Interesting big sized javanese keris

[Gustav]

Dear All,

I acquired this keris slightly more the a month ago. The pics from seller (Netherlands) were as they mostly are, but I was absolutely aware of that it would be a low-average quality keris, yet something very interesting to study, learn about keris. The money was also not big, so I have it now.

What attracted my attention was the rather substantial body of the blade. If we look at the keris from old european collections (17. cent.) in Karsten Sejr Jensen's book or Krisdisk, the javanese blades there are often very substantial in width and length.

(Of course my blade very possibly is younger then 17. cent.)

It came in an older East-Javanese wrongko, which is original to the blade; and it has a not recent mendak and nice East-Javanese hilt. Gandar is missing.

Length of the blade: 41,5 cm, width of the gonjo: 9,4 cm, width at the third luk: 3 cm.

It has full ricikan: blumbangan, two sogokan, kembang kacang with jenggot, jalen, one lambe gajah, tikel alis, kruwingan, greneng with ron dha nunut, ada-ada till the tip of the luk 13 blade.

The gonjo is Sebit Ron, Sebit Ron Tal.

The blade is very substantial but feels light for this size. Pamor is a lush wos wutah (probably called Pedharingan Kebak ?).

There is a great number of shortcomings, some caused by working process, some by wear:

1) greneng is not evenly cut, dha's doesn't have the same size and form;

2) the biggest fault, probably evident from the first day, is the loss of a layer at the Sirah Cecak of gonjo. It was caused by the obstacle, the smith choosed to forge a gonjo with horizontal layers (some sort of gonjo with pamor Mas Kemambang probably?), and not vertical, which would probably give the same wos wutah pamor (?) and be the aesthetically more satisfying and more common version.

The horizontal layers wasn't even and perfectly horizontal, and probably due to bad forging work or metal quality there is a loss of a part of the last layer and a gap;

3) kembang kacang has been pushed in to the gandhik, jenggot is almost completely gone;

[Gustav]

4) the most disturbing is the loss of material at the upper part of wadidang;

5) at two places (one on each side, both times inner curvature) the pamor material not perfectly covering slorok.

6) on one side (kembang kacang to wright when held in the hand) the sogokan and tikel alis are better cut, with a good drive, on the other (the common side, kembang kacang to left) the sogokan are a little bit stiff, to even in the width, the lis at the end of tikel alis a little bit blurred.

[Gustav]

The blade;

[Gustav]

A nice East Javanese hilt, the "nose" is partially broken. It has an interesting "shadow" on one side, may be it could be called "pelet wayang"?

The patra's were full till surface with old hardened oil & dirt.

[Gustav]

Wrongko seems to be original (there is a damage at the gandhik side, but all other inner sides are well patinated). It has a nice wood grain, has been broken an glued together.

Pesi is substantial, appropriate to the blade.

This was my attempt to do a "documentation" of a keris, what I see when I look at it "technically".

Regarding this keris I have some questions. Could we call it an East Javanese keris? What are the features typical for an East Javanese keris? Are the blades also in 18. and 19. cent. more substantial then Central Javanese? What is known about size as a rank indicator for the wearer?

[Sajen]

Hello Gustav,

interesting keris. What come direkt in my mind by you description is what Alan G. Maisey write in a other thread some time ago:
Sajen, its an old keris, and its not a bad keris. Not all keris are masterworks of the art. This is a good, solid, representative keris of its type, personally, I like it.

My own collection is the product of more than 50 years of collecting, I do have some very exceptional pieces in that collection, but I also have a lot of keris that are far, very far, from perfect, and if I consider those keris with which I would not part, most of the keris in this category are the very imperfect ones that I feel a bond with, rather than the princely pieces adorned in gold.

When you buy keris, it is perhaps best to choose those keris that you personally like, and think you might be able to feel something for, rather than a piece of perfection that leaves you cold.If you can find the aesthetically beautiful keris, and you feel something for it as well, that's when you've hit the jackpot.

Wrongko seems to be Kemuning wood. My feeling is the same as yours, I think it is a east javanese keris.

Regards,

Detlef

[Marcokeris]

Hallo gustav
Your keris seems very nice and old.
Surely wrongko (i think kemuning too or... trembalù) is old
Hit could be Timoho (is the "shadow" natural?)
Also I think east Jawa

[Gustav]

Thank you, Detlef and Marco, for responses.

Alan is absolutely wright.

The "shadow" is a little bit of mysterium for me. It seems to be the same piece of wood, there is nothing glued, yet the line between both colours is very clear, the black part very homogenous. This line goes trough both patra's and it seems, regarding the carvings, there is no work with colour or something else. A spot of this black colour appears also on the bungkul at other, bright side.

