"Armour Piercing Keris" ???

David · 21st December 2016, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kulino

Dear Alan,
Could you please elaborate on the Mentuk Iras?

I am sure that Alan will be able to elaborate further, but he is referring to the metuk as being all one piece with the pesi. It was not a piece added on and welded in place.

Kulino · 21st December 2016, 07:39 PM

I understand. The thing is that I have never made the connection between quality and a welded of separate mentuk. I tend to look at the material, the finish and the sound pitch of the metal. Let's here what Alan has to say about this.

A. G. Maisey · 21st December 2016, 10:02 PM

When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules.

Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons.

But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior.

On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways.

In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past.

Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards?

My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual.

The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved.

The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

David · 22nd December 2016, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

Thanks Alan. I neither own, nor have yet to personally handle a tombak or blade with a metuk, so i have no first hand experience. The welded comment was simply an off hand remark to suggest that it was indeed "fixed in place". Is this done with a pinning technique of some sort?

Kulino · 22nd December 2016, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules.

Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons.

But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior.

On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways.

In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past.

Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards?

My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual.

The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved.

The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

So to get this straight I've added three tombak.
One with a missing mentuk, one with a mentuk iras and one with a seperately made mentuk. Correct? Is the one with the 'missing'mentuk intended to go without?

kai · 22nd December 2016, 05:13 PM

Hello K!

Regarding the tombak with kinatah, it looks like the pamor might be continuing onto the metuk - could this be iras construction, too? (The kinatah obscures the lamination a bit and closely examining this tombak should help to resolve this.)

Regards,
Kai

Kulino · 22nd December 2016, 05:35 PM

Hi K!

Looks like it. The kinatah looks genuine. The tombak looks like a quality object. Wutuh, sepuh and maybe even a bit tanggu. If this is the case this could support the idea that there might be tombak of quality with mentuk iras. The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah.
(Maybe less intricate)

kai · 22nd December 2016, 06:13 PM

Hello Kulino,

Quote:

The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah.
(Maybe less intricate)

The center motif seems to correspond, indeed. I'd agree that the iras metuk looks nicer than the separate one in these 2 examples (even when ignoring the kinatah).

Without wanting to hijack Paul's thread - great to see some tombak here for a change!

Regards,
Kai

22nd December 2016, 05:35 PM	#7
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	Hi K! Looks like it. The kinatah looks genuine. The tombak looks like a quality object. Wutuh, sepuh and maybe even a bit tanggu. If this is the case this could support the idea that there might be tombak of quality with mentuk iras. The tombak now showing has seperate metuk with the same kinatah. (Maybe less intricate) Attached Images

21st December 2016, 07:39 PM	#2
Kulino Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 84	I understand. The thing is that I have never made the connection between quality and a welded of separate mentuk. I tend to look at the material, the finish and the sound pitch of the metal. Let's here what Alan has to say about this.

21st December 2016, 10:02 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,085	When I say that this tombak is of lower quality because the metuk was carved integrally with the blade, the standard I am using is a Javanese standard:- it is their weapon, their art, their icon:- they make the rules. Its a bit like the Japanese sword thing:- a person from a different cultural background cannot presume to set the quality rules for Japanese swords; similarly only the Javanese can set the quality rules for Javanese weapons. But we have a bit of a problem here, because there are tombak that come from other areas of Indonesia where the metuk iras is usual, so obviously those people do not consider metuk iras to be inferior. On the other hand, Javanese culture is now, has been been for at least 700 years, the dominant culture in Maritime S.E. Asia, a fact that gets a lot of people upset. So the Javanese standards tend to supplant other local standards in many ways. In the world of tosan aji it seems to me that since the revival of keris culture beginning in the 1970's, and which began in Jawa, Javanese standards and terminology have pretty much replaced whatever understanding of tosan aji existed in other areas in the past. Thus we have a question:- does a collector of tosan aji who is based in a western culture need to observe Javanese standards, or does he invent his own standards? My opinion, and it is only an opinion, is that if this collector is just a collector of objects he can be perfectly at liberty to adopt whatever standards he wishes. However, if he wants to understand that which he collects then he must adopt the standards of the culture and society from which the object comes. This then becomes a personal choice:- collect things, or understand things? Its up to the individual. The line of thought that might apply to the distinction between metuk iras and and a separately made metuk is similar to the line of thought that applies to the gonjo of a keris. There are societal and cultural elements involved. The metuk of a tombak is mechanically fixed in place, not welded.

22nd December 2016, 05:13 PM	#6
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	Hello K! Regarding the tombak with kinatah, it looks like the pamor might be continuing onto the metuk - could this be iras construction, too? (The kinatah obscures the lamination a bit and closely examining this tombak should help to resolve this.) Regards, Kai