Is it a Tajong?

Sajen · 25th March 2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Sajen

I was one of the low ball bidders on that piece and it is an interesting piece but as stated above the hilt was recent looking and the blade was of questionable quality. Was surprized it went for that final price.

Thank you for your mail,
it seems that I am not the only one who have not a good knowledge about Tajong keris so it goes for a price like this.

I ask the seller if he can make a second change offer to the next two bidders and I pay him the different. He agree and I have to wait now two days.

sajen

A. G. Maisey · 25th March 2009, 11:49 PM

I've spent a lot of time looking at the pics of this keris.

I will preface my remarks by putting it right up front that I am no expert on tajong style keris. Yes, I own a few, some old, some more recent, but I am certainly no expert.

However, if I look carefully at this keris, what I can see is this:-

the blade shows grain, and a surface that does not appear to be artificially aged; the ada-ada is the same style as a tajong, the other ricikan look as if they have been done from memory, without a clear guide; the waves are inconsistent. I feel that this blade was made by a smith, rather than by a pandai keris. In other words, to me it looks like the product of a fairly unskilled person,possibly working in a rural area, working to the limit of his ability.

the handle shows uneven patina and open grain, and probably some wear; I do not think that this handle is anywhere near recent---always depending on what we mean by "recent".

the scabbard is worn and heavily patinated; from what I can see in the photos, it has age.

the pendongkok is well crafted, and a nice thing.

My assessment of this keris is that it does have some age, but that it is a not a high quality production, and is non-typical.

As such, and bearing in mind the problems of buying from photos, I don't really think that the price paid is too extreme yes, certainly I would not have gambled on it, principally because it obviously lacks quality, and I do not buy for rareity, but for quality.

But I don't think I can go along with the general feeling of condemnation of this keris.

BluErf · 26th March 2009, 12:58 PM

Yes, I agree the piece has some age, and the price is not outrageously high. Real good old tajongs are very rare these days, and can cost a lot more than the price that went for this specimen here.

Just to share what a competently made tajong shd look like. Blade-wise, just imagine any decent pandai saras blade (I didn't take pictures of the blade).

BluErf · 26th March 2009, 01:01 PM

One thing - the pendoko is not exactly appropriate; I had since changed it to a tajong-type pendoko a few years back, but I have not taken new pictures.

Sajen · 26th March 2009, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Yes, I agree the piece has some age, and the price is not outrageously high. Real good old tajongs are very rare these days, and can cost a lot more than the price that went for this specimen here.

Just to share what a competently made tajong shd look like. Blade-wise, just imagine any decent pandai saras blade (I didn't take pictures of the blade).

BluErf,

very nice example. Hope that I will own one like this one day.
sajen

A. G. Maisey · 26th March 2009, 08:49 PM

You're welcome, Sajen.

When we look at a keris, or at one of the components of a keris, it is always best to look at both these things piece by piece. Don't just look at the keris as a whole, but look at each part of it, and when you get to the individual parts, look at the sections and characteristics of the parts.

And always bear in mind that photos can and do lie.

David · 26th March 2009, 09:19 PM

I think that this all brings me to the question of what exactly describes a proper tajong? Is it merely the name of the dress form or does it also describe the blade as well? I have never seen a tajong with a blade like this. Does this mean this is not a tajong? If it is merely a name for the dress form regardless of the type of blade within then i think we must approach the original question from an examination of just the dress. In my limited scope in the understanding of tajong hilts i look at this hilt and it doesn't look quite right to me. That is to say that the eyes don't seem to be in the right place and the carved patterns don't look particularly like what i have seen on other hilts. So i wonder, is there something that would be considered to be like a "pakem" for the design of these hilts? Does this hilt meet the standards for that "pakem" if such a guideline exists? If not, is it still a tajong?
I do not mean any of these questions to be interpreted as a general condemnation of this keris as Alan suggests. I am merely approaching the original question, "Is this a tajong?". Even if it is not i don't believe that that necessarily means it was not worth the money you paid for it.

A. G. Maisey · 27th March 2009, 08:08 AM

David, I do not know if it can be called a tajong or not. I do not know exactly what a tajong is,or what this word denotes or means, and although I have collected keris for a very long time, I had never come across the word "tajong" until a few years ago when I saw it mentioned on this site.

The original question was :- is it a tajong?

My answer is that I do not know.

But I do think it has a bit of age, I do think that it has some characteristics that also belong to the type of keris that is called a tajong, and I do think that it is a less than elegant production.

To me, this is an interesting keris. Purists in the field of tajongery may well disallow it membership of the group, just as I and some others would disallow some village Javanese keris recognition as legitimate Javanese keris.

But this is coming back to that "name game" that we are all so familiar with.

In my book, names do not mean a hell of a lot:- you accept and appraise something for what it is, not because you can hang some name or other on it.
Yeah, OK, I know I'm the odd man out, but if something has quality I really don't care what it is called, and if something lacks quality, I care even less.

By any measure this keris is interesting, simply because it is an oddity.