Sarung (or the remains of it) seems to be East Javanese, the blade also. The problem is, my only experience regarding this subject are few books, nothing more. In Jensen's book some of the keris are attributed to Bantem, some to East Jawa, and it seems to me, he's point wasn't the blade characteristics.

There must be similarities, becouse both styles are coming from Mojopahit, but what are the differences?

Also I have very little information about East Java historically and culturally.

[Sajen]

I think that the hilt is kayu Timoho.

[A. G. Maisey]

The theory is that Blambangan came from Majapahit, Bali came from Majapahit, Banten came from Blambangan.

Majapahit was bolstered by Pajajaran smiths.

Surakarta style echoes in some respects Majapahit style.

Blambangan are regarded by some experts in Jawa as within the the same stylistic parameters as Majapahit.

However, when we see Majapahit keris that are almost universally agreed to be Majapahit, they are nowhere near the same size as Blambangan.- but you can see the stylistic relationship.

A lot of keris that come from far east of East Jawa are quite big --- I'm not talking about what might be regarded as clasical Blambangan keris, but east Jawa keris from the far East of Jawa.

Once again with this keris of Gustav's we're trying to play the tangguh game.

Bad move.

Its too difficult from pics and all the guesses just confuse people and make the water muddier than it already is.

In any case, its a decent old keris, and the delamination on the gonjo is, for me, a very minor defect, its just part of the character of a very old keris.

The wrongko is text-book trembalu, the jejeran might be timoho, but timoho is not used very often for jejeran because it is inclined to be soft. If it is not a very soft wood in the white sections, it might be safer to call it "pelet" which refers to the two colours and can be a number of different woods.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by Marcokeris

Hallo gustav
Your keris seems very nice and old.
Surely wrongko (i think kemuning too or... trembalù) is old
Hit could be Timoho (is the "shadow" natural?)
Also I think east Jawa

Hello Gustav,
As Marco suggests, did you try to file a corner of the black spot on the hilt for ensuring that it is original and not dyed?
Best regards
Jean

[Gustav]

Thank you for the response, Alan.

Jean, I would never file a corner of this hilt, sorry , I would rather live with a tought it's dyed (you see now, I am not professional). I washed it finally, the wooden grain is really beautiful and good choosen. I will make some pictures when it will be dry and oiled. Material is timoho.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, if you're certain its timoho, fair enough, end of story, but you can test without filing corners. If I wanted to test it, I'd go up inside the hole with a small very sharp knife, it is quite easy to gauge the hardness of the pale and dark wood in this way.

[Sajen]

Hello Alan,

I every time have problems to differentiate between kayu Trembola and kayu Kemuning (like to see ). Would you be so kind to show two examples side by side and explain the differents? Thank you in advance.

Regards,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm sorry Sajen, but I can't do this.

I have never seen any wrongkos that the people in the circles I move in identify as kemuning. Yes, kemuning is a well known wood, and I hear kemuning mentioned here continually, but I have not ever held a wrongko in my hands that anybody I know identified as kemuning.

Trembalu , on the other hand is well known, prized, and met with fairly frequently in older pieces.

The wrongko in this thread looks exactly like what we know as trembalu, but there is a range of colour in trembalu, sometimes it can be quite a bit darker and redder than this.

As we know, colour rendition in any photos can be extremely unreliable.

[Sajen]

So this wrongko is also from trembalu?

[Sajen]

I have just searched for kemuning in old threads and looked to some books and there is said that sampirs from Bugis/Sumatera/Malay keris are often made from kemunig. And I think that for example this sampir from a other thread is worked from kemuning. I show it side by side with the wrongko from #16 to show the affinity from the grain of this both.

[A. G. Maisey]

The Jawa wrongko looks like trembalu to me.

I do not know the local and correct name for the wood in the Malay wrongko.

I have seen this degree of chatoyancy in many other woods, both SE Asian woods and European woods. You can find a chatoyant grain such as we see here in any number of common cabinet timbers, walnut for instance. In SE Asian timbers I've seen similar grain in scented sandalwood.

I'm afraid that from a picture of a piece of polished wood I simply cannot tell what the wood might be most of the time. I'm just not that good.

EDIT I probably should add that kemuning is certainly known in Jawa, but we know it as material for jejeran; it is ideal for this purpose because it has a tight, close, fine grain.Its a yellowish wood and needs to be stained after it has been carved. In these wrongkos with highly chatoyant grain, I don't see anything that I would recognise as kemuning.

