Solo Keris - Comments and Info welcome.

Sajen · 13th May 2018, 04:05 PM

Very beautiful pendok!

BluErf · 14th May 2018, 01:13 AM

This is not a poor quality keris blade. The steel is compact, of good quality.

The luks are executed in a sublime manner, beautifully curving, and seems to almost go out of control, but does not. Amplitude of the luk seems to visually increase as we move towards the tip, even as the luk gets smaller.

The keris has a substantial cross section, yet does not feel heavy. The cross section profile is beautifully plump and well shaped.

Yes, it may not be a surakarta blade, but it is far from being of poor quality.

BluErf · 14th May 2018, 01:50 AM

In my opinion, the dynamicism in the blade is far superior to the staid excellence of the pendok.

A. G. Maisey · 14th May 2018, 02:53 AM

If you say so Blue, if you say so.

We all only comment upon the basis of experience, knowledge and what we can see.

My experience, my knowledge and what I can see in the photo has generated my comment. This blade has very definitely been fiddled with, how much I do not know, what it started as I do not know, and I cannot know on the basis of a photograph. With the blade in my hand I could probably give a firm opinion, from the photo I can only go on what the photo tells me.

I do recognise that differing standards can apply in respect of just how the excellence or otherwise of a keris blade is appraised, For example, we cannot appraise a Javanese blade according to the same standards that are used for a Balinese blade, or a Bugis blade, or a Peninsular blade.

Similarly, once we establish that we are in fact looking at a Javanese blade we cannot appraise a blade from one classification by using standards that apply to a different classification.

Because of this the first thing that we seek to do when called upon to give an opinion on the excellence or otherwise of a keris is to classify the blade in accordance with its perceived tangguh. In the case of keris blades of very high quality, this is not such a difficult thing to do, but as the overall quality of a blade falls, it becomes more and more difficult to establish a tangguh classification.

So failure to establish a defensible opinion in respect of tangguh then becomes a problem in attempting to appraise quality of a blade, because we cannot use the identifiable indicators to tell us how closely or otherwise the blade conforms to established parameters.

A result such as this immediately places a blade into limbo where an opinion of blade quality needs to be based upon factors such as the skill of the maker and the nature of the materials, as well as constant factors that apply across the broad spectrum of all keris.

As an example, one such broad spectrum factor would be exposure of the blade core:- ideally the blade core should extend beyond the pamor for an even distance around the circumference of the blade.

Another universal parameter is that where an ada-ada exists, it should be centrally placed in the blade body. The style of the ada-ada depends upon the classification of the blade, so in the absence of an applicable classification we cannot know the form that the ada-ada should have.

The form of luk is highly dependent upon blade classification, so without a classification all we can say is whether the luk are attractive or not, and that then becomes a judgement that is subject to wide opinion.

With this blade that Paul has shown us, what the photo tells me is that first I cannot identify sufficient indicators to classify the blade. In broad terms it does display some Mataram characteristics, but Mataram what? I have no idea simply by looking at a photo. The form of the ada-ada seems to indicate that it might be Mataram Kajoran, the ada-ada is quite heavy, and in the hand it might resemble the back of a kerbau. But if it is Kajoran, the luk are decidely peculiar for that classification.

The next thing that immediately grabs my attention are the notches in the wadidang. Why are they there? They most certainly do not belong in any Javanese blade. Who put them there and why?

Then we come to the blade proportion which seems to indicate that the blade edges have been reduced. This edge reduction seems to be even more likely when we note that as soon as the blade begins to have luk, the ada-ada goes way, way off centre. Why is it off centre? I sincerely doubt that a maker who could handle the sculpting in the sorsoran competently, as this maker has done, could not maintain a centreline for the ada-ada.

So, for me, there are just too many questions. If it is indeed a Javanese blade, and I tend to believe that it is, it varies far too widely from accepted standards to be accepted as something of quality.

It may be accepted as a quality blade in some other places, but not by the standards that apply in Jawa, and it is, after all, presented in classic Javanese dress of quite nice quality.

