Wallace Collection Keris

[David]

Thanks for your input Alan. Yes, my confusion did not stop at the hilt. Glad you know that i may have good reason being confused.

[Battara]

Very helpful Alan and Erik, thank you.

I had always wondered about this particular piece for years.

Mystery solved.

[Gustav]

I feel, we should study a little bit more this fascinating weapon.

At first it seems to be clear, that what we see isn't the original state. The blade has been sharpened, very possibly losing some length and width (judging from the gold work), yet the most serious loss is the front Pudak Sategal. Just imagine it, and there will be no Kukri anymore in this picture.

This happens in a region where people do appreciate a sharp cutting edge and is not unusual regarding Keris, see the other example. The loss of material can be pretty substancial.

Interesting for me regarding ornamentics of this weapon is the way two kinds of popular ornaments are united. The first one is the natural plant ornament in the central panel (on a blade without sogokan, that meens, the "source" of the plant is visible), feature the weapon from Wallace collection shares with the other Keris depicted in this post.

The second kind of ornamentics is the sequence of curls, on Wallace weapon they are found on edges till the end of the remaining Pudak Sategal and on Gonjo. I feel, this ornament possibly derived from both DongSon spiral ornaments and more recent Chinese Ming influences.

I don't have any knowledge about Indian ornaments, so I don't know, if one or both of these ornaments are found on Indian weapons, yet both of them are found on Indonesian/Malay Keris, and there are big differences in how they are executed on different Keris. Of course, these are just ornaments.

[Gustav]

Here are the pictures of different Keris with the second kind of ornament, the sequences of curls. Interesting fact is, on gonjo of Wallace weapon the sides are covered with the curling ornament, yet the back of Gonjo seems to have the naturalistic plant ornament on it.

[David]

Thanks Gustav...i don't believe this mystery has been solved quite yet..

[Gustav]

And one more post regarding Gonjo and Ricikan:

Gonjo seems to be of the symmetrical type, like on Dhapur Sepang. The striking and "foreign" element seems to be the exagerated first element of Ron Dha Nunut. Yet the whole group of three elements of Ron Dha Nunut do appear on some old blades - an alternative to "classical" Ron Dha Nunut, with Dha. I have posted also a picture of the Megantoro from Bezemer's book. Here are only two elements on Ron Dha Nunut, exagerated is the second one. So I think, there is some possible space we should left for anomalies in Keris culture, and this blade clearly is one.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, I'm not quite sure what you are setting forth here.

Are you saying that in your opinion this weapon does originate from a keris bearing culture, and is in fact just a variation of keris style?

I cannot see any evidence that this keris is not in its original state, based upon what I can see in the photos this keris appears to have been made with these blade lines.

The gonjo and sorsoran area have a Javanese feeling to them, so I am looking at this keris as if it were Javanese/Balinese.

To my eye there are three things that stand out as being non-typical of a keris that bears the stylistic elements that this one does. Firstly the really obvious abnormality is the pawakan; such a pawakan is very much at variance with Javanese aesthetics, it presents the feeling of distortion and physical disability, as would be seen in a cripple.

The kinatah work is of a style that I cannot relate to any Indonesian style that I can recall, but it does look quite similar to some Indian work that I've seen.

Then there is the length. At 10.25" this is a very short keris blade, however I cannot see any evidence that it has been shortened:- the kruwingan is still as it should be, the kinatah work finishes at the edge of the kruwingan, there is no distortion nor interruption to the flow of the lines; to me, everything looks as it should. But there is an abnormality in the cross section of the blade in that there is flat face to the blade as we would expect in a Bugis style keris.
At 10.25" this blade is short, but from the displayed image, the sorsoran and gonjo appear to be proportionate to the length.

I still doubt that this keris was made in the Peninsula or in any part of what is now Indonesia.

Having said that, I'm now going to qualify what I've said:- I've formed this opinion based on fairly inadequate photos; you may well be correct, this weapon might be a product of the Peninsula or Indonesia; probably the only way we could know with certainty would be to know the complete provenance, and that appears not to be available.

Whenever I see a "one off" I always remember Panembahan Harjonegoro and the Solo Keris Mafia. Harjonegoro was acknowledged as one of the most knowledgeable people of the 20th century in the field of Javanese art and most especially the keris. He was a very, very knowledgeable and clever man.
But whenever one of the Shifty Shonks in the SKM was short of money they'd simply come up with something new, unique and undoubtedly old --- even if it had been made yesterday. Harjonegoro was virtually always a certain buyer.
In keris art, genuine quality runs in pattern styles. Where something varies from the norm the red flags must go up. The further back in time we go, the more this must apply, simply because nothing in a keris is dependent upon the whim of the maker, he must conform if he is to produce a true keris.Old keris were loaded with symbolism, so when a keris varies from the norm, the symbolism is distorted and can no longer be read, and this means that the iconography of the keris no longer exists. If the iconography no longer can be read, the keris has lost its purpose. Thus, if I see something like this weapon, I ask myself:- " what is being said?" if I cannot hear an answer, I can only assume that the maker was not speaking in the correct language.

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I cannot see any evidence that this keris is not in its original state, based upon what I can see in the photos this keris appears to have been made with these blade lines.

Alan, the edge on front (Gandhik) side is distincly narrower over its whole length then on back side. On back side there is a Pudak Sategal, on front side at the same place there are kinatah lines just ending nowhere.

So I suppose, the narrower edge is an indication for an extensive reshaping/resharpening after a damage to a hypothetical front Pudak Sategal. During this reshaping Pudak Sategal was removed, together with a distinct part of the front edge.

Also the Kinatah in area towards the tip of blade is disturbed, especially at the front side.