A Balinese (?)keris for identification please

[SidJ]

Hello
I would be grateful for your views on age and type of this keris please. Blade length is 44cm. The scabbard is described as ivory and wood. The hulu is silver. The keris is described as Balinese. The dhapur and etching is not typical for a Bali keris but there is a Balinese dhapur Marap that resembles this shape in lacking the elephant trunk and having a straight blade shape and similar fullers. The etching is also noteworthy but it may just be out of stain. Thank you in advance.

[Jean]

An interesting kris probably from Lombok, the hilt depicts a demon which may be Ravana. The blade would benefit from warangan treating indeed, the ivory warangka in kekandikan style is discolored on the back side because the maker used the outer surface of the tusk. I would estimate the age to first half of 20th century but the hilt is probably more recent.
PS: The top part of the warangka may be from bone (the pics are not clear).

[A. G. Maisey]

Sid, may I ask where you got the dhapur name "marap" from?

I know of a Balinese dhapur "marak", but I do not know "marap".

The blade pre-dates 1900, but it is very difficult to date Balinese blades with any degree of certainty.

[SidJ]

Hi Alan
Apologies. You are right. I meant 'Marak'. The reference I have is pg 266 of Keris Bali Bersejarah. Thanks for your thoughts re the age of the blade. I had thought that the hilt was also pre 1900s given the detail of the work and the patina of the silver.

[Battara]

The silver patina is not a great indicator of age. However the style of work is more so and I would think that the metal work fits more the 1940s - 1970s.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Sid, yes, I guess "marak" will pass with a push.

I don't know the Bali dhapurs, and I've gone to the Neka book too, the characteristics that dhapur marak should have are given as:-

gandhik polos berukir, alis, sogokan arep, reringgitan

I find this a bit confusing because "gandhik polos berukir" means a "plain gandhik that is carved" to my way of thinking the gandhik can be either plain or carved, but it cannot be both.

"alis" is OK, but "tikel alis" would be closer to the mark

"sogokan arep" would be more clear if it were to be "sogokan ngarep" which means "sogokan in front", but I guess that we can assume he means the same thing

"reringgitan" means greneng --- I have no idea what language this is, but the explanation is given under an illustration.

Anyway, I reckon this keris is probably near enough to marak, which I know as a Javanese dhapur, not Balinese. I cannot see a tikel alis in this keris under discussion, the sogokan is maybe there, the gandhik is not carved.

But maybe this keris does pass as marak.

Blade age is pre-1900, the dress probably dates from the 1960's-1970's.

The top of the wrongko(atasan) might not be ivory, as Jean has said, its a bit hard to judge from the photo, but if it is bone it would need to come from something pretty big.

I actually have a similar wrongko that came out of Bali in the early 1970's, the previous owner, who was a well known Australian collector, thought it was ivory, the gentleman who described it for the auction house that sold it in Sydney was another very experienced dealer and he thought it was ivory, but close inspection revealed that it was not. The previous owner had bought it from the original man who brought it out of Bali, this original importer had bought it in Bali, it was sold to him as ivory, and he honestly believed it was ivory.

If it does turn out to bone, don't feel too bad about it, a lot of people can make the same error.

I cannot give this hilt as pre-WWII, during the 1940's & 1950's the place was in turmoil, nothing much was going on in the way of art & craft, 1960's Bali & Indonesia in general started to open up again, 1970's the tourists were all coming back looking for a South Sea Island Paradise. I think it was most likely made in the early 1970's.

Battara is dead right, we cannot really rely on silver patina too much as an indicator of age.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by Jean

An interesting kris probably from Lombok, the hilt depicts a demon which may be Ravana. The blade would benefit from warangan treating indeed, the ivory warangka in kekandikan style is discolored on the back side because the maker used the outer surface of the tusk. I would estimate the age to first half of 20th century but the hilt is probably more recent.
PS: The top part of the warangka may be from bone (the pics are not clear).

I was thinking if the warangka could be moose antler. There are already Balinese craftsmen using moose antler for warangka. I kept some moose antler material made Balinese hulu.

[David]

Originally Posted by Anthony G.

I was thinking if the warangka could be moose antler. There are already Balinese craftsmen using moose antler for warangka. I kept some moose antler material made Balinese hulu.

For me moose antler has a rather particular look. I don't think this is moose.

[A. G. Maisey]

Sid, if I'm right about approximate age of the dress, we can forget moose antler, the international supply network to Bali was a wee bit different 50-60 years ago to what it is now.

Imagine being in Den Pasar and being told that if you want to fly back to Australia you've got a choice between an occasional flight to Darwin, and catching the bus back to Jakarta --- alternatively you can take a boat.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by David

For me moose antler has a rather particular look. I don't think this is moose.

I showed it to my good friend and he advised it is not ivory, could be a long bone sliced on the very side of the animal, Looks warangka might be made of animal bone.

[Jean]

Hello Sidj,
Please show us detailed pictures of the top part of the warangka (front, rear, and top sides, taken at a right angle) for better identification of the materials.
Regards