Bali keris restored

A. G. Maisey · 11th August 2009, 08:29 AM

Tatyana, what additional information are you seeking?

We cannot reliably date these blades, there is not as far as I am aware a parrallel Balinese system to the Javanese system of tangguh, so we cannot really classify them.

It is probably possible to give them a dhapur, in accordance with the data provided by Lalu Djelengga.

The pamor in both cases is a simple m'lumah style, that most people would call wos wutah.

Yours has the remnants of kinatah work, which probably indicates original ownership by a person with rank.

I doubt that there is much more that anybody could say about these blades --- except that they are very nice, very typical Balinese blades.

Tatyana Dianova · 11th August 2009, 10:10 AM

Alan these few lines of text are really what I've been looking for. This information may be evident to you and other advanced Keris collectors, but there are novices like me whom even this short description is extremely important. Thank you very much for your comments!

Sajen · 11th August 2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Tatyana, what additional information are you seeking?

We cannot reliably date these blades, there is not as far as I am aware a parrallel Balinese system to the Javanese system of tangguh, so we cannot really classify them.

It is probably possible to give them a dhapur, in accordance with the data provided by Lalu Djelengga.

The pamor in both cases is a simple m'lumah style, that most people would call wos wutah.

Yours has the remnants of kinatah work, which probably indicates original ownership by a person with rank.

I doubt that there is much more that anybody could say about these blades --- except that they are very nice, very typical Balinese blades.

Hello Mr. Maisey,

isn't the pamor of my keris not a sort of a wengkon?
Here some closeups of the blade.

Regards,
sajen

A. G. Maisey · 11th August 2009, 09:07 PM

I don't know that I'd be inclined to call it a wengkon. Yes, it has some characteristics of a wengkon, but we've still got that random pamor below the "wengkon" and the core of the blade.

To be frank, I prefer not to get too involved with the refined niceties of pamor types. I'm pretty relaxed about the whole thing. In the group of people with whom I associate in Jawa, most of whom are dealers, we tend to paint with a rather broad brush.This is somewhat different to the current collector attitude that wants to define and categorise to the Nth. degree. Amongst the people I mostly associate with, if we see anything that is any kind of random pamor, we call it wos wutah. What we call wos wutah, the bulk of collectors in Jawa would probably want to categorise into a multitude of sub-types.

Your blade looked at in cross section, has a core, a layer of random pamor, and one of the layers of contrasting material in that random pamor is marginally thicker than the others.

The question then must be asked:-

did the maker produce this pattern intentionally, attempting to create a wos wutah/wengkon pamor?

or was the folding of the pamor material less than expert and he finished up with a layer of contrasting material on the outside of the forging?

did he then realise that his blade was not going to be thick enough and he added a layer of iron to compensate?

A wengkon is a very difficult pamor to produce. It requires an enormous amount of both forge control and benchwork control. This keris might be the result of a conscious effort to produce a wengkon, but the control is far from good, so it might also be the result of error correction. Since none of us were there looking over the maker's shoulder, I'd say that we can take our own decisions on the matter.

Sajen · 11th August 2009, 11:00 PM

From this case of view I would agree because the other side of the wilah is a random pamor wos wutah so it is obvious that this "wengkon" is a product of fortune. I am a collector too and sometimes wish to see something special.

A. G. Maisey · 13th August 2009, 12:31 AM

Maybe, but also maybe not.

There are several different ways that this blade could have gained the plain iron overlay to one face, the correction of error that I have already mentioned, or the failure to remove a protective plate used during production, or maybe --- just maybe --- the intentional production of a pamor tangkis.

Pamor tangkis requires that each blade face carry a different pamor.

An easy way to do this is to make an ordinary random pamor and then add to that on one blade face.

Pamor tangkis is regarded as a protective device against black magic.

We do not know exactly why this blade has this pamor, but there are several possibilities, some I have mentioned, but we could probably come up with additional ones also.

11th August 2009, 08:29 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	Tatyana, what additional information are you seeking? We cannot reliably date these blades, there is not as far as I am aware a parrallel Balinese system to the Javanese system of tangguh, so we cannot really classify them. It is probably possible to give them a dhapur, in accordance with the data provided by Lalu Djelengga. The pamor in both cases is a simple m'lumah style, that most people would call wos wutah. Yours has the remnants of kinatah work, which probably indicates original ownership by a person with rank. I doubt that there is much more that anybody could say about these blades --- except that they are very nice, very typical Balinese blades.

11th August 2009, 10:10 AM	#2
Tatyana Dianova Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 737	Alan these few lines of text are really what I've been looking for. This information may be evident to you and other advanced Keris collectors, but there are novices like me whom even this short description is extremely important. Thank you very much for your comments!

11th August 2009, 09:07 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	I don't know that I'd be inclined to call it a wengkon. Yes, it has some characteristics of a wengkon, but we've still got that random pamor below the "wengkon" and the core of the blade. To be frank, I prefer not to get too involved with the refined niceties of pamor types. I'm pretty relaxed about the whole thing. In the group of people with whom I associate in Jawa, most of whom are dealers, we tend to paint with a rather broad brush.This is somewhat different to the current collector attitude that wants to define and categorise to the Nth. degree. Amongst the people I mostly associate with, if we see anything that is any kind of random pamor, we call it wos wutah. What we call wos wutah, the bulk of collectors in Jawa would probably want to categorise into a multitude of sub-types. Your blade looked at in cross section, has a core, a layer of random pamor, and one of the layers of contrasting material in that random pamor is marginally thicker than the others. The question then must be asked:- did the maker produce this pattern intentionally, attempting to create a wos wutah/wengkon pamor? or was the folding of the pamor material less than expert and he finished up with a layer of contrasting material on the outside of the forging? did he then realise that his blade was not going to be thick enough and he added a layer of iron to compensate? A wengkon is a very difficult pamor to produce. It requires an enormous amount of both forge control and benchwork control. This keris might be the result of a conscious effort to produce a wengkon, but the control is far from good, so it might also be the result of error correction. Since none of us were there looking over the maker's shoulder, I'd say that we can take our own decisions on the matter.

11th August 2009, 11:00 PM	#5
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,216	From this case of view I would agree because the other side of the wilah is a random pamor wos wutah so it is obvious that this "wengkon" is a product of fortune. I am a collector too and sometimes wish to see something special.

13th August 2009, 12:31 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,019	Maybe, but also maybe not. There are several different ways that this blade could have gained the plain iron overlay to one face, the correction of error that I have already mentioned, or the failure to remove a protective plate used during production, or maybe --- just maybe --- the intentional production of a pamor tangkis. Pamor tangkis requires that each blade face carry a different pamor. An easy way to do this is to make an ordinary random pamor and then add to that on one blade face. Pamor tangkis is regarded as a protective device against black magic. We do not know exactly why this blade has this pamor, but there are several possibilities, some I have mentioned, but we could probably come up with additional ones also.