Frey Collection Picit

[David]

Originally Posted by kai

I'd guess that it went back home into SE Asia though - it's not unusual for special pieces to reach prices that most western collectors are not used to...

Yes, that is quite so...

[Jean]

Originally Posted by David

But i would also like to draw your attention once again to the elephant in the room which very few here seem to want to engage in discussion on. This is what appears to be a pre-WWII (at least) keris picit of Malaysian origin. I think your call of early 20th Century might well be correct, but judging the exact era when this keris was made seems difficult. It may be older for all i know. As such, at least from what i know, this is a rather rare specimen. Please, someone, show me another non-contemporary keris picit made in Malaysia. Show me one even not made in Jawa. I can't say i have ever seen one. So from a collector's perspective this seems to be a rather unusual item and as we all know, rare items in the keris world will demand high prices. Whether the pendok is solid gold or not might not be a driving factor in that equation.

Hello David,
Regarding your valid question about the origin and age of this picit blade I am referring to the book "Keris and other Malay weapons" from G.B. Garner (ex-Johor Civil Service agent) first published in 1936 and one of the few reference books about Malaysian weapons, but not a very reliable source IMO. In pages 33, 34, and 36 of his book he describes and shows pictures of some krisses picit from his collection without mentioning their area of origin (Malaysia?), although they look quite similar to the Javanese ones (the pics are very poor). He also refers to forgeries of Trengganu Majapahit-picit krisses with a broad punched blade and integral hilt.
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

Hello David,
Regarding your valid question about the origin and age of this picit blade I am referring to the book "Keris and other Malay weapons" from G.B. Garner (ex-Johor Civil Service agent) first published in 1936 and one of the few reference books about Malaysian weapons, but not a very reliable source IMO. In pages 33, 34, and 36 of his book he describes and shows pictures of some krisses picit from his collection without mentioning their area of origin (Malaysia?), although they look quite similar to the Javanese ones (the pics are very poor). He also refers to forgeries of Trengganu Majapahit-picit krisses with a broad punched blade and integral hilt.
Regards

Thanks Jean. I have and have read Gardner's book. I agree that he is not a particularly reliable source of information at times. I wish we had better images of the two keris sajen that he claims are "forgeries" made in Terengganu, or even more information about what he means when he says "forgeries". From the bad copies of photos in that book those blades do indeed look very much like Javanese keris sajen. He doesn't mention what convinced him that these examples were made in Teregganu. But if they were made in Terengganu i don't know why they would necessarily be considered "forgeries". Who would such "forgeries" have been made for? In the mid 1930s was there really a market for such things?
Gardner clearly does not understand the purpose of such keris (either keris sajen or picit) given this remark:
"Of the ten keris pichit I have only two that are thick enough to be used as keris; the others, being not much thicker than tin, would bend if used with any force, so I conclude they were used principally as talismans; but of course they may have been poisoned and used in the same way as k. majapahit ..." It would seem that at this point he limited his definition of keris solely to those that could be used as weapons (and he seems to have believed that keris sajen were not talismanic blades, but used as weapons in conjunction with poison).

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

He also refers to forgeries of Trengganu Majapahit-picit krisses with a broad punched blade and integral hilt.

I am also not convinced we can refer to any keris picit as "forgeries" simply because we suspect a broad punch was used to create the indentations. This is probably the case with many old keris picit for all we know. I don't think it is actually possible to prove that any picit was truly accomplished with only the bare fingers of the smith. Like Gardner i do believe that on very thin blades this method is indeed possible to accomplish, but to prove it one way or another for any particular keris would be quite impossible. Some indentations do tend to look more organic than others, but beyond that how would we know?
I am surprised to find that Gardner seems to dismiss the magickal power of such a method though, stating "Such a feat would be no more wonderful than firewalking. It is said that many professional conjurers use on their hands a mixture of camphor and styrax dissolved in spirit, and can then handle red hot iron with ease." Given that Gardner was indeed the father of modern Wicca and a practitioner of ceremonial and ritual magick in his day it seems odd that he would dismiss the use of bare finger tips transferring talismanic power into a blade as a mere parlor trick. From my perspective it is not that the act seems impossible to perform that determines the intent and purpose or power of the act. It is simply a direct transference of power by the empu into the blade. If "tricks" are used to make this operation possible it does not really diminish the act in the eyes of the empu or those that believe in its power. Of course, Gardner didn't fully begin to step into his magickal world view until 1939 so maybe these ideas were not fully formed in his mind at the time of this writing.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by David

I am also not convinced we can refer to any keris picit as "forgeries" simply because we suspect a broad punch was used to create the indentations.

