Just a small question that had me very curious...

Henk · 23rd December 2009, 09:28 AM

ThePepperSkull,

I think you started a great topic. With a great answer from Alan.
The trading of Javanese blades troughout the whole Archipello, that made that we find Javanese blades in different dresses according to the area where the blade was bought and blades from other areas dressed in the style of the court where the owner served.

I remember also reading in a book and unfortunately i cann't recall what book it was, probably Dutch, that warriors who damaged the dress of the keris replaced the damaged part at the place where they found a mrangi, a woodcarver. That would explain for instance, the marriage of a maduran blade with a maduran ukiran in a javanese scabbard and other marriages that look ridicoulous.

Comes immediately up in my mind the thought that a warrior when he came home immediately would change the replaced dresspart for the one from the area he originated. The only reason not to do so could be the lack of money to buy a new dresspart for the keris.

But i completely agree with Alan that many of the rehilted keris we see, mainly the javanese with a balinese, maduran or even a sumatran ukiran, preferable ivory, is the result of taste of the western collectors.

Moshah · 23rd December 2009, 10:02 AM

Hi.

Keris trade activities also is one of main reason why the wilah-ukiran-wronko uniformity are not strictly followed and founded, although this is not always the case.

As most old blade pieces do stand the test of time, its hilt and sheath sometimes do not.

However, do blades are always the determinant of the origin?

While I am unsure of whether javanese / buginese / sumatran blades are, patani / southern thailand kerises like tajong and coteng are recognized by its hilts and sheaths. Although they do have their own specific blades, sometimes it can be of different styles anyway.

Rick · 23rd December 2009, 02:51 PM

Another question I might add is :

Did the old Jawa makers manufacture keris in other than Javanese dapurs expressly for export ?

David · 23rd December 2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moshah

However, do blades are always the determinant of the origin?

From what i have seen the origin of a keris is generally determined by it's dress. I think this is because the term "keris" refers not only to the blade itself, but is often meant to refer to the entire ensemble.
Of course this becomes difficult when you have a Javanese keris in a Surakarta wrongko with a Maduran ivory hilt.

Personally i prefer to collect keris that are culturally correct as the understanding of the culture is an important aspect of my collecting. Sometimes that might mean having a mix of dress and blade origins as sometimes these mixes have been historical demanded by the culture as has been mentioned, but i am afraid that most often when we see these mixed keris on the market that they are the "dealers special" aimed at a western market that is looking more for flair and artistry than cultural reality.

ThePepperSkull · 23rd December 2009, 06:21 PM

Oh, wow! Thanks for the input and answers; I really really appreciate them. You guys have given me a whole lot to think about.

In fact, I have a few follow up questions:

Are there any cultural implications when mixing ukiran from one area to a blade or a warangka from another? Is there a combination that should be avoided due to cultural significance?

Have there been historical instances, other than the necessity for a new fitting for the blade (be it from damage to previous fittings or the requirements of law), of an ukiran/warangka of differing regions to be used on a blade? Did the Indonesian Keris owner of old mix parts of his own choosing or is this a recently new, more western concept to mix-and-match for aesthetic choices?

A. G. Maisey · 24th December 2009, 04:06 AM

Rick

I don't think so.

Consider. I'm thinking in terms of +500 years ago. Javanese makers produced the product and exported to other countries, possibly even as far as Sri Lanka. Since those original exports, those other countries learnt to make their own keris, and developed their own styles. At the time of early export, there was no local style for Javanese makers to copy.

David

The word "keris" can refer to either the blade alone, more correctly termed wilah, or the entire keris including scabbard and hilt. The form of the dress determines whether we call any particular keris a Jogja keris, or Solo keris, or a Cirebon keris, however, in the case where a keris from a particular area is fitted with a blade from an area other than the one that covers the dress , we would classify the blade when broke down the keris into its separate parts, so we could have a Surakarta ladrangan, pendok blewah, jejeran yudowinatan, wilah Madura sepuh ( or Bugis, or Bali, or whatever).

Pepperskull

Response interpolated:-

Oh, wow! Thanks for the input and answers; I really really appreciate them. You guys have given me a whole lot to think about.

In fact, I have a few follow up questions:

Are there any cultural implications when mixing ukiran from one area to a blade or a warangka from another?

I do not understand the question.

Is there a combination that should be avoided due to cultural significance?

Depends upon the situation.
In a western setting, who cares?
In a village setting it probably doesn't matter much.
In a city setting where the city is under the influence of a court, anything other than the court approved style will make the wearer look silly
In a court setting ? Who knows ? Demotion? Write out ten thousand times:- I will not make myself look like a fool? Pick up rubbish in the alun2 after Friday prayers?

Have there been historical instances, other than the necessity for a new fitting for the blade (be it from damage to previous fittings or the requirements of law), of an ukiran/warangka of differing regions to be used on a blade?

Who knows?

Did the Indonesian Keris owner of old mix parts of his own choosing or is this a recently new, more western concept to mix-and-match for aesthetic choices?

Must be more specific than "Indonesian" .
The idea of "Indonesian" really only dates from around 1946, so there really was no "Indonesian of old".
The answer to this lays in the answers already given:- under court influence you conform; in a village if you think you can hang a bit of bling and get away with it, you do.

From what I can see of it, collectors have always done pretty much whatever they like with dress --- something that tends to annoy me more than just a little.

Rick · 24th December 2009, 04:43 PM

A.G.M.
"From what I can see of it, collectors have always done pretty much whatever they like with dress --- something that tends to annoy me more than just a little."

Yeah, I put the old Bondolan hilt back on my Ligan; no uwer .

The wood and blade are eloquent enough on their own .

I might be coming 'round a bit .

