The Knaud

A. G. Maisey · 3rd November 2022, 05:01 AM

Those comments of yours are very pertinent JG. Your own socio-cultural background has permitted you to immediately see one of the major fault-lines in the Knaud argument.

In fact, David Van Duuren delves pretty deeply into the back story of the Knaud's acquisition and gives us a lot of info that we, or at least I, did not previously know. For example:-

Charles Knaud was not a "doctor" in the European sense of the word, he claimed to have trained under a Javanese dukun, and his powers of healing came from a Javanese, not a Dutch, foundation.

Dutch doctors had already attempted to heal the young prince, but had failed, Charley Knaud enters the scene, detects that the prince has been subjected to guna-guna, ie, black magic, and promptly cures him.

What we know of CharleyK mostly comes from his grand nephew John Knaud who wrote an article about CharleyK many years after his death. According to this article CharleyK was an eccentric, a painter, and an art collector who had a very high degree of interest in Javanese beliefs.

The keris itself was brought into the spotlight after Charley got hold of it, then it disappeared, it was commented upon by N.J.Krom, it was rediscovered in 2002.

In his book, David Van Duuren is rather dismissive of the back story, he concentrates on the keris itself, not the embroidery surrounding it. You yourself understand that convention in Javanese society is that reality must never be permitted to get in the way of making a story, or anything else for that matter, better or more interesting than it really is. The truth of something is often so exceedingly boring, one of the reasons why gratuitous truths are never welcome.

So, let us just concentrate on the keris itself. I will continue to call it a "keris", but frankly, when I look at many of the physical features of The Knaud, I am forced to think of it as a "keris-like object", rather than a keris.

What questions can be directed at the physical characteristics of The Knaud?

JeffS · 3rd November 2022, 05:37 AM

Withdrawing my comment.

JustYS · 3rd November 2022, 06:00 AM

Hi jagabuwana,

I agreed with you, I will try to get hold of this book as well.

Hi Alan,

Looking at the keris itself, my first impression is that the pawakan looks awkward. The sharp bent above the gandhik seems to me lack of harmony.

A. G. Maisey · 3rd November 2022, 07:08 AM

Perhaps we might consider the dimensions & proportions?

Does this keris have a separate gonjo or is gonjo iras?

Have we looked closely at the pesi?

Have we considered the actual blade sculpting that is covered by the bronze overlay?

Lots of things going on here gentleman. Can we relate all these things to the Keris Buda form?

Harmony?

Well, from that perspective it is certainly no symphony.

JustYS · 3rd November 2022, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Perhaps we might consider the dimensions & proportions?

Does this keris have a separate gonjo or is gonjo iras?

Have we looked closely at the pesi?

Have we considered the actual blade sculpting that is covered by the bronze overlay?

Lots of things going on here gentleman. Can we relate all these things to the Keris Buda form?

Harmony?

Well, from that perspective it is certainly no symphony.

Thank you for posing these questions Alan.

To my untrained eyes, Knaud Keris has round pesi, which would not be conform to Keris Buda that typically square pesi?

A. G. Maisey · 3rd November 2022, 12:48 PM

Thank you for your comments JYS.

In fact, I've been looking at pictures of that Knaud for years, I mean literally years. I've probably looked at The Knaud pictures more than I've looked at any other keris or pictures of keris.

In spite of all that looking I could not make up my mind in respect of two little questions, just little questions, maybe most people would not think that these little questions were even questions, just idle, wandering curiosity. But to me these questions were the single biggest unanswered questions about The Knaud, and they were unanswerable, because The Knaud was lost, but then it just sort of magically reappeared again, it came into the hands of a highly respected writer on the keris, David Van Duuren, and a door opened.

Mr. Van Duuren took the whole legend apart, top to bottom, and in the process answered many questions, something that I am very grateful for. But he did not answer the two questions that had worked their way to the top of my question list.

So, after reading his book, I wrote to him and asked if the gonjo was round or square, most especially if it was round or square at the point where it exited the gonjo, I also asked if there was any evidence if it had ever had a metuk fitted, and if it had an integral (iras) gonjo or if the gonjo was separate to the blade.

Mr. Van Duuren responded promptly and without equivocation:-

1) the pesi is round
2) there is no evidence of a metuk
3) the gonjo is iras, ie, it was forged as integral with the blade

I currently have custody of four typical keris buda, well, three are typical, the fourth is much larger than typical, but also of typical buda form, one of the three has lost its original gonjo and its gonjo has been replaced. All four have or had gonjos that were forged separately to the body of the blade.

Apart from these four KB's I also have two transitional keris, that is, keris that bear some features of a KB and some features of the Modern Keris. Both these transitional keris have gonjos that were forged separately to the body of the blade.

In the past I have had other KB's that I passed on to other people. I have also handled KB's that belonged to other people, or that were for sale and I did not buy.

I have only ever seen one genuine old KB that had a gonjo iras and that keris was a cast bronze keris.

I have never seen a genuine old KB that had been made with a round pesi.

In Jawa, the very first thing that any keris literate person looks at in order to form an opinion on the age of a very old keris is the pesi at the point where it emerges from the gonjo. If it has a round pesi it is eliminated from consideration as being of extreme age.

So, is it possible for me to accept that a keris with a round pesi and an integral gonjo actually was produced prior to the collapse of Majapahit?

But the pesi and the gonjo are only two questionable characteristics, there are also other things that raise questions.

Bob A · 3rd November 2022, 05:17 PM

I don't have the book, nor have I read it. The only information I have is from the posts here, and the pictures that I can see on my computer screen.

The question I have relates to the apparent wear on the carved figures: how might it have occurred, on an object that would presumably have haf great significance? It seems odd that this should be the case. Was it an intentional part of the design, to emulate the worn figures on carved stone statuary? On first glance, that was my impression.