PS:-

http://www.kerisarchipelago.150m.com/webpage/Tajong.htm

milandro · 14th March 2024, 10:19 AM

Another Resurrection

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

I think that this all brings me to the question of what exactly describes a proper tajong? Is it merely the name of the dress form or does it also describe the blade as well? I have never seen a tajong with a blade like this. Does this mean this is not a tajong? If it is merely a name for the dress form regardless of the type of blade within then i think we must approach the original question from an examination of just the dress. In my limited scope in the understanding of tajong hilts i look at this hilt and it doesn't look quite right to me. That is to say that the eyes don't seem to be in the right place and the carved patterns don't look particularly like what i have seen on other hilts. So i wonder, is there something that would be considered to be like a "pakem" for the design of these hilts? Does this hilt meet the standards for that "pakem" if such a guideline exists? If not, is it still a tajong?.....

Having acquired a Panjang which came with a Tajong hilt I am now looking to acquire informations about Tajongs.

I too am somewhat confused from what I see for sale as a Tajong.

Some show only a Tajong hilt mounted on krises which could be Bugis or I found even one were a Yogyakarta keris has a Tajong hilt (not unlike My Panjang which came with such an hilt ).

Aside from what the pendongkok should look like and the hilt is there any typical characteristic of the blade?

Perhaps the answer is contained in this post.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...6&postcount=11

"...Hi Jeff,

Your tajong hilts are the real stuff. The blades you have shown in the 2 links above are not the normal type of blade normally associated as tajongs. The most common forms are the straight "pandai saras" blade form, followed by the wavy "pandai saras" blade form and the "carita" blade form, in approximately similar rarity. Please note that the use of the term "carita" (pronounced "cher-rita") is not the same as the Javanese context. "Carita" in the Malay keris world refers to blades with shallow fullers running nearly the full length of the blade. If the fullers had been deeper, they would be called "melela". Again "melala" here is different from the "melela" used in the Javanese context, which is often used to describe "besi melela", or metal without visible pamor patterns. I am not good with Javanese kerises, so I would defer the explanations on these to the other members who are more knowledgeable in Javanese kerises.

Anyway, the 3 common keris forms for tajongs are attached below. Please ignore the hilts, as these hilts (of the jawa demam form) can also be appropriately paired with such blades, but then of course, the keris would not be called a tajong. There are other Malay keris forms found on tajongs, but would be the exception, rather than the rule.

Kerises and keris parts travel in the archipelago. This exchange of parts is also what fuels the exchange of aesthetics and forms, contributing to the variation of keris blades and keris dress/hilt forms, and they also cause mis-matched kerises to turn up all the time. And of course, we cannot discount dealers and collectors who swap hilts and blades around for all sorts of reasons, even if they don't really conform to the archetypal forms. I'm afraid your question would not be easily answered. You have to learn from good books, good teachers, and from handling as many kerises as you can, and that is a long hard but fun road.

A proper tajong - hilt, sheath and blade - is illustrated in the 4th and 5th pic. Arguably, the defining characteristics of a tajong are the hilt and the sheath. Any other types of hilts and sheaths would make it hard for us to call the resulting keris a proper tajong. Note that Northern Malay aesthetics dictates that the sheath must be long and lanky, with the sheath stem much longer than the blade. I have seen some people (I refuse to call them "collectors") shorten the stem so that it is just slightly longer than the blade. This was because they liked the keris that way. But in my opinion, that is just destroying the original aesthetics of the tajong keris, not to mention, ruining a perfectly good antique sheath....."

and these are the pics from that post (linking those here shouldn't be a problem since they are on the forum vaults)

Sajen · 16th April 2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

You're welcome, Sajen.

When we look at a keris, or at one of the components of a keris, it is always best to look at both these things piece by piece. Don't just look at the keris as a whole, but look at each part of it, and when you get to the individual parts, look at the sections and characteristics of the parts.

And always bear in mind that photos can and do lie.

First off all thank's to all for the informative discussion about this keris.

Yes, photos can lie, this is very true. Received the keris two weeks ago, sheat and handle seems recent and from very poor wood and on what way ever patinated, the only nice at this keris is the pendongkok.
The blade have maybe some age.

sajen

Sajen · 26th March 2009, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I've spent a lot of time looking at the pics of this keris.

I will preface my remarks by putting it right up front that I am no expert on tajong style keris. Yes, I own a few, some old, some more recent, but I am certainly no expert.

However, if I look carefully at this keris, what I can see is this:-

the blade shows grain, and a surface that does not appear to be artificially aged; the ada-ada is the same style as a tajong, the other ricikan look as if they have been done from memory, without a clear guide; the waves are inconsistent. I feel that this blade was made by a smith, rather than by a pandai keris. In other words, to me it looks like the product of a fairly unskilled person,possibly working in a rural area, working to the limit of his ability.

the handle shows uneven patina and open grain, and probably some wear; I do not think that this handle is anywhere near recent---always depending on what we mean by "recent".

the scabbard is worn and heavily patinated; from what I can see in the photos, it has age.

the pendongkok is well crafted, and a nice thing.

