Keris Sundang Melayu with twist core

Gustav · 20th June 2013, 03:17 PM

Alan, I agree, we are actually saying the same.

The discussion for me started actually with this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

To my eye, this miring pamor is the style of work I expect to see in later pieces. The techniques and technology required to weld this type of pamor and to achieve this degree of perfection did not develop until relatively recently in the areas of keris production with which I am familiar.

For me the pefection of twistcore Pamor in Moro pieces is almost inexplicable, even more, becouse this is almost the only one Miring pattern we see in Moro blades. Just like they weren't interested in something other.

And exactly this is the thing that lets me think about Turkish Yataghans, where we encounter the same thing. No other technicques, perhaps some exeptional Adeg (like in some rare Moro blades), only twistcore, yet quite perfect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Of the examples you list, the Sendai keris has pamor sanak I believe. It was examined by a Javanese gentleman --- Martowikrodo or a similar name --- and he states this in his report. I've read this somewhere, but I forget where. It might be on the net.

Actually I posted this article in the thread about Sendai Keris.
I can assure you, the pamor of it seems to be Miring, it could be even twistcore, yet it surely isn't Sanak. I am not allowed to show a picture of it.

A. G. Maisey · 26th June 2013, 12:14 AM

Gustav, I have now had the opportunity to examine perhaps the best screen photograph that is available of the Sendai keris. I have Photoshopped this image and reworked it to the limit of my capability, I have viewed the results on a high resolution screen, and then examined the screen image with a good quality magnifying glass; my eyes test at 20/20 wearing reading glasses.

In the sorsoran area of the Sendai Keris I can see some very faint, very slight white marks; in my opinion these marks, or traces, could be due to a number of reasons. I most definitely cannot see anything that would permit me to state categorically that the Sendai Keris has pamor miring.

Here is a link to the article by Wahyono Martokrido that you posted on 21st September 2012.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...6&page=2&pp=30

What Wahyono Martokrido says about the pamor in this keris is:-

The pamor is light grey in color, showing the patterns of curvy lines. The color of the pamor is not so contrast to that of the iron. This pamor can be categorized as pamor sanak, i.e. pamor made of different iron with so small difference in grain size and phosphorous (and arsenic) content in the metal.[13]
( the reference "13" is to Prof. Piaskowski's 1995 paper, a paper in which I had some involvement)

I think we might have to agree to disagree on this matter relating to the Sendai Keris Gustav, I can see no evidence of pamor miring, Martokrido could see only pamor sanak, and he held the thing in his hands.

I will accept that you can see firm evidence of pamor miring, but I cannot.

However, Martokrido does mention "---patterns of curvy lines---"; this indicates clearly that the pamor material has been folded and worked, but it cannot be taken as evidence that this working involved the miring technique.

Personally, I do not find the appearance of this twist pamor in Moro metal work to be so puzzling. Clearly it came from outside the area and was not an indigenous development.

There was solid, continuing trade and cultural contact between virtually all areas of Maritime SE Asia during the time in which this twist pamor in Moro weapons made its appearance; the most advanced smiths in the region during this period were those from Jawa/Madura (in this context Jawa and Madura can be considered as a single entity, the variation between the two places can be likened more to a district variation rather than anything else).

The style and execution of the pamor in the blade under discussion here, as well as other blades of this type that I personally have seen does appear to be Madurese. To my mind, this indicates a high probability that this pamor is a direct product of, or is linked to a smith, or smiths from Jawa/Madura, most likely Madura.

There is a possibility that the link for this pamor could be to some other place, and some cultural root. However, in light of the available evidence of trade and cultural contact across Maritime SE Asia, I do feel that a link to anywhere other than Jawa/Madura must be regarded as an outside possibility, rather than a probability.

I do feel that we are both on the same track here, but I think we must agree to disagree in respect of the nature of the pamor in the Sendai keris.

