Is This A Royal Keris?

David · 8th March 2015, 08:51 AM

Yes Alan, i am afraid that José can relate to you all too well regarding stolen keris.

I suppose that in my own estimate i would consider anything that would have been owned and carried by someone considered an accepted member of the royal court to qualify. Some might be more restrictive and only see keris owned by members of the royal family to count.

DAHenkel · 21st March 2015, 06:59 AM

interesting discussion everyone...I would like to clarify firstly that I was not protesting change or evolution. Not at all! Contemporary innovation can be wonderful. However my concern is based in overly simplistic execution and interpretation. Because a keris is made with gold or silver its a masterpiece? A false logic but one which all too many people fall for. My issue is that the foundational principles on which keris art and craftsmanship are based are crumbling. We live in a world where cheaper, mass produced cookie cutter efforts are rewarded and the genuine artist is ignored. Alan, you are absolutely correct when you say the solution is for people to learn and I think we all can agree that history will not judge kindly 99.9% of the production coming out today.

Also, briefly with regards to the wearing of gold, it is widely accepted within Islamic jurisprudence that wearing gold ornaments is haram for men. However this prohibition is not very widely observed. Some probably due to ignorance, others because they don't care or think its not that big of a deal. Many dissemble, wearing "suasa" or some other alloy of gold or by offering some other excuse. I'm not judging them either way here but clearly this was a factor in how keris were traditionally decorated. Many traditional Southeast Asian texts reference sumptuary laws on the wearing of gold but these would have been predecated on the ruler's ability to enforce those norms. Naturally the use of gold embellishment would have evolved and changed over time and place, probably in more or less direct correlation to a ruler's power and position.

21st March 2015, 06:59 AM	#2
DAHenkel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 125	interesting discussion everyone...I would like to clarify firstly that I was not protesting change or evolution. Not at all! Contemporary innovation can be wonderful. However my concern is based in overly simplistic execution and interpretation. Because a keris is made with gold or silver its a masterpiece? A false logic but one which all too many people fall for. My issue is that the foundational principles on which keris art and craftsmanship are based are crumbling. We live in a world where cheaper, mass produced cookie cutter efforts are rewarded and the genuine artist is ignored. Alan, you are absolutely correct when you say the solution is for people to learn and I think we all can agree that history will not judge kindly 99.9% of the production coming out today. Also, briefly with regards to the wearing of gold, it is widely accepted within Islamic jurisprudence that wearing gold ornaments is haram for men. However this prohibition is not very widely observed. Some probably due to ignorance, others because they don't care or think its not that big of a deal. Many dissemble, wearing "suasa" or some other alloy of gold or by offering some other excuse. I'm not judging them either way here but clearly this was a factor in how keris were traditionally decorated. Many traditional Southeast Asian texts reference sumptuary laws on the wearing of gold but these would have been predecated on the ruler's ability to enforce those norms. Naturally the use of gold embellishment would have evolved and changed over time and place, probably in more or less direct correlation to a ruler's power and position. Last edited by DAHenkel; 21st March 2015 at 07:12 AM.

8th March 2015, 08:51 AM	#1
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,047	Yes Alan, i am afraid that José can relate to you all too well regarding stolen keris. I suppose that in my own estimate i would consider anything that would have been owned and carried by someone considered an accepted member of the royal court to qualify. Some might be more restrictive and only see keris owned by members of the royal family to count.