[Gustav]

Dear All,

that's what it looks like after some cleaning:

1) I was wrong, it is not timoho (probably kemuning but not stained?); just when I cleaned patra's, the bright parts seemed to be soft wood.

2) I am nearly sure now the "shadows" are dyed; the consistence of wood there seems to be harder, also better for carving - the details are better cut were the wood is black.

The long lines visible now on bright parts are recognizable also within the "shadow".

The wood of my wrongko IS darker and more reddish then on the two pictures; the natural color is more like in the one with keris inside (same post).

There are some wrongko examples from Hidayat's site. It seems, he calls it Kemuning when long paralel lines in the wood are visible, sometimes it seems to be the only difference.

Trembalo: http://keris.fotopic.net/p55407012.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50102970.html , http://keris.fotopic.net/p52103495.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p61975575.html

Kemuning: http://keris.fotopic.net/p50102970.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50299622.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50103001.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p52104027.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p45534487.html

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The Jawa wrongko looks like trembalu to me.

I do not know the local and correct name for the wood in the Malay wrongko.

I have seen this degree of chatoyancy in many other woods, both SE Asian woods and European woods. You can find a chatoyant grain such as we see here in any number of common cabinet timbers, walnut for instance. In SE Asian timbers I've seen similar grain in scented sandalwood.

I'm afraid that from a picture of a piece of polished wood I simply cannot tell what the wood might be most of the time. I'm just not that good.

EDIT I probably should add that kemuning is certainly known in Jawa, but we know it as material for jejeran; it is ideal for this purpose because it has a tight, close, fine grain.Its a yellowish wood and needs to be stained after it has been carved. In these wrongkos with highly chatoyant grain, I don't see anything that I would recognise as kemuning.

Thank you Alain for the time you spend by this. And you are right; I also know this grain from walnut, very similar. And it's maybe possible that there are different sorts of kemuning.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Gustav

Dear All,

that's what it looks like after some cleaning:

1) I was wrong, it is not timoho (probably kemuning but not stained?); just when I cleaned patra's, the bright parts seemed to be soft wood.

2) I am nearly sure now the "shadows" are dyed; the consistence of wood there seems to be harder, also better for carving - the details are better cut were the wood is black.

The long lines visible now on bright parts are recognizable also within the "shadow".

The wood of my wrongko IS darker and more reddish then on the two pictures; the natural color is more like in the one with keris inside (same post).

There are some wrongko examples from Hidayat's site. It seems, he calls it Kemuning when long paralel lines in the wood are visible, sometimes it seems to be the only difference.

Trembalo: http://keris.fotopic.net/p55407012.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50102970.html , http://keris.fotopic.net/p52103495.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p61975575.html

Kemuning: http://keris.fotopic.net/p50102970.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50299622.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p50103001.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p52104027.html, http://keris.fotopic.net/p45534487.html

Hello Gustav,

nice jejeran. I think that you want to write under 2. that you sure that the black parts are not dyed. And it will be like this since nothing is gone from the black by the cleaning.

About kemuning and trembalo: It's still a mystery for me to differ between this two woods, special after seeing the examples you have shown.

Best,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

I believe the people who are taking part in this conversation are aware that I deal, ie, I buy and sell keris.

I also have very extensive experience and many contacts in the dealer network in Indonesia, that stretch back over 40 years.

Perhaps it might be as well to note that a dealer will often discover that the name of something is what a number of his buyers would like it to be.

Never forget:- the customer is always right.

And this applies doubly in Indonesia.

Many dealers, especially Indonesian dealers, are extremely knowledgeable, but that does not mean that what they tell their customers is necessarily what they themselves know, or believe, to be accurate.

In Jawa you simply do not find a lot of big kemuning trees, thus it is not regarded as a wrongko wood, but rather as a wood for jejeran. Outside Jawa in the Peninsula, and probably Kalimantan, it seems there are more big kemuning trees, so it is used for wrongkos, because sometimes you do get nginden (chatoyant) grain in kemuning.

Another quite common wood that is used in Jawa for wrongkos, and has distinct similarities to kemuning is akasia.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I believe the people who are taking part in this conversation are aware that I deal, ie, I buy and sell keris.

I also have very extensive experience and many contacts in the dealer network in Indonesia, that stretch back over 40 years.

Perhaps it might be as well to note that a dealer will often discover that the name of something is what a number of his buyers would like it to be.

Never forget:- the customer is always right.

And this applies doubly in Indonesia.

Many dealers, especially Indonesian dealers, are extremely knowledgeable, but that does not mean that what they tell their customers is necessarily what they themselves know, or believe, to be accurate.