RSWORD · 26th June 2013, 12:46 AM

When considering outside possibilities in regards to twistcore influences in the Philippines I would toss in China. You find very fine twistcore blades in Chinese swords, both in double edge jian swords as well as single edge dao swords. The question, however, for both China as well as any Middle Eastern source, such as the Turkish Yataghan, is in how far back do you find examples with twistcore. In both the Turkish and Chinese examples, you are hard pressed to find examples that date prior to the 18th century. Perhaps you could stretch this back a century and say 17th century. So perhaps in the Phillipines, the "perfection" of twistcore may have been a Chinese influence from the 18th or 19th centuries. Of course, twistcore dates a long ways back. You find early Viking swords with complex and fine twistcore blades and they were a nautical bunch so who is to say that technology didn't find it's way half way around the world. Then again, where did the Vikings learn and develop such complicated twistcore technology. I'm pretty sure it wasn't ancient aliens as some US shows would like to hypothesize. But in any event, I'm rambling but it sure is a fun ramble!

A. G. Maisey · 26th June 2013, 02:35 AM

Yes, twisted manipulation of iron is not unique. In fact, it is one of the basic methods used in times past in a number of places to remove impurities from iron in order to make it fit for use.

However, when we consider these Philippine or Moro blades we have one window in time, and a very limited number of windows in opportunity to transfer skills.

Within the convergence of these two windows the highest probability of source lays with Jawa/Madura. This probability is strengthened by the knowledgeable appraisal of the style and technique of manufacture.

Here we have the difference between possibility and probability:-

anything is possible, only a very limited number of things can ever be probable.

Gustav · 26th June 2013, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RSWORD

So perhaps in the Phillipines, the "perfection" of twistcore may have been a Chinese influence from the 18th or 19th centuries. Of course, twistcore dates a long ways back. You find early Viking swords with complex and fine twistcore blades and they were a nautical bunch so who is to say that technology didn't find it's way half way around the world. Then again, where did the Vikings learn and develop such complicated twistcore technology. I'm pretty sure it wasn't ancient aliens as some US shows would like to hypothesize.

The aliens were, as in most cases in Europe, the Romans. One of the best sources for roman swords with elaborate welding patterns is the moor of Illerup. If you try to search "Illerup Adal swords", you perhaps will find something. There is also a very good book in two volumes.

Yet the most likeable, actually undisputable origin of twistcore and other elaborate patterns is the Middle East. The Romans adapted this technique only after the wars with Parthians, together with longer swords.

A. G. Maisey · 26th June 2013, 12:04 PM

Heaps of stuff out there.

Have a talk to Dr. Google

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom...eich-0508.html

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...swords&f=false

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=me...w=1280&bih=907

DAHenkel · 26th June 2013, 03:54 PM

Properly speaking this sampir style in Kelantan is known as a sampir "pucuk kacang". My understanding at this point is that the term Ku Sriwa is an attribution to a group of kerises with this style of sheath to an aristocractic Kelantanese of that name. Ku (Tengku) Sriwa is supposed to have lived around the turn of the 20th century and is reported to be an historic figure. I have not however had a chance to follow up this in archival records. Hopefully I will get a chance to visit Kelantan soon and follow up.

Gustav · 26th June 2013, 08:24 PM

For me a problem to accept Madura smiths as initial propagators of twistcore on Philippine blades is, as I wrote, the lack of other more elaborate patterns. We see only twistcore with exeption of some very rare Adeg patterns.

I also doubt, there are Madura blades at all, which have rows of more then 3 twistcore stripes, seen on Kampilan and sometimes on Kris. Yet the normal keris blades are much narrower, of course.

Here is a thread about a twistcore Yataghan in SEA dress:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7622

Here is a thread about twistcore Mandau:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...4243&highlight

Also pictures of a Kampilan and two Yataghans, one of them (the upper one) dated 1592.

Regarding Sendai Keris, I have the same picture, the best available at the moment. The keris is out of stain, has a polished and in some areas slightly rusted surface, so it is difficult to be judged and no categorical statements can be made. Yet I would say, there is at least a possibility of a pattern welded Pamor Miring, even if the Pamor material isn't of high contrast.

