Balinese keris advice

[A. G. Maisey]

If what I think I can see in the photos is correct, this is a very, very good keris.

The blade style is classic, the garap appears to be detailed and neat, the forge work looks to be better than competent.

The dress is classic.

Old keris of this style of keris in Bali itself have been highly sought after for some years, especially so since the monetary crisis of the late 20th century.

I would not be so inclined to think in terms of Balinese warriors, out of context this can be a pretty misleading thought, similarly, in the Balinese context the keris should not thought of just in weapon terms.

It seems that you might be considering changing the dress, Jeff?

This could be one of the greatest errors in your collecting life if you do.

The only thing I might suggest is the addition of an old wewer (hilt ring), but undamaged old ones are very difficult to obtain.

This keris is perfect & beautiful exactly as it is.

[JeffS]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

If what I think I can see in the photos is correct, this is a very, very good keris.

The blade style is classic, the garap appears to be detailed and neat, the forge work looks to be better than competent.

The dress is classic.

Old keris of this style of keris in Bali itself have been highly sought after for some years, especially so since the monetary crisis of the late 20th century.

I would not be so inclined to think in terms of Balinese warriors, out of context this can be a pretty misleading thought, similarly, in the Balinese context the keris should not thought of just in weapon terms.

It seems that you might be considering changing the dress, Jeff?

This could be one of the greatest errors in your collecting life if you do.

The only thing I might suggest is the addition of an old wewer (hilt ring), but undamaged old ones are very difficult to obtain.

This keris is perfect & beautiful exactly as it is.

Wow, I have gotten very lucky. Thank you for the advice. Best leave this at that. I would, however, be very interested to hear more regarding Balinese warriors and their use of keris as weapons within the proper context and nuance you mention. I am thinking of older photos with rough looking armed men with a large keris carried on the back. I know I've seen threads with lively keris/weapon discussions. I will go back and read on this and start a new thread if the specific Balinese context is not already well traveled ground here.

[David]

Originally Posted by JeffS

Wow, I have gotten very lucky. Thank you for the advice. Best leave this at that. I would, however, be very interested to hear more regarding Balinese warriors and their use of keris as weapons within the proper context and nuance you mention. I am thinking of older photos with rough looking armed men with a large keris carried on the back. I know I've seen threads with lively keris/weapon discussions. I will go back and read on this and start a new thread if the specific Balinese context is not already well traveled ground here.

I completely agree with Alan that it would be misleading to consider the Bali keris only in terms of weaponry alone. While it is my understanding that the keris was indeed employed as a weapon in Bali, its place within that culture is so much larger than that and i don't think the keris was ever considered a prime weapon of war even if it was fought with at times.
I also agree with Alan that you should not be thinking about changing anything about this classic keris dress. The sheath, though worn, looks to be in pretty good condition, made from select and desirable timoho pelet wood, as is the Cekah Solas hilt. While perhaps not exactly rare, old examples of these hilts are at least less common and it suits this keris quite well. As Alan mentioned, the only thing i would consider changing about this ensemble would be to add a wewer/uwer (hilt ring) to it. While old, undamaged uwer may indeed be more difficult to find, if you look around some you can probably find a fairly decent new one that might fit the bill.I used to see these quite often on eBay.
When you think about images of "rough looking armed men" carrying keris you may well be thinking about this image. You will note that the gentleman on the right carries a keris at his back and the hilt on his keris is indeed a the Cekah Solas form. This image presents these gentlemen as warriors, but it is obviously a set-up photo so it's impossible to say for sure how much of this image was orchestrated by the photographer for effect. But as i mentioned before, it is my understanding that these Cekah Solas hilts were favoured by warriors due to their grip. When i went searching for where i had seen this before it does seem to be information that was suggested by Lalu Djelenga. Still, i believe it is important to approach keris form a position that focusses on far more than martial applications.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, these are indeed pretty scary looking men, but we can all look pretty scary when when we want to. As you say David, a posed photograph. If we were to have met these men in other than this photo pose, I believe we would have found them to be as friendly and as personable as we now find their present day descendants to be.

In my experience and personal relationships with Balinese people, which stretches over more than 50 years, and speaking in general terms, I can find no traces of a warrior society in Bali.

Yeah, sure, we have a K'satriya caste, the "knights" within the societal system, but even in past times, when these "knights" had a duty to protect their ruler and their fellow members of society, it seems to me that the Balinese idea of combat was more in the nature of theatre, rather than the ideas surrounding combat that we find in many societies in other parts of the world, for example in European societies.

