Two 17th century Keris at the Power and Fashion Exhibition in Dresden

Bjorn · 8th June 2017, 08:52 PM

I agree with David. The painting of the sheath looks very Chinese. The same style also exists in Japan, imported from China, but considering the large amount of ethnic Chinese and peranakan in Indonesia, Chinese influence seems more likely.

Both blades are nice, but I love the Sumbawa one. The blade itself strikes me as Javanese also, but perhaps there were Javanese smiths at the royal courts of Sumbawa at one point? Or it could have been a gift to cement the relationship between ruler and vassal. I forget whether Sumbawa was a vassal state to Mojohapit.

Alan, out of curiosity, what are the reasons the Dresden museum does not want these photos made public?

kai · 8th June 2017, 09:55 PM

Bima and some other kingdoms/regencies on Sumbawa were tightly connected to Gowa; their pusaka blades include several gifts from Gowa rulers.

Actually, the fittings of the keris shown first is distinctly Sulawesi Selantan, possibly a style that predates the arrival of Islam on Sulawesi. The gorgeous blade is a rare example of a quality kinatah blade with complex pamor!

The blade may be a gift from East Jawa.

Regards,
Kai

drdavid · 8th June 2017, 11:20 PM

Thank you very much Tatyana, having images of pieces like these with good provenance is very useful. I would vote Chinese over Japanese, the peacock is not a common motif in Japan.
DrDavid

A. G. Maisey · 9th June 2017, 01:13 AM

What I will write here is from memory, I do not have time to check references at the moment.

In respect of the Chinese style ornamentation, I think that was actually done in Europe, possibly Germany, or maybe Vienna?

In any case, it is not original ornamentation out of the East. If Gustav tunes into this thread, he will be able to expand on this.

I do have notes on everything I handled, but those notes are targetted at specific things that I was looking at and for, they are not comprehensive notes. I had one day to examine and photograph a very large number of keris, in fact I had less than a day because I lost time through a mixup with meeting the curator. I used a Canon S95 for the photos, natural light through a window, no bounce boards, no tripods. I did record photos purely for research.

I do not recall handling the Bugis keris. I do recall that I missed handling, I think, two of the Dresden holdings, they were on display in the Rustkammer at the time of my visit, Maybe that gold Bugis keris was there.

Edit

The keris with Oriental ( Chinese in style but probably influenced by Japanese examples used for study by Schnell) ornamentation is to be found on P.13, Chapter 5 of "Keris Disc", it is attributable to the workshop of Martin Schnell, Dresden, circa 1720.

Schnell studied Japanese lacquer work in the possession of Augustus II (1670-1733), the lacquer work on this scabbard has been applied over original Javanese red laquer work. This new lacquer work was probably carried out for Augustus II.

The original hilt on this keris was gold, it was sold by Augustus II, probably after the Seven Years War (I was advised after the Thirty Years War, but that War ended in 1648 and Augustus II was born in 1670).

The hilt now fitted to this keris was carved in Dresden as a replacement and has an integral mendak, it is noted in records from 1757.

The sirah cecak is Mojopahit form, but overall, other characteristics indicate that the keris itself is of Mataram form, but most likely made in East Jawa.

This keris is probably not original to the wrongko.

David · 9th June 2017, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I do not recall handling the Bugis keris. I do recall that I missed handling, I think, two of the Dresden holdings, they were on display in the Rustkammer at the time of my visit, Maybe that gold Bugis keris was there.

Given what appear to be Gowa influences (or perhaps even from there) would it be correct to refer to this as a Bugis keris. I thought Gowa was Makassarese people.
Also wondering if this is the same keris. Seems so.

Paul Duffy · 9th June 2017, 02:12 AM

May I add my thanks also for sharing this interesting 17th century piece.

I recently saw some keris in Paris at the La Musee de L'Armee, which are also described as 17th century pieces. I'll try to post a photo, but I'd be interested in any comments on these keris

rasdan · 9th June 2017, 03:28 AM

Thank you very much for posting these pictures, Tatyana. I really appreciate it.

kai · 9th June 2017, 02:18 PM

Hello Alan,

Thanks a lot for your added notes on the keris with sunggingan scabbard!

Quote:

The sirah cecak is Mojopahit form, but overall, other characteristics indicate that the keris itself is of Mataram form, but most likely made in East Jawa.

Do you believe this to originate from an area in East Jawa which was under control (or strong influence) of (early?) Mataram rather than a peripheral politi like Blambangan?

Regards,
Kai

David · 9th June 2017, 03:36 PM

Thanks Kai. Man, i now wish i had kept up with my high school German, but if you don't use it, you lose it i'm afraid.
But i agree that the detailed photographs of some of these old examples make it worth reviewing for the visual aspects alone.

Bjorn · 9th June 2017, 11:56 PM

I dislike reading in German, but I know I'll be able to understand a lot of it if I put my mind to it. Considering the subject matter, I'll save the pdf for future study.