My assessment of this keris is that it does have some age, but that it is a not a high quality production, and is non-typical.

As such, and bearing in mind the problems of buying from photos, I don't really think that the price paid is too extreme yes, certainly I would not have gambled on it, principally because it obviously lacks quality, and I do not buy for rareity, but for quality.

But I don't think I can go along with the general feeling of condemnation of this keris.

Hello Mr. Maisey,

thank you for the elaborate comment. Now I will feel better when the second high bidder don't take the second change offer. Of course I've seen that it isn't a high class Tajong, the carving of the handle is to crude for this. It have been my thought that it is a simple form of a Tajong and like you guess manufactured in a rural area. Since I don't have a Tajong until now it will be a placeholder until I can get a better one.
Tank's again ang regards,
sajen

26th March 2009, 12:58 PM	#3
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Yes, I agree the piece has some age, and the price is not outrageously high. Real good old tajongs are very rare these days, and can cost a lot more than the price that went for this specimen here. Just to share what a competently made tajong shd look like. Blade-wise, just imagine any decent pandai saras blade (I didn't take pictures of the blade). Attached Images

27th March 2009, 08:08 AM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,991	David, I do not know if it can be called a tajong or not. I do not know exactly what a tajong is,or what this word denotes or means, and although I have collected keris for a very long time, I had never come across the word "tajong" until a few years ago when I saw it mentioned on this site. The original question was :- is it a tajong? My answer is that I do not know. But I do think it has a bit of age, I do think that it has some characteristics that also belong to the type of keris that is called a tajong, and I do think that it is a less than elegant production. To me, this is an interesting keris. Purists in the field of tajongery may well disallow it membership of the group, just as I and some others would disallow some village Javanese keris recognition as legitimate Javanese keris. But this is coming back to that "name game" that we are all so familiar with. In my book, names do not mean a hell of a lot:- you accept and appraise something for what it is, not because you can hang some name or other on it. Yeah, OK, I know I'm the odd man out, but if something has quality I really don't care what it is called, and if something lacks quality, I care even less. By any measure this keris is interesting, simply because it is an oddity. PS:- http://www.kerisarchipelago.150m.com/webpage/Tajong.htm Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 27th March 2009 at 01:07 PM.

25th March 2009, 11:49 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,991	I've spent a lot of time looking at the pics of this keris. I will preface my remarks by putting it right up front that I am no expert on tajong style keris. Yes, I own a few, some old, some more recent, but I am certainly no expert. However, if I look carefully at this keris, what I can see is this:- the blade shows grain, and a surface that does not appear to be artificially aged; the ada-ada is the same style as a tajong, the other ricikan look as if they have been done from memory, without a clear guide; the waves are inconsistent. I feel that this blade was made by a smith, rather than by a pandai keris. In other words, to me it looks like the product of a fairly unskilled person,possibly working in a rural area, working to the limit of his ability. the handle shows uneven patina and open grain, and probably some wear; I do not think that this handle is anywhere near recent---always depending on what we mean by "recent". the scabbard is worn and heavily patinated; from what I can see in the photos, it has age. the pendongkok is well crafted, and a nice thing. My assessment of this keris is that it does have some age, but that it is a not a high quality production, and is non-typical. As such, and bearing in mind the problems of buying from photos, I don't really think that the price paid is too extreme yes, certainly I would not have gambled on it, principally because it obviously lacks quality, and I do not buy for rareity, but for quality. But I don't think I can go along with the general feeling of condemnation of this keris.

26th March 2009, 01:01 PM	#4
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	One thing - the pendoko is not exactly appropriate; I had since changed it to a tajong-type pendoko a few years back, but I have not taken new pictures.

26th March 2009, 08:49 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,991	You're welcome, Sajen. When we look at a keris, or at one of the components of a keris, it is always best to look at both these things piece by piece. Don't just look at the keris as a whole, but look at each part of it, and when you get to the individual parts, look at the sections and characteristics of the parts. And always bear in mind that photos can and do lie.

26th March 2009, 09:19 PM	#7
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	I think that this all brings me to the question of what exactly describes a proper tajong? Is it merely the name of the dress form or does it also describe the blade as well? I have never seen a tajong with a blade like this. Does this mean this is not a tajong? If it is merely a name for the dress form regardless of the type of blade within then i think we must approach the original question from an examination of just the dress. In my limited scope in the understanding of tajong hilts i look at this hilt and it doesn't look quite right to me. That is to say that the eyes don't seem to be in the right place and the carved patterns don't look particularly like what i have seen on other hilts. So i wonder, is there something that would be considered to be like a "pakem" for the design of these hilts? Does this hilt meet the standards for that "pakem" if such a guideline exists? If not, is it still a tajong? I do not mean any of these questions to be interpreted as a general condemnation of this keris as Alan suggests. I am merely approaching the original question, "Is this a tajong?". Even if it is not i don't believe that that necessarily means it was not worth the money you paid for it.