ANTIQUE 16th C OLD MADURA KERIS ??????

[Mark]

The forum policy is to not discuss values/prices on the open boards. Sometimes a comment such as "what a steal!" or "way over-priced!" does slip by, but we prefer that more specific opinions on value not be posted.

However, I expect that your question can, and will, be answered via e-mail or PM. Anyone should feel free to do so.

Mark

[Henk]

I don't want to get suspended, so I won't answer this question in public.

Mark is completely right. Rule number one: discuss the weapons not the value.

Katana, I will sent you a PM.

[katana]

I apologise, I thought it was ok to talk in terms of a 'good' price, 'bad' price etc ...as long as monetary values were not used. I stand corrected .

I am relatively new to collecting and, it is very difficult to know whether or not you are paying a reasonable amount for items you wish to add to your collection. This is why I asked about value, so I have some idea for future purchases.

[doecon]

Under a close up from the tip.

And here direct links to the other (original pictures)

http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600501.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600502.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600503.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600504.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600505.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600506.jpg
http://67.59.155.243/images/doecon/k0600507.jpg

On picture 4,6,7 you can clearly see the pamor. Its hard to give a simple answer about establishing age, any indication about age is a guess. But then again, some guesses are more better then others.

Good guidelines are; color, wear around the edges, number of pamor layers, traces of grains in metal, the way the layers are bend etc etc. As soon as you think you know the period, compare it with reliable dated keris (maybe there is one in a museum near you. In the exemple above you'll probably end up in the 16th century..but then again that my guess

Sheath, hilt ect.. are of course more recent. Its very hard to find even a 19th century keris with original sheath, handle, mendak etc (I have some, will share them later).

One reason is obvious (and mentioned above), its hard to keep a piece of 200 year old wood in good condition in the tropics.

The second reason is that keris blade are (locally) seen as valuable, but the rest is not (well not always). Most of the "new" owners simply want to change the "clothes" of their old blade. Put on a brand new sheath with shiny new brass cover is still seen as a good thing. You also dont wear the same clothes all the time, right ? The old ones sometimes is simply thrown away (trust me I see it happen a lot).

To Illustrate: I was on a market in Solo, few months ago. Found a nice old blade, in a good 19th century cover. Seller wanted to do me a favor and change the old cover with a brand new, for free even...He really had difficulty to understand why I wanted to keep the old one. In the end I left the market with an old blade in a flashy new sheath, meanwhile carying the old cover in a plastic with me of course

I can't comment on the "catch", and I dont see any reason I should But I'm sure the new owner will be happy with his new collection addition.

[nechesh]

Hhhhmmm.....well, thanks for the pics Doecon. Unfortunately, they still aren't very good (blurry, dark) and i certainly wouldn't try to judge age from them. There does seem to be a certain amount of the type of pitting i would expect to see on artificially aged blades, but i wouldn't bet the farm that there is no real age to it. I do suspect that it is, indeed, a Madurese blade and therefore correctly, if poorly, dressed
I do find you comments on dress to be a bit off the mark. Dress is very highly regarded in Indonesian cultures and the really nice and reverred types of woods that are/were used in high quailty dress are becoming rarer and rare. Rare valuable materials are often used such as ivory which are held in very high esteem. The idea that a new owner would automatically trade out a fine quality dress for a shiny new one if that dress is in good condition just don't sound right to me at all. It would be disrespectful to the blade to leave it in damaged dress, but otherwise it would not just merely be tossed away for new.
Anyway, this is a fairly low quality blade (old or not) in a low quality dress. I would still say the new owner did alright if this is the type of keris he was looking to add to his collection. I do wonder, however, if it is advisible for you as the seller to appear on this forum to defend your description of this keris (and future auctions if they are discussed here). If there are factual discrepancies in your listings and you chose to defend them here i can assure you that the level of expertise on this forum here WILL find them and expose them. You may not find that in your best interest.

[doecon]

Thanks for your advice, looking forward meeting some expertise, might even learn something along the way.

I do however think you misunderstood the aim of my answer. I’m not defending anything, but I do think its important to show additional material so everybody can make up his own mind.

About the dress thing, yes of course we all understand people don’t throw their Ivory or golden dresses (they sell them). As I mentioned its quite common (here) to change an old dress for a new one, to illustrate that most blades around, don’t come with their “original” sheath. You should have a look in Java, you’ll be surprised to see a good amount of small businesses creating new sheaths, handles and pendok. Mostly for the local market. It’s a cultural thing. We (westerners) see the half rotten sheath as a valuable antique, here (java) they mostly don’t.

Regarding the possibility of keris being fake, I do have some things to say. It takes a lot of prejudice to assume that a (any) 15th, 16th , 17th year old keris is beforehand, probably a fake. Especially when it concerns a “common” keris. Fact is that there is still plenty (luckily) of old blades available in Indonesia. It simply doesn’t make sense to “copy” or fake a 16th century blade, when there is enough supply of the original. Or when the model copied is not in high demand.