A. G. Maisey · 10th June 2017, 12:26 AM

Kai,

your post #19:- no, not Blambangan

your post #18:-
I know there is a tendency amongst collectors in the Western World to classify keris in accordance with Western patterns of thought, but this does not work if we are trying to apply a classification system that has its roots in Central Javanese aristocratic mores.

To a traditionally orientated Javanese aristocrat, even today, the idea of "Jawa" means the "Land of Jawa", not the "Island of Jawa". All within the Land of Jawa is worthwhile and legitimate, all outside the Land of Jawa is --- oh well, isn't it a pity? In other words, not relevant, doesn't count.

So a Western based collector will look at a blade and think in terms of the Island of Jawa, or maybe he won't even focus on the blade, he'll take broad overall look at the entire keris and form an opinion that gives more or less equal weight to all parts of the entire keris.

However, the Surakarta based ahli keris will look at only the blade, and focus on tiny, seemingly inconsequential details. He will test the "tanting" (percieved weight and balance), he will look at it in all dimensions, he will flick it with his finger-nail, he will stroke it between thumb and index-finger, if possible he will give very close attention to the pesi and the procedure that has been used to fix the gonjo. Possibly he may ask to borrow the keris for a few days, in order to meditate with it, or sleep with it. If he gives an opinion he will be able to substantiate that opinion. Sometimes he will give no opinion, or qualify his opinion.

This is a very serious matter when it is applied at the highest level, because the ahli keris might be asked to provide a certificate over his signature, and his reputation can then rest on that opinion. Opinions from the top people do not come free. It is not a game, it is a profession, and the opinion is paid for. Depending on the value of the appraised keris, that payment can be very substantial.

To the Surakarta ahli keris, it is not a matter of "is it Javanese?", it is a matter of "my opinion in respect of point of origin in terms time and geographic location, expressed in the terms of the Surakarta keris belief system".

In other words:- "tangguh".

Once the tangguh is established, then he will be able to give an opinion as to whether the keris is from the Land of Jawa, or not. The process is the reverse of the way in which a Western based collector will consider the matter.

Now, Kai, I know a little bit about how to classify keris blades. I was taught by perhaps the most respected Surakarta ahli keris in post WWII Jawa. I try to classify in accordance with what I was taught.

I cannot give a proper opinion from an image on a computer screen. The best I can do is to give a very qualified opinion.

In my opinion, and based upon what I believe I can see, the keris shown in post #1 of this thread is stylistically Javanese, where "Javanese" is to be understood as "Island of Jawa". It appears to display characteristics that do not permit an opinion to be given as to a precise geographic point of origin. The pawakan (overall visual impression) tends towards Banten, but other characteristics tend towards East Jawa. I am not able to form an opinion on where it might have been made. To my mind, there is no certainty at all as to geographic point of origin.

9th June 2017, 01:13 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	What I will write here is from memory, I do not have time to check references at the moment. In respect of the Chinese style ornamentation, I think that was actually done in Europe, possibly Germany, or maybe Vienna? In any case, it is not original ornamentation out of the East. If Gustav tunes into this thread, he will be able to expand on this. I do have notes on everything I handled, but those notes are targetted at specific things that I was looking at and for, they are not comprehensive notes. I had one day to examine and photograph a very large number of keris, in fact I had less than a day because I lost time through a mixup with meeting the curator. I used a Canon S95 for the photos, natural light through a window, no bounce boards, no tripods. I did record photos purely for research. I do not recall handling the Bugis keris. I do recall that I missed handling, I think, two of the Dresden holdings, they were on display in the Rustkammer at the time of my visit, Maybe that gold Bugis keris was there. Edit The keris with Oriental ( Chinese in style but probably influenced by Japanese examples used for study by Schnell) ornamentation is to be found on P.13, Chapter 5 of "Keris Disc", it is attributable to the workshop of Martin Schnell, Dresden, circa 1720. Schnell studied Japanese lacquer work in the possession of Augustus II (1670-1733), the lacquer work on this scabbard has been applied over original Javanese red laquer work. This new lacquer work was probably carried out for Augustus II. The original hilt on this keris was gold, it was sold by Augustus II, probably after the Seven Years War (I was advised after the Thirty Years War, but that War ended in 1648 and Augustus II was born in 1670). The hilt now fitted to this keris was carved in Dresden as a replacement and has an integral mendak, it is noted in records from 1757. The sirah cecak is Mojopahit form, but overall, other characteristics indicate that the keris itself is of Mataram form, but most likely made in East Jawa. This keris is probably not original to the wrongko. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 9th June 2017 at 07:35 AM.

