Opinions on Javanese Keris

Paul B. · 1st February 2020, 09:47 PM

Yes indeed the first one and the line seems so 'perfect' and the kinatah work a cover-up. Of course I can be mistaken.

A. G. Maisey · 1st February 2020, 10:55 PM

Paul, I believe that this is a separate gonjo, but very probably not the original gonjo. I think I expressed the opinion earlier that I believe this keris is a robahan, something that has been changed to make it more saleable.

If this keris were to be gonjo iras we could expect to see the lines of pamor running into the gonjo, but they do not. The gonjo is different material from the body of the keris.

The overall form of the keris is peculiar, the gonjo is not any type of acceptable form, the kinatah work is recent, by "recent" I do not mean last week, I mean much more recent than the body of the keris. This kinatah work could well be 80 or 100 years old, equally, it could be 1990's. The one thing I am certain of is that it is not original work.

1st February 2020, 09:47 PM	#1
Paul B. Member Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 205	Yes indeed the first one and the line seems so 'perfect' and the kinatah work a cover-up. Of course I can be mistaken.

1st February 2020, 10:55 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Paul, I believe that this is a separate gonjo, but very probably not the original gonjo. I think I expressed the opinion earlier that I believe this keris is a robahan, something that has been changed to make it more saleable. If this keris were to be gonjo iras we could expect to see the lines of pamor running into the gonjo, but they do not. The gonjo is different material from the body of the keris. The overall form of the keris is peculiar, the gonjo is not any type of acceptable form, the kinatah work is recent, by "recent" I do not mean last week, I mean much more recent than the body of the keris. This kinatah work could well be 80 or 100 years old, equally, it could be 1990's. The one thing I am certain of is that it is not original work.