I do not deny for one moment that it is an attractive blade, and close examination of it could well reveal that it has been competently made, if it has been altered, as I suspect, the alterations appear to have been competently handled.

However, simply because it might be attractive and competently made that does not make it an item of quality. There is a lot more to it than that. It has been presented as a Javanese keris, so it should be appraised in accordance with Javanese standards.

It is a very nice dress keris.

Jean · 14th May 2018, 09:02 AM

Different but interesting wiew points from Alan and Bue Erf, and both are fully defendable IMO, thanks!

A. G. Maisey · 14th May 2018, 10:06 AM

Yes Jean, I agree, Blue's opinion and my opinion are coming from different directions:-

Blue's opinion is absolutely defensible from the perspective of the average general collector who is outside Javanese society, on the other hand I have chosen to adopt an attitude that reflects what I have been taught of the Javanese perspective.

I guess it depends upon whether we view this keris as a Javanese cultural artifact, or whether we do not differentiate it from any keris from any other place. Whether we judge it according to parameters specific to the Javanese keris, or whether we judge it according to the parameters of general collectors who have only a very slight understanding of the way in which to appraise a Javanese keris.

In my opinion it should be judged as a Javanese keris, not just as any old keris that happened to wander along. Somebody took the trouble to dress it very tastefully and very correctly. It deserves nothing less than culturally correct appraisal. It is not just another collectable item, it is a very nice example of a Javanese dress keris. In my opinion to give it only a cursory comment based upon overall appearance is to disrespect this keris, it is a serious cultural artifact and should be given serious attention.

Jean · 14th May 2018, 01:44 PM

Thank you Alan, and "defensible" is more appropriate than "defendable", sorry for that.
To me this blade does not look to be in accordance with classical Central Java standards (odd greneng on the wadidang, very thick ada-ada, uneven luks, etc) so is it appropriate to try to assign a tangguh to it?
According to the EK, a blade with luks closer and closer towards the tip as this one is an indicator of tangguh Kahuripan (a very old so questionable one?).
I only have one blade with such feature (also with ada-ada), see pic.
Regards

14th May 2018, 01:13 AM	#2
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	This is not a poor quality keris blade. The steel is compact, of good quality. The luks are executed in a sublime manner, beautifully curving, and seems to almost go out of control, but does not. Amplitude of the luk seems to visually increase as we move towards the tip, even as the luk gets smaller. The keris has a substantial cross section, yet does not feel heavy. The cross section profile is beautifully plump and well shaped. Yes, it may not be a surakarta blade, but it is far from being of poor quality. Attached Images Last edited by BluErf; 14th May 2018 at 01:44 AM.

