Origin of the keris

Marcokeris · 11th January 2008, 11:24 AM

Thanks a lot Alan for your answer.
Also I have many unsolved doubts

I showed the first hilt to an art-tribal's seller in Milan and he said "probalby original" but, of course, for me is not enought.
But in Kerobokan (Bali) i saw years ago another similar hilt (jointed to a litlle piece of rusty corroded iron) in a shop very famous for his reliability in tribal art dealer world (I woul like to know if, in the same condition, iron and bronze are the same corrosion or a different corrosion's speed)
I found the second hilt in a home outside Yogya. The seller had a lot of nice old wood and ivory Cirebon, Tegal, Madura hits... and together the unclean bronze second hilt under discussion: his prize was the same of a honest ivory hilt (but... of course ... in all world the prize changes according to the numbers of successions an object has).
A strange matter that probably is not good for an old aged confirm is that the hilts are enourmously alike.
Thanks again and sorry for my english
Marco

A. G. Maisey · 11th January 2008, 08:49 PM

Nothing wrong with your English, Marco---damn sight better than my Italian.

Anyway--- ferric material corrodes much more quickly than brass or bronze. Most of the genuine old excavated bronzes that I have seen have been fairly thin and light, and mostly seem to be filled with a clay-like substance, rather than jabung or damar. The smooth parts of the material are very smooth and have nice even, dark patina.Old bronzes in general have a very refined, "gentle" feel to them---something that is difficult for me to put into words--- its almost as if when hold the object you can feel the age.This handle of yours just looks too heavy and unrefined. I could be 100% wrong, I'm no expert on bronzes, but to my eye it just doesn't look like genuine stuff I have seen and handled. If the price approximated ivory, that was probably not high enough. I have seen quite small , genuine bronzes change hands within the trade, in Jawa, for very impressive money.Something else too:- can you still see the lines of the cast and has the surface been well finished after casting? If you can still see the joints and there has been minimum finishing it is certain to be modern.Have you tested the material? Brass or bronze? If brass it is modern.

After more than 40 years of buying things in Indonesia, I no longer take a great deal of notice of the "supporting evidence" when I buy. Anybody dealing on even the lowest commercial level knows what they can get for their goods, and the way something is presented --- for instance, with adhering deposits, or stubs of corroded iron--- is just so much window dressing.

Marcokeris · 14th January 2008, 01:03 PM

In this picture the two hits are near . Excluding the base they are pratically two of a kind

.
The beauty, harmony are on the contrary great

14th January 2008, 01:03 PM	#3
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	In this picture the two hits are near . Excluding the base they are pratically two of a kind . The beauty, harmony are on the contrary great Attached Images

11th January 2008, 11:24 AM	#1
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	Thanks a lot Alan for your answer. Also I have many unsolved doubts I showed the first hilt to an art-tribal's seller in Milan and he said "probalby original" but, of course, for me is not enought. But in Kerobokan (Bali) i saw years ago another similar hilt (jointed to a litlle piece of rusty corroded iron) in a shop very famous for his reliability in tribal art dealer world (I woul like to know if, in the same condition, iron and bronze are the same corrosion or a different corrosion's speed) I found the second hilt in a home outside Yogya. The seller had a lot of nice old wood and ivory Cirebon, Tegal, Madura hits... and together the unclean bronze second hilt under discussion: his prize was the same of a honest ivory hilt (but... of course ... in all world the prize changes according to the numbers of successions an object has). A strange matter that probably is not good for an old aged confirm is that the hilts are enourmously alike. Thanks again and sorry for my english Marco

11th January 2008, 08:49 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Nothing wrong with your English, Marco---damn sight better than my Italian. Anyway--- ferric material corrodes much more quickly than brass or bronze. Most of the genuine old excavated bronzes that I have seen have been fairly thin and light, and mostly seem to be filled with a clay-like substance, rather than jabung or damar. The smooth parts of the material are very smooth and have nice even, dark patina.Old bronzes in general have a very refined, "gentle" feel to them---something that is difficult for me to put into words--- its almost as if when hold the object you can feel the age.This handle of yours just looks too heavy and unrefined. I could be 100% wrong, I'm no expert on bronzes, but to my eye it just doesn't look like genuine stuff I have seen and handled. If the price approximated ivory, that was probably not high enough. I have seen quite small , genuine bronzes change hands within the trade, in Jawa, for very impressive money.Something else too:- can you still see the lines of the cast and has the surface been well finished after casting? If you can still see the joints and there has been minimum finishing it is certain to be modern.Have you tested the material? Brass or bronze? If brass it is modern. After more than 40 years of buying things in Indonesia, I no longer take a great deal of notice of the "supporting evidence" when I buy. Anybody dealing on even the lowest commercial level knows what they can get for their goods, and the way something is presented --- for instance, with adhering deposits, or stubs of corroded iron--- is just so much window dressing.