In Jawa you simply do not find a lot of big kemuning trees, thus it is not regarded as a wrongko wood, but rather as a wood for jejeran. Outside Jawa in the Peninsula, and probably Kalimantan, it seems there are more big kemuning trees, so it is used for wrongkos, because sometimes you do get nginden (chatoyant) grain in kemuning.

Another quite common wood that is used in Jawa for wrongkos, and has distinct similarities to kemuning is akasia.

Yes, without doubt you are right. I am a little bit younger than you, don't have spend so many time in Indonesia and mainly my treasury of words in bahasa indonesia is very bordered and my knowledge of keris is extremely limited but this is something I have learned.

So I take it as fact that when you have a javanese/madurese wrongko with a grain like this it will be mainly from trembalu or one of the other woods you mentioned. And the wrongkos from Peninsula as well Bugis wrongkos most of the time from kemuning. Thank's again for the time you spend by this.

Regards,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm not saying that it is not possible for a Javanese wrongko to be from kemuning.

I'm sure some older wrongkos, were from kemuning, but I have never seen or handled one that people who know more than I do identified as kemuning. Over the years I have known three or four tukang wrongko very well, and a couple of tukang jejeran very well. The tukang jejeran would not infrequently mention kemuning, the tukang wrongko never did.

Kemuning is a light coloured yellowish wood. If it is dark, it has been stained, If a wood that is darkish and has the appearance of kemuning has not been stained, it is not kemuning.

There is a type of kemuning that is called "red kemuning" (kemuning bang), but its only reddish when it is freshly cut, when it dries its just as pale as any other kemuning.

Kemuning that has a nginden grain is very, very difficult to work, the nginden grain is fibrous, and it is exceptionally difficult to get a good polished finish to it, so even if there were to be a piece large enough for a wrongko, the finishing of it to wrongko standard poses a problem.

Kemuning does not look anything like trembalu, and trembalu does not look anything like akasia, even though both usually have a nginden grain.

[sirek]

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by sirek

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

When both wrongkos unstained, yes!

[David]

Originally Posted by sirek

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

The only thing i can see in photos of this size is a difference in the color of the wood which could very well be stain as much as natural. Perhaps you could repost these much larger and explain what differences you see between them.

[sirek]

These pictures are from the net, and I forgot to mention the source where I have pictures of, maybe the real pictures on the site are clearer:
(to enlarge the photo press the left Ctrl button and tap the + button.
back to normal: ctrl and -button)

http://www.tjokrosuharto.com/catalog...hp/language/en

or you can have a look at this site:
http://blade.japet.com/KRISS/K-Artisans/K-bois.htm

(and the real names):

Kemuning -(Murraya Paniculata)
Trembalo - (Cassia Glauca)

[Gustav]

I just think, we should take earnest what Alan has written about this.

Here an old post about Kemuning in bugis sheath:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Typically, only the root portion of the kemuning trunk is used to make the sheath and the hilt. As the kumuning is more of a very slow-growing bush than a tree, it has to be a hundred or two hundred years old to have a thick enough root portion for the sheath. Hilts can come from smaller bushes.

The kemuning trees that grow in very harsh environment has the most beautiful grains. Sometimes, the root grows over rocky/sandy soil, and the root envelopes sand or rock within itself. Some pieces of kemuning wood thus have sand within the wood that is so compacted that they have literally become sandstone. This hilt could have had that void because of this. Normally, such kemuning are not used, but for some reason, this hilt is made out of such a piece. Perhaps for esoteric reasons - insertion of talisman, etc?.

The way the grain radiates out of the centre top of the sheath seems to be a Sulawesi characteristic. I don't see this sort of "radiation" (hmm... sounds nuclear ) on kemuning sheaths from other regions.

[A. G. Maisey]

These photos are from a sales site.

Please re-read what I have already written about salesmen's descriptions.

On this site is also shown akasia, however, the colour of the wood shown bears no resemblance to akasia.

The wood identified as kemuning is textbook akasia colour and grain. To confirm that it is akasia it would need to be handled.

Wood big enough for a wrongko and with a chatoyant grain must come from either a branch junction (in some instances) or from the root area. You need a very big tree to get chatoyant grain.

It is a very, very long time since there have been big kemuning trees in Jawa. In 40 years I have never seen large pieces of kemuning wood for sale. Never.

However, this wrongko identified on this sales site has every appearance of a new wrongko.

Perhaps the very worst source of information for somebody who knows very, very little about keris is an Indonesian seller of keris.


There is at least one error in the the other site too.