A. G. Maisey · 27th June 2013, 12:47 AM

Yes, agreed, there is always the possibility of a miring technique having been used to weld the Sendai Keris.

There is always the possibility of anything.

Javanese and Madurese blades do exist that display multiple bars of twisted material welded together. I have owned a number of these, mostly pedangs.

There is a possibility that the technology used to weld twist patterns in the Philippines did come from the Middle East --- as I have said:- anything is possible.

However, I do feel that we would need a a little more evidence of trade links between the areas where these Philippine blades were produced and the Middle East. I have never looked specifically at this local area, the Philippines, so I do not know what the trade links were.

If we wish to assign origin of technology to somewhere other than the obvious source then what we need is evidence of trade links. Not just itinerant preachers, but solid, continuing trade. If we can show that existed then there is a good chance that the technology came into the Philippines from the Middle East.

We know that there there were trade links between Jawa and virtually all of Maritime SE Asia. Why do we need to look further afield? The most obvious source of the technology is Jawa, but there is always the possibility that the technology could have come from somewhere else.

Spunjer · 27th June 2013, 04:09 PM

very informative and interesting thread so far!
the triangular trade between india, china and southeast asia in the mid 1700's in turn developed Sulu into a major trading center and transshipment for the zone (Warren, the sulu zone, 1768-1898).

A. G. Maisey · 28th June 2013, 12:36 AM

This post is a comment on the possible source of technique and technology necessary for the production of pattern welded blades in the region under the control of the Sulu Sultanate.

As already noted, I have very little interest in this geographic area or this subject, however I have spent half an hour or so looking at web sources with the assistance of Dr. Google. In fact, there seems to be quite a lot of information available online that deals with the history of this area and its trade links.

Cursory review of the available information indicates that until the arrival of the Spanish and conflict with them there was not inconsiderable contact with Islam through both Middle Eastern and Chinese Muslim merchants and preachers. Thus it is reasonable to assume that there was a direct transfer of technology in metal working from Chinese and Middle Eastern societies to craftsmen within the Sulu Sultanate, just as there was in Jawa.

There was diplomatic and mercantile contact with China on a reasonably large and consistent scale, and also contact with Sufi traders from the early 15th century.

Against this background it is reasonable to assume a similar transfer of skills to that which took place in Jawa.

With the arrival of the Spanish it appears that trade links between the Middle East & China (to a lesser extent) and the Sulu Sultanate declined, but the trade and cultural exchange between the various entities of regional Maritime SE Asia continued.

It seems that two distinct influences contributed to metal working techniques and technology in the Sulu Sultanate, first direct contact with peoples from both China and the Middle East, and a lengthy and continuing contact with peoples from within Maritime SE Asia.

What I have written above is the product of no more than 30 minutes web browsing. It may be correct, substantially correct, or incorrect. But it does indicate that there is a very adequate quantity of information available for research by anybody with an interest in this subject --- and that's just the on-line stuff. Get involved with real, live, genuine printed matter and there's no telling what you might discover.

Is anybody even remotely interested in looking for factual historical information to supplement their interest in the weaponry of this area?

