Identifying Pamor for a First Keris

[Sajen]

Could it be a Sumbawa blade?

[A. G. Maisey]

When we try to guess at a geographic origin for a keris, we can only rely upon our experience of keris that we know do come from a particular geographic location.

I mean absolutely rely, without question, positively.

I have never handled even one keris that I was absolutely positive came from Sumbawa.

In fact I cannot even remember seeing a photo of even one keris that I knew without any doubt at all came from Sumbawa.

I do believe that there are keris that originated in Sumbawa, and that they look more or less Bugisy. But I cannot remember ever seeing a keris , or a photo of a keris that was identified positively as having been made in Sumbawa.

What I do know, and know without the slightest shadow of a doubt is this:-

Bugis people settled in Eastern Lombok.

Javanese people settled in Lombok, Balinese people settled in Lombok, and in fact people from a number of other locations settled in Lombok, but in smaller numbers than the Javanese, Balinese, and Bugis.

Keris from Lombok sometimes display rather extreme topographic sculpting.

This keris under discussion displays features that are attributable to a Bugis influence. It also displays very aggressive topographic sculpting.

I do not know beyond the shadow of a doubt that this keris definitely originated in Lombok. But I do think that Lombok is a more likely point of origin than any other place I can think of.

[Sajen]

I will post in the next days pictures from a keris I've bought many years ago from a Lombok dealer who stated that he get it from Sumbawa. This blade show some resemblance to the blade in question. But I have only the statement from the seller.

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you Detlef.

You see, this is our problem:- certainty.

I also have seen & owned keris that were supposedly from Sumbawa, and other places. For many years I dealt with a gentleman in Bali who seemed to come up regularly with unusual forms of keris.

These unusual keris invariably came from places further East, invariably they had been collected by the dealer himself who periodically went island hopping through the Eastern Islands, and invariably they bore prices that I was unwilling to pay.

This gentleman passed away a few years ago, and I have since had conversations with both his wife and his two nieces, who used to work in his shop. According to them he had not been outside of Bali in 30 years.

What I have noticed about keris from the islands East of Lombok is that they seem to be of slightly degraded form and quality, not of a quality of craftsmanship that has risen above the norm, but of one that is struggling to reach the norm. I'm talking here about the Eastern Islands in general, and keris that I have been prepared to believe were actually from the Eastern Islands.

Incidentally, the Bugis who invaded Lombok in the 1600's came from already established colonies in Sumbawa, and there was continuing intercourse between these Sumbawa colonies and the new settlements in Eastern Lombok. Thus, if we wish to affix a Sumbawa origin to any keris blade, this might prove to be quite difficult.

[Sajen]

Here the promised pictures. The blade has as well similar long ada ada, not good to seen on the picture. I've received the keris in bad state, the blade and sarung was restored, the buntut was missing.

[Sajen]

We have bad lighting conditions today, maybe this two pictures are helpful.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Detlef, some similarities, as is to be expected.

However, although we can see that South Sulawesi gandhik, and other characteristics that mark this blade as Bugis, the kruwingan looks to me to extend only as far as the 3/4 luk, it is not deep kruwingan as in Tim's keris, and overall the blade does not have anything like the same deep topographic relief of Tim's blade.

I would say it is related to Tim's blade, but not, let us say, a brother, perhaps a cousin or other slightly removed relative.