Enquiry about a Bali keris motif

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by Gustav

The inspiration for this specimen, so it seems, can be found in Hales book, p. 125, Nr. 306.

I agree with everything Alan has said regarding it, would like to add an observation about Pamor. There are only three layers of Pamor material on a side, which is absolutely OK for Bali/Lombok Keris - but this Pamor material is very thin, very uniformly thin, and of very uniform consistence/colour. It seems, whoever made it, likely did have access to prefabricated (in a Western way) material in plates/sheets.

I know of at least one Keris with long Sogokan following Luk, which is genuine Bali. It was taken after the Puputan in Denpasar in 1906. I have seen a couple of other old Keris with this feature, but they could also have been from Lombok.

What is your view about this? I have a Lombok friend who told me that old Balinese keris does not have luk that exceed 17 luk. Above 17 Luks are more likely modern century creation.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, just a comment in respect of pamor.

It really does not matter what the source of the contrasting material is prior to it being used in a keris, it also does not matter how thick it is, nor its form.

Before the first weld is taken to fix it between iron, the contrasting material is forged very thin, about as thick as a piece of newspaper. When I have done this part of the forging, I would take the nickel to the point where it began to break up under the hammer & show holes in the material. This nickel usually started out as about 15-20mm thick.

The uniform thickness of the contrasting material in the finished blade is an indication that the entire forging & welding process was well controlled & consistent.

The idea of long sogokan following luk is new to me. In a keris with luk there will normally be a bend in the sogokan, but the proportional length should not vary. Some keris do have exceptionally long grooves in place of a sogokan, I've forgotten the usual name for these, but they are not sogokan.

In an old Balinese keris that follows tradition, the number of luk by conventional count, should not exceed 13. Yes, I am aware that we can find old keris with more luk than this, but the legitimacy within the socio-cultural tradition is open to question.

[jagabuwana]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In an old Balinese keris that follows tradition, the number of luk by conventional count, should not exceed 13.

Alan, I take this to mean 13 luk by the current convention of counting and therefore 11 luk by the old method. Am I understanding correctly?

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Jaga.

The number of luk to parallel the number of roofs to which the family temple of the keris custodian is entitled.

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by Anthony G.

What is your view about this? I have a Lombok friend who told me that old Balinese keris does not have luk that exceed 17 luk. Above 17 Luks are more likely modern century creation.

Anthony, if you ask about the Keris in Hales book (which has 31 Luk), it's impossible to say something from a quite small picture. Its appearance in that picture is that of a Keris older then Ex-IFICAH, which surely is 20th century, and I think, not the very beginning of it.

Regarding high number Luk Kerisses in Bali, Jasper&Mas Pirngadie, who gathered their material in the years before and around WWI and are conservative about Keris Bali, do list names for Keris with 15 and 25 Luk.

As I wrote, there is a Keris with 19 Luk in the collection of museum in Leiden, which was taken after the Puputan in Denpasar.

But your friend certainly is wright in that there surely are much more modern creations with high Luk number then genuine old ones.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, we can find high numbers of luk in keris that originated in a number of locations, but in every case of which I am aware, these are relatively recent keris. When I say "relatively recent", I am thinking in a Javanese time frame, which places keris younger than Sultan Agung as "new keris". I am not thinking in terms of Kamardikan nor even of 19th century.

In Javanese keris tradition any keris with more than 13 luk (conventional count) is regarded as a keris that was made for somebody who was outside the norms of society, somebody with special talents or qualities, such as a dukun, or an artist, or similar people with particular characters or talents.

I do not know why a Balinese style keris might have more than the socially supportable number of luk, but my suspicion is that such a Balinese style might well have been made within the Balinese community in Lombok. I once had custody of a royal keris that had many more than the socially supportable number of luk, and based upon the old dress (19th century), which was Lombok style dress, and possibly upon the kinatah work, this might well have been of Balinese/Lombok origin.