26th June 2013, 12:14 AM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Gustav, I have now had the opportunity to examine perhaps the best screen photograph that is available of the Sendai keris. I have Photoshopped this image and reworked it to the limit of my capability, I have viewed the results on a high resolution screen, and then examined the screen image with a good quality magnifying glass; my eyes test at 20/20 wearing reading glasses. In the sorsoran area of the Sendai Keris I can see some very faint, very slight white marks; in my opinion these marks, or traces, could be due to a number of reasons. I most definitely cannot see anything that would permit me to state categorically that the Sendai Keris has pamor miring. Here is a link to the article by Wahyono Martokrido that you posted on 21st September 2012. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...6&page=2&pp=30 What Wahyono Martokrido says about the pamor in this keris is:- The pamor is light grey in color, showing the patterns of curvy lines. The color of the pamor is not so contrast to that of the iron. This pamor can be categorized as pamor sanak, i.e. pamor made of different iron with so small difference in grain size and phosphorous (and arsenic) content in the metal.[13] ( the reference "13" is to Prof. Piaskowski's 1995 paper, a paper in which I had some involvement) I think we might have to agree to disagree on this matter relating to the Sendai Keris Gustav, I can see no evidence of pamor miring, Martokrido could see only pamor sanak, and he held the thing in his hands. I will accept that you can see firm evidence of pamor miring, but I cannot. However, Martokrido does mention "---patterns of curvy lines---"; this indicates clearly that the pamor material has been folded and worked, but it cannot be taken as evidence that this working involved the miring technique. Personally, I do not find the appearance of this twist pamor in Moro metal work to be so puzzling. Clearly it came from outside the area and was not an indigenous development. There was solid, continuing trade and cultural contact between virtually all areas of Maritime SE Asia during the time in which this twist pamor in Moro weapons made its appearance; the most advanced smiths in the region during this period were those from Jawa/Madura (in this context Jawa and Madura can be considered as a single entity, the variation between the two places can be likened more to a district variation rather than anything else). The style and execution of the pamor in the blade under discussion here, as well as other blades of this type that I personally have seen does appear to be Madurese. To my mind, this indicates a high probability that this pamor is a direct product of, or is linked to a smith, or smiths from Jawa/Madura, most likely Madura. There is a possibility that the link for this pamor could be to some other place, and some cultural root. However, in light of the available evidence of trade and cultural contact across Maritime SE Asia, I do feel that a link to anywhere other than Jawa/Madura must be regarded as an outside possibility, rather than a probability. I do feel that we are both on the same track here, but I think we must agree to disagree in respect of the nature of the pamor in the Sendai keris. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 26th June 2013 at 12:25 AM. Reason: clarification.

26th June 2013, 08:24 PM	#8
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,295	For me a problem to accept Madura smiths as initial propagators of twistcore on Philippine blades is, as I wrote, the lack of other more elaborate patterns. We see only twistcore with exeption of some very rare Adeg patterns. I also doubt, there are Madura blades at all, which have rows of more then 3 twistcore stripes, seen on Kampilan and sometimes on Kris. Yet the normal keris blades are much narrower, of course. Here is a thread about a twistcore Yataghan in SEA dress: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7622 Here is a thread about twistcore Mandau: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...4243&highlight Also pictures of a Kampilan and two Yataghans, one of them (the upper one) dated 1592. Regarding Sendai Keris, I have the same picture, the best available at the moment. The keris is out of stain, has a polished and in some areas slightly rusted surface, so it is difficult to be judged and no categorical statements can be made. Yet I would say, there is at least a possibility of a pattern welded Pamor Miring, even if the Pamor material isn't of high contrast. Attached Images Last edited by Gustav; 26th June 2013 at 09:12 PM.

26th June 2013, 12:46 AM	#3
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,087	When considering outside possibilities in regards to twistcore influences in the Philippines I would toss in China. You find very fine twistcore blades in Chinese swords, both in double edge jian swords as well as single edge dao swords. The question, however, for both China as well as any Middle Eastern source, such as the Turkish Yataghan, is in how far back do you find examples with twistcore. In both the Turkish and Chinese examples, you are hard pressed to find examples that date prior to the 18th century. Perhaps you could stretch this back a century and say 17th century. So perhaps in the Phillipines, the "perfection" of twistcore may have been a Chinese influence from the 18th or 19th centuries. Of course, twistcore dates a long ways back. You find early Viking swords with complex and fine twistcore blades and they were a nautical bunch so who is to say that technology didn't find it's way half way around the world. Then again, where did the Vikings learn and develop such complicated twistcore technology. I'm pretty sure it wasn't ancient aliens as some US shows would like to hypothesize. But in any event, I'm rambling but it sure is a fun ramble!

26th June 2013, 02:35 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Yes, twisted manipulation of iron is not unique. In fact, it is one of the basic methods used in times past in a number of places to remove impurities from iron in order to make it fit for use. However, when we consider these Philippine or Moro blades we have one window in time, and a very limited number of windows in opportunity to transfer skills. Within the convergence of these two windows the highest probability of source lays with Jawa/Madura. This probability is strengthened by the knowledgeable appraisal of the style and technique of manufacture. Here we have the difference between possibility and probability:- anything is possible, only a very limited number of things can ever be probable.

