Strange Mendak on Yogyakarta Keris

[drdavid]

Hi Alan
I will be the fish on the hook here and all my comments are based on what I see in the photos. For me the sogokan is not well executed, the edges are wavy and there is poor symmetry, this is in contrast to the blumbangan. The greneng is not crisp but it is adequate. The kembang kacang is interesting, very elongated and less worn than the work under it, I wonder if it has been reshaped
cheers
DrD

[David]

Well, i believe i would like to see a much clearer and more detailed photos before i would set out to pick apart the garap of this particular blade. Certainly it is not a master work. Simply a nice and serviceable blade that i like the look of.
I am assuming this is not a contemporary blade and there is, no doubt, wear to all the ricikan of this blade, but frankly there is not a single photo presented here that would allow me to make an opinion on the greneng of this blade, worn or not. I do see the unevenness of the sogokan that Dr. D mentions, but again, there is no telling what this blade looked like when it was first produced.
What i will say again is that i like this blade and would gladly add it to my collection. I am much more concerned with the rust i presently see in the sogokan than whether i believe it was crafted by expert hands.

[Johan van Zyl]

Of course, the terms describing the depth/shallowness of the waves as "strong/weak" was poorly chosen. Yes, the tangguh classification needs to be taken into account. I noticed the relatively deep waves immediately, because the waves of my Bugis Riau keris are relatively shallow in comparison. Thanks, Alan & David.

Like David, I also would gladly add it to my collection!

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, these fotos are less than adequate to enable a thorough critical assessment, but even though they could be improved, I believe we can see sufficient to permit some valid opinions to be formed. In a way, seeing photos like these does reflect the real life situation of buying in a market in Jawa, the light in the markets is very far from ideal, the pressure from the mass of people one is surrounded by, and from the seller, often forces an opinion when it might be wiser to delay until the available info was a little better.

Taking these things into consideration I do feel that legitimate comment can be made about this blade, and it is an interesting blade to comment on.

The first thing that hits my eye is the very badly shaped sogokan:- the front edge of the sogokan in the grey background foto is appalling.
But was it like this originally?
I do not believe so.

Another incongruous thing with the sogokan is the fact that the poyuhan (the very tip of the sogokan) does not produce a nice neat balanced meeting of the two sides of the sogokan.

If we compare the two sogokans, one on each side of the blade, it seems that the sogokan in the foto on the red background has nice straight edges , so maybe that wavy edge in the grey foto is due to damage, or maybe it is due to a flaw in the material. But even though the edges of the red background sogokan do look better, once again the poyuhan is much less than good.
Is this due to age, or damage, or was it like this from the beginning?

I don't know, and even if the fotos were very much better, I still wouldn't know. I would need the blade in my hand and 3X loupe screwed into my eye.

The only thing I can say with confidence is that right now, these sogokan suck.

If we look at the blumbangan and the gandhik, what we can see is very skilful work. Both these features are very well sculpted, but the kembang kacang is thin and wispy, very much like a Madura kembang kacang, or as DR.D. suggests, a KK that has been heavily eroded and perhaps reshaped. However, there is an irregularity under the KK which might indicate that this KK once had a jenggot. Again no better foto could tell me any more than I can see now, I would need to handle the blade.

But, if the jenggot is missing --- why?

The greneng is a real puzzle. Yes, there is clear evidence of some erosion, but we can see that we are looking at a Mataram rondha. However, there is nothing that resembles a correct kanyut. Even though the greneng has lost form --- if it had good form to begin with --- it still appears to be relatively thick, not thin as is usually the case with an eroded greneng.

In short, the greneng is a mess, as it is, it does not carry any message at all. The gonjo seems to be original, so what I'm thinking now is that maybe some extremely unskilled person took a file to the greneng and tried to improve something that had been eaten by erosion. But if this happened, why is the flow of greneng into wadidang still smooth?

Additionally, if the greneng and the jenggot were subject to erosion, why is the outline of the blumbangan still perfect to the point where it looks like it came off the bench yesterday afternoon? Then we have the gandhik, it looks like HB, and it is very, very nice.

The ada-ada is clean and perfect. No erosion at all to the wadidang. The pamor is lifting away from the core, but the edges of the core show none of the expected fraying that is usual when pamor retreats to this degree.

But the pamor itself is very well handled. Complex, and beautiful. All marks of an extremely competent smith.

So we have a competent smith, but several different levels of competence in the garap, and unexpected levels of erosion overall.

Based upon what I believe I can see in the photos, there are too many inconsistencies in this blade to permit any definite opinion in respect of the maker, or more likely, the makers. Frankly, I do not know if I am looking at an old blade that has been subject to erosion, I do not know if the blade has been re-worked, I do not know if I am looking at a relatively recent blade that has been subjected to processing.

What I do know is that there are more inconsistencies than I can feel comfortable with.

[Athanase]

Some pictures taken quickly, but it's difficult to take nice pictures because all my windows are north (with a tree in front), and with the photoflash it's too bright and blurry.