If we play with the numerology of keris luk we can draw all sorts of conclusions from the results, for example, if we apply the game to the keris under discussion we can say that 3 + 5 = 8, now the number 8 according to the Candra Sangkala is the number of both the Naga & the Elephant, and the Elephant is the icon of Ganesha. But in my opinion, this sort of construction really has very little to support it, so it is perhaps as well not to go anywhere near it. There are a variety of numerological applications that can be applied to keris.

In summary, yes, we can find keris from Bali with more luk than socio-cultural mores can support, and at the present time we do not know why.

Just because this keris under discussion does have more luk than we might tend to expect, that by itself is perhaps not sufficient to affix any sort of age to it, but when we look at the number of rather questionable characteristics of this keris, there does seem to me to be quite a few open questions.

[Gustav]

Alan, I understand well all you have written here, agree, and wouldn't argue with anything.

Regarding possibility or impossibility of higher number Luk on pre-Sultan Agung time Keris, let's say pre-1600 - I am custodian of a Megantoro "type" blade with 19 Luk. It did come with Malay Pendokok and hilt. With Megantoro "type" I mean blade has a central field, which has a central ridge at its lower part, and this field terminates in a central ridge. It has the typical Megantoro "Kembang Kacang". In the central field and Sorsoran it has remnants of prepared base for flat koftgari style Kinatah. The style of ornamentation, even for a Sumatran blade, could be early 1600 or likely before that.

[A. G. Maisey]

Gustav, I am always very wary of early dated keris, possibly unjustifiably so, but when I consider societal structure, population & development of the Archipelago prior to 1600 all I can see are warning signs telling me to go slow.

Through to around the 1300's or maybe later, in Jawa, the evidence seems to point to the keris style still following pre-Islamic forms. Candi Sukuh is dated to the 1400's, and the several keris found in bas-relifs there are still Buda style. There are longer weapons represented at Candi Sukuh, & they do have some keris-like characteristics, but I think we would now call them "keris pedang".

The early spread of keris from Jawa seems to have been by way of gifts to rulers & other elites in societies with which Javanese kingdoms had trade links, one of the attached characteristics of the keris is as a binding instrument, a physical icon of the Naga Basuki (Vasuki), who does have a binding force. When the physical object was given as a token of friendship, the societal values & beliefs of Jawa did not follow, thus it is that we can find varying keris beliefs & values in societies where the keris is found.

In Jawa until the present day, we can find a belief that maintains that only a ruler can have a keris of 13 luk. This 13 luk is in accord with the current method of count, which in the older method of count, and one that seems to have been used by at least some people in Bali up to at least circa 1978, equates to a luk count of 11.

The number 11 is significant in Balinese society and in pre-Islamic Javanese society as the number associated with Siwa, and with a ruler, the representative of Siwa on earth, as the appropriate number of roofs on a meru dedicated to Siwa, and also to a ruler, not only upon the ruler's personal temple, but also upon his bale, the cremation tower.

If we can assume that the ornamentation on the keris in your possession was placed there at the time of manufacture --- & I believe we can assume this, since it is the foundation for kinatah work --- then this would seem to indicate that the keris itself was made in Sumatera, if indeed this ornamentation can be confirmed as being of a Sumatran style current in the 1500's.

The keris Si Ginjai was supposedly made by Empu Kinom & was gifted by Sultan Agung of Mataram to the ruler of Jambi in the mid-1500's by Javanese dates, or if using the Western system of dating, the first half of the 1600's.

It seems to be generally accepted that it was after this gift of Si Ginjai that the Modern/Islamic form of keris began to proliferate in Sumatera.

If all the above is so, ie, that the keris in your possession is a keris of Sumatran manufacture that dates from the early 1600's or earlier, then this does indeed seem to indicate that we all need to have a little bit of a re-think about the recorded history of (probably) the Archipelago in general.

However, it is --- to me at least --- quite understandable that we do find many more keris with a proliferation of luk from locations outside Jawa/Bali, than we find originating from Jawa/Bali.