26th June 2013, 12:04 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Heaps of stuff out there. Have a talk to Dr. Google http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom...eich-0508.html http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...swords&f=false http://www.google.com.au/search?q=me...w=1280&bih=907

26th June 2013, 03:54 PM	#7
DAHenkel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 125	Properly speaking this sampir style in Kelantan is known as a sampir "pucuk kacang". My understanding at this point is that the term Ku Sriwa is an attribution to a group of kerises with this style of sheath to an aristocractic Kelantanese of that name. Ku (Tengku) Sriwa is supposed to have lived around the turn of the 20th century and is reported to be an historic figure. I have not however had a chance to follow up this in archival records. Hopefully I will get a chance to visit Kelantan soon and follow up.

27th June 2013, 12:47 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Yes, agreed, there is always the possibility of a miring technique having been used to weld the Sendai Keris. There is always the possibility of anything. Javanese and Madurese blades do exist that display multiple bars of twisted material welded together. I have owned a number of these, mostly pedangs. There is a possibility that the technology used to weld twist patterns in the Philippines did come from the Middle East --- as I have said:- anything is possible. However, I do feel that we would need a a little more evidence of trade links between the areas where these Philippine blades were produced and the Middle East. I have never looked specifically at this local area, the Philippines, so I do not know what the trade links were. If we wish to assign origin of technology to somewhere other than the obvious source then what we need is evidence of trade links. Not just itinerant preachers, but solid, continuing trade. If we can show that existed then there is a good chance that the technology came into the Philippines from the Middle East. We know that there there were trade links between Jawa and virtually all of Maritime SE Asia. Why do we need to look further afield? The most obvious source of the technology is Jawa, but there is always the possibility that the technology could have come from somewhere else.

27th June 2013, 04:09 PM	#10
Spunjer Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Witness Protection Program Posts: 1,730	very informative and interesting thread so far! the triangular trade between india, china and southeast asia in the mid 1700's in turn developed Sulu into a major trading center and transshipment for the zone (Warren, the sulu zone, 1768-1898).

28th June 2013, 12:36 AM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	This post is a comment on the possible source of technique and technology necessary for the production of pattern welded blades in the region under the control of the Sulu Sultanate. As already noted, I have very little interest in this geographic area or this subject, however I have spent half an hour or so looking at web sources with the assistance of Dr. Google. In fact, there seems to be quite a lot of information available online that deals with the history of this area and its trade links. Cursory review of the available information indicates that until the arrival of the Spanish and conflict with them there was not inconsiderable contact with Islam through both Middle Eastern and Chinese Muslim merchants and preachers. Thus it is reasonable to assume that there was a direct transfer of technology in metal working from Chinese and Middle Eastern societies to craftsmen within the Sulu Sultanate, just as there was in Jawa. There was diplomatic and mercantile contact with China on a reasonably large and consistent scale, and also contact with Sufi traders from the early 15th century. Against this background it is reasonable to assume a similar transfer of skills to that which took place in Jawa. With the arrival of the Spanish it appears that trade links between the Middle East & China (to a lesser extent) and the Sulu Sultanate declined, but the trade and cultural exchange between the various entities of regional Maritime SE Asia continued. It seems that two distinct influences contributed to metal working techniques and technology in the Sulu Sultanate, first direct contact with peoples from both China and the Middle East, and a lengthy and continuing contact with peoples from within Maritime SE Asia. What I have written above is the product of no more than 30 minutes web browsing. It may be correct, substantially correct, or incorrect. But it does indicate that there is a very adequate quantity of information available for research by anybody with an interest in this subject --- and that's just the on-line stuff. Get involved with real, live, genuine printed matter and there's no telling what you might discover. Is anybody even remotely interested in looking for factual historical information to supplement their interest in the weaponry of this area?