I think that Gardner considered these pieces as forgeries because they were recently made contrary to the old original pieces (see one specimen of each type). I regret that he did not elaborate on the area of origin of his krisses picit.
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

I think that Gardner considered these pieces as forgeries because they were recently made contrary to the old original pieces (see one specimen of each type). I regret that he did not elaborate on the area of origin of his krisses picit.

Well, Gardner calls keris sajen as keris majapahit. It seems, from his further commentary about keris sajen made with picit after the 1500s that he may not have considered these keris legitimate if they were not made during the Mojopahit empire. It does seem that now most collectors recognize that legitimate keris sajen were made well after the Mojopahit kingdom was in power.
Still, all this is a little off track since the keris in question is not a keris sajen. It seem that the only keris picit that Gardner talks about in this section are ones that are also keris sajen. This is true of the ones he claims were from Terengganu as well. But we do know that there is a tradition of talismanic keris with picit that are not in any way keris sajen. We must also keep in mind that Gardner did not spend any of his time in SEA Malaysia, except for a brief stint in Borneo. So the information he was receiving about Javanese keris and other keris outside Malaysia in all probability was not coming from natives to those specific areas. That he speaks of the keris sajen as being used as a weapon with a poisoned blade certainly makes all his subsequent information on the subject suspect.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by David

It seem that the only keris picit that Gardner talks about in this section are ones that are also keris sajen. We must also keep in mind that Gardner did not spend any of his time in SEA outside? Malaysia, except for a brief stint in Borneo. So the information he was receiving about Javanese keris and other keris outside Malaysia in all probability was not coming from natives to those specific areas.

Just a small comment: the krisses picit shown by Gardner on pics 27.6, 27.7, 28.1, and 39.4 are not sajen type and he makes a clear distinction between the 2 types IMO.
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

Just an observation that krisses picit shown by Gardner on pics 27.6, 27.7, 28.1, and 39.4 are not sajen type and he makes a clear distinction between the 2 types IMO.
Regards

You are correct that 27. 6 appears to be a keris picit (from his words since the photo does not reveal the picit) with a broken off hole at the end of the pesi. I am not so sure about 27.7 (again due to the bad photos. The pesi gets strangely fat at the end making me wonder if it is not a slimmer version of a figurative integral handle. Not all keris sajen have the more developed integral hilts. I borrowed this one from Alan's site and he has a few more like it. Both 27.7 and 28.1 might very well be this style of keris sajen.
Thanks for pointing out the keris picit in 39.4. I wasn't looking that much further into the book given the section on picit came earlier. It does have a Jawa Demam hilt, but again, given the unfortunate photos it is impossible to determine if the blade is truly Malay or if it's origins are also in Jawa. Certainly many Javanese blades found their way beyond Jawa.

[Marcus]

I sat in on that auction. There was a Chakra estimated at about $900 that went for $19,000 (plus 22% premium)! Quite a number of the Kris went unsold. I picked up this one for the opening bid.

From the catalog:
Fine old blade (pamor restored) and Surakarta style hilt, with green and gold demon face and fanciful Indonesian designs. It is noted by Edward Frey in the description for this kris that it is "Another scabbard decorated by the aging Solo artist."

Publications: Frey, Edward. "The Kris: Mystic weapon of the Malay world." New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Fig. 8(b).

length 19 1/2 in.

Took them two weeks to ship. Should get it Tuesday.

[David]

i like that keris Marcus! Strange that no one else bid on it, but lucky for you.

[David]

Originally Posted by Marcus

Quite a number of the Kris went unsold.

I just reviewed the auction and just for the record it looks like just 7 keris went unsold and the vast majority that did went for a fair bot more than their estimated value.

[Green]

Marcus;

Congratulation on winning that keris. I like the strange pamor and the blade type. I am curious what will happen to the unsold ones. Hope they will go up in another auction later?

[David]

Green, you could probably contact the auction house and ask about them. The vast majority sold, but i did find a few of the 6 or 7 that didn't interesting. You can see them, what sold and how much they realized by going to the auction house online and going to past auctions. I would think that in general they were pretty pleased with the auction and the prices realized.

[Marcus]

https://new.liveauctioneers.com/cata...of-edward-frey

[Gustav]

This one:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=bendho

and somewhere on forum is another one of this size and Pamor, but with separate Gonjo and not Picit.

Here (scroll down please) a Sumatran Keris Picit:

http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002019.html