14th May 2018, 02:53 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,990	If you say so Blue, if you say so. We all only comment upon the basis of experience, knowledge and what we can see. My experience, my knowledge and what I can see in the photo has generated my comment. This blade has very definitely been fiddled with, how much I do not know, what it started as I do not know, and I cannot know on the basis of a photograph. With the blade in my hand I could probably give a firm opinion, from the photo I can only go on what the photo tells me. I do recognise that differing standards can apply in respect of just how the excellence or otherwise of a keris blade is appraised, For example, we cannot appraise a Javanese blade according to the same standards that are used for a Balinese blade, or a Bugis blade, or a Peninsular blade. Similarly, once we establish that we are in fact looking at a Javanese blade we cannot appraise a blade from one classification by using standards that apply to a different classification. Because of this the first thing that we seek to do when called upon to give an opinion on the excellence or otherwise of a keris is to classify the blade in accordance with its perceived tangguh. In the case of keris blades of very high quality, this is not such a difficult thing to do, but as the overall quality of a blade falls, it becomes more and more difficult to establish a tangguh classification. So failure to establish a defensible opinion in respect of tangguh then becomes a problem in attempting to appraise quality of a blade, because we cannot use the identifiable indicators to tell us how closely or otherwise the blade conforms to established parameters. A result such as this immediately places a blade into limbo where an opinion of blade quality needs to be based upon factors such as the skill of the maker and the nature of the materials, as well as constant factors that apply across the broad spectrum of all keris. As an example, one such broad spectrum factor would be exposure of the blade core:- ideally the blade core should extend beyond the pamor for an even distance around the circumference of the blade. Another universal parameter is that where an ada-ada exists, it should be centrally placed in the blade body. The style of the ada-ada depends upon the classification of the blade, so in the absence of an applicable classification we cannot know the form that the ada-ada should have. The form of luk is highly dependent upon blade classification, so without a classification all we can say is whether the luk are attractive or not, and that then becomes a judgement that is subject to wide opinion. With this blade that Paul has shown us, what the photo tells me is that first I cannot identify sufficient indicators to classify the blade. In broad terms it does display some Mataram characteristics, but Mataram what? I have no idea simply by looking at a photo. The form of the ada-ada seems to indicate that it might be Mataram Kajoran, the ada-ada is quite heavy, and in the hand it might resemble the back of a kerbau. But if it is Kajoran, the luk are decidely peculiar for that classification. The next thing that immediately grabs my attention are the notches in the wadidang. Why are they there? They most certainly do not belong in any Javanese blade. Who put them there and why? Then we come to the blade proportion which seems to indicate that the blade edges have been reduced. This edge reduction seems to be even more likely when we note that as soon as the blade begins to have luk, the ada-ada goes way, way off centre. Why is it off centre? I sincerely doubt that a maker who could handle the sculpting in the sorsoran competently, as this maker has done, could not maintain a centreline for the ada-ada. So, for me, there are just too many questions. If it is indeed a Javanese blade, and I tend to believe that it is, it varies far too widely from accepted standards to be accepted as something of quality. It may be accepted as a quality blade in some other places, but not by the standards that apply in Jawa, and it is, after all, presented in classic Javanese dress of quite nice quality. I do not deny for one moment that it is an attractive blade, and close examination of it could well reveal that it has been competently made, if it has been altered, as I suspect, the alterations appear to have been competently handled. However, simply because it might be attractive and competently made that does not make it an item of quality. There is a lot more to it than that. It has been presented as a Javanese keris, so it should be appraised in accordance with Javanese standards. It is a very nice dress keris. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 14th May 2018 at 03:59 AM. Reason: comment extended

14th May 2018, 01:44 PM	#7
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Thank you Alan, and "defensible" is more appropriate than "defendable", sorry for that. To me this blade does not look to be in accordance with classical Central Java standards (odd greneng on the wadidang, very thick ada-ada, uneven luks, etc) so is it appropriate to try to assign a tangguh to it? According to the EK, a blade with luks closer and closer towards the tip as this one is an indicator of tangguh Kahuripan (a very old so questionable one?). I only have one blade with such feature (also with ada-ada), see pic. Regards Attached Images

13th May 2018, 04:05 PM	#1
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,164	Very beautiful pendok!

14th May 2018, 01:50 AM	#3
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	In my opinion, the dynamicism in the blade is far superior to the staid excellence of the pendok.

14th May 2018, 09:02 AM	#5
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Different but interesting wiew points from Alan and Bue Erf, and both are fully defendable IMO, thanks!

14th May 2018, 10:06 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,990	Yes Jean, I agree, Blue's opinion and my opinion are coming from different directions:- Blue's opinion is absolutely defensible from the perspective of the average general collector who is outside Javanese society, on the other hand I have chosen to adopt an attitude that reflects what I have been taught of the Javanese perspective. I guess it depends upon whether we view this keris as a Javanese cultural artifact, or whether we do not differentiate it from any keris from any other place. Whether we judge it according to parameters specific to the Javanese keris, or whether we judge it according to the parameters of general collectors who have only a very slight understanding of the way in which to appraise a Javanese keris. In my opinion it should be judged as a Javanese keris, not just as any old keris that happened to wander along. Somebody took the trouble to dress it very tastefully and very correctly. It deserves nothing less than culturally correct appraisal. It is not just another collectable item, it is a very nice example of a Javanese dress keris. In my opinion to give it only a cursory comment based upon overall appearance is to disrespect this keris, it is a serious cultural artifact and should be given serious attention.