8th June 2017, 08:52 PM	#1
Bjorn Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 188	I agree with David. The painting of the sheath looks very Chinese. The same style also exists in Japan, imported from China, but considering the large amount of ethnic Chinese and peranakan in Indonesia, Chinese influence seems more likely. Both blades are nice, but I love the Sumbawa one. The blade itself strikes me as Javanese also, but perhaps there were Javanese smiths at the royal courts of Sumbawa at one point? Or it could have been a gift to cement the relationship between ruler and vassal. I forget whether Sumbawa was a vassal state to Mojohapit. Alan, out of curiosity, what are the reasons the Dresden museum does not want these photos made public?

8th June 2017, 09:55 PM	#2
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	Bima and some other kingdoms/regencies on Sumbawa were tightly connected to Gowa; their pusaka blades include several gifts from Gowa rulers. Actually, the fittings of the keris shown first is distinctly Sulawesi Selantan, possibly a style that predates the arrival of Islam on Sulawesi. The gorgeous blade is a rare example of a quality kinatah blade with complex pamor! The blade may be a gift from East Jawa. Regards, Kai

8th June 2017, 11:20 PM	#3
drdavid Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 372	Thank you very much Tatyana, having images of pieces like these with good provenance is very useful. I would vote Chinese over Japanese, the peacock is not a common motif in Japan. DrDavid

9th June 2017, 02:12 AM	#6
Paul Duffy Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 31	May I add my thanks also for sharing this interesting 17th century piece. I recently saw some keris in Paris at the La Musee de L'Armee, which are also described as 17th century pieces. I'll try to post a photo, but I'd be interested in any comments on these keris

9th June 2017, 03:28 AM	#7
rasdan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Kuala Lumpur Posts: 368	Thank you very much for posting these pictures, Tatyana. I really appreciate it.

9th June 2017, 03:36 PM	#9
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	Thanks Kai. Man, i now wish i had kept up with my high school German, but if you don't use it, you lose it i'm afraid. But i agree that the detailed photographs of some of these old examples make it worth reviewing for the visual aspects alone.

9th June 2017, 11:56 PM	#10
Bjorn Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 188	I dislike reading in German, but I know I'll be able to understand a lot of it if I put my mind to it. Considering the subject matter, I'll save the pdf for future study.

10th June 2017, 12:26 AM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Kai, your post #19:- no, not Blambangan your post #18:- I know there is a tendency amongst collectors in the Western World to classify keris in accordance with Western patterns of thought, but this does not work if we are trying to apply a classification system that has its roots in Central Javanese aristocratic mores. To a traditionally orientated Javanese aristocrat, even today, the idea of "Jawa" means the "Land of Jawa", not the "Island of Jawa". All within the Land of Jawa is worthwhile and legitimate, all outside the Land of Jawa is --- oh well, isn't it a pity? In other words, not relevant, doesn't count. So a Western based collector will look at a blade and think in terms of the Island of Jawa, or maybe he won't even focus on the blade, he'll take broad overall look at the entire keris and form an opinion that gives more or less equal weight to all parts of the entire keris. However, the Surakarta based ahli keris will look at only the blade, and focus on tiny, seemingly inconsequential details. He will test the "tanting" (percieved weight and balance), he will look at it in all dimensions, he will flick it with his finger-nail, he will stroke it between thumb and index-finger, if possible he will give very close attention to the pesi and the procedure that has been used to fix the gonjo. Possibly he may ask to borrow the keris for a few days, in order to meditate with it, or sleep with it. If he gives an opinion he will be able to substantiate that opinion. Sometimes he will give no opinion, or qualify his opinion. This is a very serious matter when it is applied at the highest level, because the ahli keris might be asked to provide a certificate over his signature, and his reputation can then rest on that opinion. Opinions from the top people do not come free. It is not a game, it is a profession, and the opinion is paid for. Depending on the value of the appraised keris, that payment can be very substantial. To the Surakarta ahli keris, it is not a matter of "is it Javanese?", it is a matter of "my opinion in respect of point of origin in terms time and geographic location, expressed in the terms of the Surakarta keris belief system". In other words:- "tangguh". Once the tangguh is established, then he will be able to give an opinion as to whether the keris is from the Land of Jawa, or not. The process is the reverse of the way in which a Western based collector will consider the matter. Now, Kai, I know a little bit about how to classify keris blades. I was taught by perhaps the most respected Surakarta ahli keris in post WWII Jawa. I try to classify in accordance with what I was taught. I cannot give a proper opinion from an image on a computer screen. The best I can do is to give a very qualified opinion. In my opinion, and based upon what I believe I can see, the keris shown in post #1 of this thread is stylistically Javanese, where "Javanese" is to be understood as "Island of Jawa". It appears to display characteristics that do not permit an opinion to be given as to a precise geographic point of origin. The pawakan (overall visual impression) tends towards Banten, but other characteristics tend towards East Jawa. I am not able to form an opinion on where it might have been made. To my mind, there is no certainty at all as to geographic point of origin.