My experience with sculpture from the area of its origin is nearly nil, as is most of my understanding of the keris, and indeed of the culture from whence it sprang, so I hope my effrontery in commenting will be viewed in that context, and forgiven for its lack of sophistication.

3rd November 2022, 05:37 AM	#2
JeffS Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 423	Withdrawing my comment. Last edited by JeffS; 3rd November 2022 at 11:29 PM.

3rd November 2022, 06:00 AM	#3
JustYS Member Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 145	Hi jagabuwana, I agreed with you, I will try to get hold of this book as well. Hi Alan, Looking at the keris itself, my first impression is that the pawakan looks awkward. The sharp bent above the gandhik seems to me lack of harmony. Attached Images

3rd November 2022, 05:01 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Those comments of yours are very pertinent JG. Your own socio-cultural background has permitted you to immediately see one of the major fault-lines in the Knaud argument. In fact, David Van Duuren delves pretty deeply into the back story of the Knaud's acquisition and gives us a lot of info that we, or at least I, did not previously know. For example:- Charles Knaud was not a "doctor" in the European sense of the word, he claimed to have trained under a Javanese dukun, and his powers of healing came from a Javanese, not a Dutch, foundation. Dutch doctors had already attempted to heal the young prince, but had failed, Charley Knaud enters the scene, detects that the prince has been subjected to guna-guna, ie, black magic, and promptly cures him. What we know of CharleyK mostly comes from his grand nephew John Knaud who wrote an article about CharleyK many years after his death. According to this article CharleyK was an eccentric, a painter, and an art collector who had a very high degree of interest in Javanese beliefs. The keris itself was brought into the spotlight after Charley got hold of it, then it disappeared, it was commented upon by N.J.Krom, it was rediscovered in 2002. In his book, David Van Duuren is rather dismissive of the back story, he concentrates on the keris itself, not the embroidery surrounding it. You yourself understand that convention in Javanese society is that reality must never be permitted to get in the way of making a story, or anything else for that matter, better or more interesting than it really is. The truth of something is often so exceedingly boring, one of the reasons why gratuitous truths are never welcome. So, let us just concentrate on the keris itself. I will continue to call it a "keris", but frankly, when I look at many of the physical features of The Knaud, I am forced to think of it as a "keris-like object", rather than a keris. What questions can be directed at the physical characteristics of The Knaud?

3rd November 2022, 07:08 AM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Perhaps we might consider the dimensions & proportions? Does this keris have a separate gonjo or is gonjo iras? Have we looked closely at the pesi? Have we considered the actual blade sculpting that is covered by the bronze overlay? Lots of things going on here gentleman. Can we relate all these things to the Keris Buda form? Harmony? Well, from that perspective it is certainly no symphony.

3rd November 2022, 12:48 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	Thank you for your comments JYS. In fact, I've been looking at pictures of that Knaud for years, I mean literally years. I've probably looked at The Knaud pictures more than I've looked at any other keris or pictures of keris. In spite of all that looking I could not make up my mind in respect of two little questions, just little questions, maybe most people would not think that these little questions were even questions, just idle, wandering curiosity. But to me these questions were the single biggest unanswered questions about The Knaud, and they were unanswerable, because The Knaud was lost, but then it just sort of magically reappeared again, it came into the hands of a highly respected writer on the keris, David Van Duuren, and a door opened. Mr. Van Duuren took the whole legend apart, top to bottom, and in the process answered many questions, something that I am very grateful for. But he did not answer the two questions that had worked their way to the top of my question list. So, after reading his book, I wrote to him and asked if the gonjo was round or square, most especially if it was round or square at the point where it exited the gonjo, I also asked if there was any evidence if it had ever had a metuk fitted, and if it had an integral (iras) gonjo or if the gonjo was separate to the blade. Mr. Van Duuren responded promptly and without equivocation:- 1) the pesi is round 2) there is no evidence of a metuk 3) the gonjo is iras, ie, it was forged as integral with the blade I currently have custody of four typical keris buda, well, three are typical, the fourth is much larger than typical, but also of typical buda form, one of the three has lost its original gonjo and its gonjo has been replaced. All four have or had gonjos that were forged separately to the body of the blade. Apart from these four KB's I also have two transitional keris, that is, keris that bear some features of a KB and some features of the Modern Keris. Both these transitional keris have gonjos that were forged separately to the body of the blade. In the past I have had other KB's that I passed on to other people. I have also handled KB's that belonged to other people, or that were for sale and I did not buy. I have only ever seen one genuine old KB that had a gonjo iras and that keris was a cast bronze keris. I have never seen a genuine old KB that had been made with a round pesi. In Jawa, the very first thing that any keris literate person looks at in order to form an opinion on the age of a very old keris is the pesi at the point where it emerges from the gonjo. If it has a round pesi it is eliminated from consideration as being of extreme age. So, is it possible for me to accept that a keris with a round pesi and an integral gonjo actually was produced prior to the collapse of Majapahit? But the pesi and the gonjo are only two questionable characteristics, there are also other things that raise questions.

3rd November 2022, 05:17 PM	#7
Bob A Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 435	I don't have the book, nor have I read it. The only information I have is from the posts here, and the pictures that I can see on my computer screen. The question I have relates to the apparent wear on the carved figures: how might it have occurred, on an object that would presumably have haf great significance? It seems odd that this should be the case. Was it an intentional part of the design, to emulate the worn figures on carved stone statuary? On first glance, that was my impression. My experience with sculpture from the area of its origin is nearly nil, as is most of my understanding of the keris, and indeed of the culture from whence it sprang, so I hope my effrontery in commenting will be viewed in that context, and forgiven for its lack of sophistication.