A. G. Maisey · 24th December 2009, 08:39 PM

I reckon a bit of bling is OK, especially with Bali pieces, but what really gets up my nose is combinations that just totally put your teeth on edge.

Intricate Madura ivories with severly sophisticated Surakarta ladrangans.

Bugis hilts with Bali wrongkos.

Lampung hilts with Madura wrongkos.

These combinations are all ones that I have recently seen, and to me, they just look so bad.

If we want to do the bling thing, we should stay within the bounds of acceptability.

23rd December 2009, 09:28 AM	#1
Henk Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,209	ThePepperSkull, I think you started a great topic. With a great answer from Alan. The trading of Javanese blades troughout the whole Archipello, that made that we find Javanese blades in different dresses according to the area where the blade was bought and blades from other areas dressed in the style of the court where the owner served. I remember also reading in a book and unfortunately i cann't recall what book it was, probably Dutch, that warriors who damaged the dress of the keris replaced the damaged part at the place where they found a mrangi, a woodcarver. That would explain for instance, the marriage of a maduran blade with a maduran ukiran in a javanese scabbard and other marriages that look ridicoulous. Comes immediately up in my mind the thought that a warrior when he came home immediately would change the replaced dresspart for the one from the area he originated. The only reason not to do so could be the lack of money to buy a new dresspart for the keris. But i completely agree with Alan that many of the rehilted keris we see, mainly the javanese with a balinese, maduran or even a sumatran ukiran, preferable ivory, is the result of taste of the western collectors.

23rd December 2009, 10:02 AM	#2
Moshah Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 171	Hi. Keris trade activities also is one of main reason why the wilah-ukiran-wronko uniformity are not strictly followed and founded, although this is not always the case. As most old blade pieces do stand the test of time, its hilt and sheath sometimes do not. However, do blades are always the determinant of the origin? While I am unsure of whether javanese / buginese / sumatran blades are, patani / southern thailand kerises like tajong and coteng are recognized by its hilts and sheaths. Although they do have their own specific blades, sometimes it can be of different styles anyway.

23rd December 2009, 02:51 PM	#3
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Another question I might add is : Did the old Jawa makers manufacture keris in other than Javanese dapurs expressly for export ?

23rd December 2009, 06:21 PM	#5
ThePepperSkull Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 338	Oh, wow! Thanks for the input and answers; I really really appreciate them. You guys have given me a whole lot to think about. In fact, I have a few follow up questions: Are there any cultural implications when mixing ukiran from one area to a blade or a warangka from another? Is there a combination that should be avoided due to cultural significance? Have there been historical instances, other than the necessity for a new fitting for the blade (be it from damage to previous fittings or the requirements of law), of an ukiran/warangka of differing regions to be used on a blade? Did the Indonesian Keris owner of old mix parts of his own choosing or is this a recently new, more western concept to mix-and-match for aesthetic choices?

24th December 2009, 04:06 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Rick I don't think so. Consider. I'm thinking in terms of +500 years ago. Javanese makers produced the product and exported to other countries, possibly even as far as Sri Lanka. Since those original exports, those other countries learnt to make their own keris, and developed their own styles. At the time of early export, there was no local style for Javanese makers to copy. David The word "keris" can refer to either the blade alone, more correctly termed wilah, or the entire keris including scabbard and hilt. The form of the dress determines whether we call any particular keris a Jogja keris, or Solo keris, or a Cirebon keris, however, in the case where a keris from a particular area is fitted with a blade from an area other than the one that covers the dress , we would classify the blade when broke down the keris into its separate parts, so we could have a Surakarta ladrangan, pendok blewah, jejeran yudowinatan, wilah Madura sepuh ( or Bugis, or Bali, or whatever). Pepperskull Response interpolated:- Oh, wow! Thanks for the input and answers; I really really appreciate them. You guys have given me a whole lot to think about. In fact, I have a few follow up questions: Are there any cultural implications when mixing ukiran from one area to a blade or a warangka from another? I do not understand the question. Is there a combination that should be avoided due to cultural significance? Depends upon the situation. In a western setting, who cares? In a village setting it probably doesn't matter much. In a city setting where the city is under the influence of a court, anything other than the court approved style will make the wearer look silly In a court setting ? Who knows ? Demotion? Write out ten thousand times:- I will not make myself look like a fool? Pick up rubbish in the alun2 after Friday prayers? Have there been historical instances, other than the necessity for a new fitting for the blade (be it from damage to previous fittings or the requirements of law), of an ukiran/warangka of differing regions to be used on a blade? Who knows? Did the Indonesian Keris owner of old mix parts of his own choosing or is this a recently new, more western concept to mix-and-match for aesthetic choices? Must be more specific than "Indonesian" . The idea of "Indonesian" really only dates from around 1946, so there really was no "Indonesian of old". The answer to this lays in the answers already given:- under court influence you conform; in a village if you think you can hang a bit of bling and get away with it, you do. From what I can see of it, collectors have always done pretty much whatever they like with dress --- something that tends to annoy me more than just a little.

24th December 2009, 04:43 PM	#7
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	A.G.M. "From what I can see of it, collectors have always done pretty much whatever they like with dress --- something that tends to annoy me more than just a little." Yeah, I put the old Bondolan hilt back on my Ligan; no uwer . The wood and blade are eloquent enough on their own . I might be coming 'round a bit .

24th December 2009, 08:39 PM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	I reckon a bit of bling is OK, especially with Bali pieces, but what really gets up my nose is combinations that just totally put your teeth on edge. Intricate Madura ivories with severly sophisticated Surakarta ladrangans. Bugis hilts with Bali wrongkos. Lampung hilts with Madura wrongkos. These combinations are all ones that I have recently seen, and to me, they just look so bad. If we want to do the bling thing, we should stay within the bounds of acceptability.