patches. Its a pamor of the order nginden and the name of this pamor PB X. The lower part just above the sor-soran seems to me to small and the greneng are not nice. But anyway if somebody collecting new Kerisses on this standard i`m happy. Please go on. The garapan is also much better but there is still a lot to improve. Blues keris is nice but also not perfect ( to my experience i always say under 10,000 blades, there is one good blade and i can just sorry for my high standards) i always say there is blade with sheet seems to me very high and the tlamaan (aereal of connection between ganja and blade) is bend in the wrong direction. The outer lis of the tikel alis should not meet with the tampingan and the janur should be more bended. The lambe gajah ahd the jalen is nice too but the buntut and greneng to wide. The sogokan could bee better. The bangkekan is ok but the waduk of the blade is to close to the point. The wrangka seems nice but i would prefer a pendok. The wrangka seems to be new but nice and the handle ? old ?. The Madurese pande`s has a long break of almost 20 years and its really time their quality improves. Several month or weeks ago there has been a Megantaro close to this style. But i`m not sure who made them. Somebody remember ? Has somebody seen the work of Sukoyo from Surabaya ? For some time i haven`t been in Madura but i see it will be important to go there again. My next voyage will be soon (hopefully !) and i will have stopover in Singapore wether incoming or on the way back Europe. So i hope to see you in Singapore. For sure I wiil give you a notice by email. Probably the blade attributed to Ki Jeno is not made by himself but from his pupils. Ki Jeno has already given over to his adopted son. But its not a masterpiece because of the proportions of the blades lenght and ganja. To me the gandik is to short and the buntut to long. But most disturbing are the pamorfree pachtes on the sor-soran and on the wilah. Overall i would say i can`t feel the personalty of this blade. He don`t speak to me. About the pudak sategal normally sticking two thorns out of the sharpnes and to my knowledge if they look like yours (picture keris Malaysia) has the name pudak sategal bungkem, so far i remember. Lis-lisan is the frame between the landep and the kruwingan. Between you have the gusen. In your picture the pudak sategal and the lis-lisan are connected just where the sor-soran is ending. Empu Kumis

16th January 2005, 03:21 AM	#6
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Just read through some of the posts more carefully and I thought I should say some more things: To Nechesh -- sorry for not answering your question when you asked. I was starting to question my own understanding of the pudak setegal at that point in time, so I did not want to say anything potentially wrong. To Empu Kumis -- the gang (Paul, Dave, Adni and myself) here in Singapore looks forward to seeing you again, and I'm sure we have many things to discuss over coffee or dinner.

16th January 2005, 05:45 AM	#7
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	No Problem Blu. It wasn't omly directed at you. There were a few others who could have answered as well. So i guess what i currently understand after E.K.s explanation is that it is NOT necessary for this feature to pertrude from the blade profile. I guess i had assumed this was necessary because in all the diagrams that DO show this feature it always does stick out.

14th January 2005, 12:29 PM	#11
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Just some thoughts: The dapur does not look like what the Madurese smiths usually make -- notice the way the upper half of the blade tapers to a narrow sharp point. I have also seen an old bugis blade from the collection of our vey own Dave Henkel with very similar pamor. The corrosion is also very similar. The fact that the blade is so corroded yet the metal surface is still generally intact (i.e. no cracks or forging flaws showing) says a lot about the quality of the metal and the good fusion between the pamor and the steel core. I am inclined to think this is an old blade.