Those of us who have read, or studied, this work:-

Visible and Invisible Realms-Margaret J.Wiener
ISBN 0-226-88582-8/1,The University of Chicago Press

have consistently recommended it as a starting point to understand the keris in Bali.

The keris in all societies where it is found as a cultural artefact does not stand independent of the society, it is essential to understand the society before one can understand the keris.

[JeffS]

This photo also comes to mind. I see the Wiener book is still readily available, will order when back from traveling.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yeah, sure, we have a K'satriya caste, the "knights" within the societal system, but even in past times, when these "knights" had a duty to protect their ruler and their fellow members of society, it seems to me that the Balinese idea of combat was more in the nature of theatre, rather than the ideas surrounding combat that we find in many societies in other parts of the world, for example in European societies.

I am a bit confused by this comment Alan. Surely the Balinese engaged in combat at times in their history. I would image this involved real warfare, not just theatre. I was not suggesting a warrior society per se, but i don't see anything too off base in referring to someone who engages in battle as a warrior. Though again, i don't believe the keris would have been considered regular weapon of war in these cases.
Jeff, i also cannot recommend Visible and Invisible Realms by Margaret J.Wiener more heartily. It is an excellent book to understand Bali and the place the keris held within that society.

[A. G. Maisey]

I think I can understand what you're saying here David, and if I do, I can also understand why my comment might seem to be confusing.

Yes, it is certain that in Old Bali there was sometimes conflict between the various kingdoms, a colony was established on Lombok, other colonies were attempted in other locations. However, in Standard English, and also in the way I think --- and this could be the problem --- simple conflict does not a warrior make.

The way I understand the word "warrior" is that a man who is a warrior is one who makes warfare his occupation, thus a warrior society is a society that depends for its existence upon its ability to wage war. If I think "warrior" in an historic context I think of people such as Ghengis Khan, or other historic people whose profession was war, not just occasional conflict, especially conflict that ultimately might be settled by negotiation rather than spilt blood.

Balinese society was a society of farmers who occasionally became involved in conflict, within Balinese society the K'satriya caste can be thought of as the ruling class of people, Brahmana could not rule, traders and craftsmen could not rule, the tillers of the soil could not rule, only the K'satriya could rule, so the job of this entire class of people was to ensure order & and stability within the realm, and to support the ruler, whose presence was in fact, The Realm. Not at all dissimilar to the old English hierarchy of nobility.

Yes, the K'satriya was also the line of first defence, or first offence, in times of conflict, but their profession was not war, thus they were not warriors, they were the ruling class.

In Standard English, the word "warrior" is now principally used in a poetic or rhetorical way, and it can also be used in a manner that bestows praise, for instance, in a eulogistic sense.

Balinese society was not a warrior society, and I was commenting in terms of the society.

There is another book that is well worth the time (& effort) to read:-

Negara:- The theatre state in 19th. century Bali -- Clifford Geertz,
ISBN 0 691 05316 2 Princeton University Press

I used the word "effort", because I do not find this work as easy to digest as Wiener, it can be an effort to get through, but it does clarify the way in which Balinese realm & society functioned before the puputans, before the tourists, and before the erosion of traditional ways.

[Gustav]

A few comments about "Balinese warrior" also from me.

Balinese society perhaps was not primarily a warriors society, but Balinese undoubtely were very well known in 17th and 18th century Java as fierce warriors. Balinese forces captured and for some time controlled Blambangan in East Java. Balinese mercenaries were much sought after by VOC and different Javanese parties, and were equal in their fighting abilities with the two other classic mercenary groups - Madurese and Makassarese/Buginese. M.C.Ricklefs writes, after mentioning these: "The Balinese were also a nation of soldiers, (...)" (the "but" part of quotation deals with their religion).

Balinese participated in Javanese conflicts until the end of the Third Sucession War in 1757, there most notably within Mangkunegaran party. Their impact on Javanese culture for more then a half of a century was huge - Balinese dance, dress style, moustache - at that time a genuinely Balinese feature in Java - and along with dress, Balinese (or Balinese style, or better, size) Keris.

We have not much detailed information on situation in Bali itself until around 1800, but after that it was a time of frequent conflicts.

The referring to Javanese and Balinese warfare as theatre or dance was quite popular with period European witnesses.

The book of Geertz is a classic (1980), an indispensable reading, but already at its appearance was criticised for rather one-sided view.

Surely the last Puputans changed the Balinese society and culture (something like Gamelan Gong Kebyar was unthinkable before them), but always, looking at the friendly smiling Balinese and their peaceful and artistic society, I must think of 1965 in Bali. In less then a half of year estimated 80 000 people were killed, proportionally more then anywhere else in Indonesia.