I do however get worried myself about the continuous number of sellers claiming centuries of ages for obvious new blades. To me this doesn’t make sense. A good old keris is a good old one, a good new keris is a good new one…

[nechesh]

Originally Posted by doecon

Thanks for your advice, looking forward meeting some expertise, might even learn something along the way.

I do however think you misunderstood the aim of my answer. I’m not defending anything, but I do think its important to show additional material so everybody can make up his own mind.

About the dress thing, yes of course we all understand people don’t throw their Ivory or golden dresses (they sell them). As I mentioned its quite common (here) to change an old dress for a new one, to illustrate that most blades around, don’t come with their “original” sheath. You should have a look in Java, you’ll be surprised to see a good amount of small businesses creating new sheaths, handles and pendok. Mostly for the local market. It’s a cultural thing. We (westerners) see the half rotten sheath as a valuable antique, here (java) they mostly don’t.

Regarding the possibility of keris being fake, I do have some things to say. It takes a lot of prejudice to assume that a (any) 15th, 16th , 17th year old keris is beforehand, probably a fake. Especially when it concerns a “common” keris. Fact is that there is still plenty (luckily) of old blades available in Indonesia. It simply doesn’t make sense to “copy” or fake a 16th century blade, when there is enough supply of the original. Or when the model copied is not in high demand.

I do however get worried myself about the continuous number of sellers claiming centuries of ages for obvious new blades. To me this doesn’t make sense. A good old keris is a good old one, a good new keris is a good new one…

Doecon, just to be clear, i was not assuming that this keris was a fake. I merely stated that the pics weren't very good and that the pitting looked suspicious to me. After further consideration and talk with other forumites i have come more to the conclusion that the pitting is just due to mistreatment over the years.
You are certainly right to say that " A good old keris is a good old one, a good new keris is a good new one…", however, i would definitely argue if you were to state that there are plenty of "good" old blades still available in Jawa. So of course it makes sense to copy 16thC blades if you make high quality ones. The blade in question is certainly not a high quality keris at all. You can probably find blades like this pretty cheap in Jawa.
As to dress, i firstly wouldn't make any assumption abot what "we (westerners) value. Many of us here understand the "cultural thing" and keep our collections accordingly. If i recieve a keris with damaged parts i replace them. If the blade needs a re-etching and staining, i do it , as do others on this forum. And it is not just ivory and gold dress which is highly valued and appreciated in Indonesia, but many types of highly prized woods. High levels of carving are also to be prized and appreciated. So, of course, anyone with a cultural understanding would not allow their keris to remain in a half rotten sheath. But in Indonesia don't just automatically change out a perfectly good sheath when they recieve an old keris, which is what you implied when you wrote:
"Most of the "new" owners simply want to change the "clothes" of their old blade. Put on a brand new sheath with shiny new brass cover is still seen as a good thing. You also dont wear the same clothes all the time, right ? The old ones sometimes is simply thrown away (trust me I see it happen a lot)."
But this is not the same as replacing an old worn out dress. I would not, however, be at all surprised at the number of small mranggi businesses in Jawa making new dress for old blades.

[doecon]

It seems that we almost agree on something
Regarding the “quality” of the old blades, it all depends on what you’re looking for. But as far as I know there is no rational way to measure the “quality” of an old blade.

Lot depends indeed how a keris was kept, how it survived the tests of aging or maybe even the quality of the metals used .(although mpu’s centuries ago simply didn’t have “good” metals (fine grains) and needed to work in very primitive conditions).

But probably more important, how would the spiritual and creative part of an Mpu be measured? No doubt that there have been master (keraton) MpuMpu who’s work is appreciated still by many..But how about the work from their students, followers or good amateurs from a village nearby?

To clarify (and for the clarity of not getting banned) I will use a simple analogue with paintings; Conditions of old oil paintings do effect their value, but they hardly do when the creator was considered a master. On the other side there is however masterpainter (Jeroem Bosch for example) who created art in a very primitive way. If we would place such an artist in the wrong timeframe (lets say he would have lived in the 19th C), his works would have been near worthless. Same probably counts for Da Vinci and others.
On top of this, there has been tons of good painters that never were considered “masters”, or worse….How about the nice old paintings without a sign!

To conclude, the keris isn’t a “Da Vinci”, but as an old ethnological creation it is an interesting object. Regarding the “painter”, I think its clearly made by someone who was skilled enough to create a keris that would maintain its proportions (and strength btw) after hundreds of years. Maybe not a “master”, but who knows…Clearly he (or she) left the work unsigned. And yes this keris could use a bath

I’m off now, finding some of those plenty cheap old blades again and visit the mranggi for some new dresses.
Cu