Keris with Ivory, Silver and Horn

[F. de Luzon]

Originally Posted by kai

It has lost too many details to allow for a more critical appraisal though. If it has been cared for in a western collection for over 100 years, the blade could easily be from the 18th century; blades that came out of Indonesia more recently, can exhibit similar erosion and be much younger (including artificially aged new blades).

Hello Kai,

Out of curiosity, is there a way to tell if a keris blade has been artificially aged?

Kind regards,

Fernando

[Jean]

Hello Fernando,
I don't think that your blade was artificially aged but it looks older than the dress (pendok and pendokok especially).
I attach a pic of a similar kris from my collection bought in Medan (North Sumatra) in 1996 and originally fitted with an ivory Bugis hilt.
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by F. de Luzon

Out of curiosity, is there a way to tell if a keris blade has been artificially aged?

I agree with José. I have no suspicions that your keris was artificially aged. Often it can be obvious based on the look of the wear patterns. There might be severe pitting, but edges remain unusually sharp or some other unusual contradiction in appearance. When you see blades like these they will automatically look suspicious. But i have heard of blades where the process is done well enough to at least fool a well trained Keris Ahli for a time.
It should also be noted that artificial keris aging isn't always done to fool. Within certain collecting circles (this probably only applies to Javanese keris) an aged look is the preferred look so new blades will receive this process with the buyer knowing that the keris is new. It is only when such blades are presented as antique that we have a problem.

[F. de Luzon]

Hello Jean and David,

Your insights are very reassuring. Thank you very much!

Jean, that kris is very nice.

Kind regards,

Fernando