Replacement bun tut

archer · 14th November 2007, 11:17 PM

I'm trying to replace a missing bun tut and realizing I am less sure about the correct shape for this sabit bulan type sampir. Any help identifying the kerises correct place of origin and most importantly photos of proper shape for the bun tut are desperately needed.
thanks, Steve

Newsteel · 15th November 2007, 01:17 AM

Hi Steve,
That sampir is not bulan sabit or sari bulan type but it is of Minang Kabau, more towards central Sumatra. Nice fossil hilt too.

About the buntut, my opinion is that it need to flow down harmonously from the stem (batang) down to the buntut. I found that yours is slightly too big. Maybe other members (like VVV, AlamShah) can show some better pictures for example.

PenangsangII · 15th November 2007, 02:46 AM

Minangkabau sampir, I thought it looked more Palembang, but of course when discussing Sumatra, it could very tricky

I think that the sarung is not original to the blade because the blade looks Bugis or Bugis inffluence with the Northern Malaysia/ Southern Thai hilt and pendokok. But the previous owner could have used the sarung for the blade, maybe more than 60 years or so.

Just my 0.02 cent.

archer · 15th November 2007, 06:26 PM

I'm wondering if it's really a Bugis blade. The ganja seems too perpendicular to the blade on the aring side. The sampir still remains similar to those mentioned;but, definately different. Could the blade and sampir be from Thailand? The buntut is still loosely fitted and roughly shaped.

I added A couple of blade closeups. I tried to upload three Minang kabau keris
from Van Zonnevelds traditional weapons, top of page 64, with no luck. It was the ganjas on those keris that were sharply angled and confusing me. The older you get the easier for confusion to errupt.

David · 15th November 2007, 07:10 PM

looks Bugis to me, but some close-ups would help.

BluErf · 16th November 2007, 06:05 PM

Taking a long hard look, I think this keris is a keris debek from N Malaysia/S Thailand.

The sampir is rather compact, but is definitely more akin to the other keris debek sampir I've seen. The other possibility is Banjarmasin, but that form does not have overhanging daun like this. As for a Minang origin, the roundedness of the underside is something I've not really seen in Minang kerises. Another point is that if this is Minang, the batang should be tapering, but this specimen here does not.

Blade-wise, first impression was that this was a coteng-type blade. Meaning it comes from the Singora area in S. Thailand. Such blades can look very very Bugis, but the styling of the base of the keris is the part that differentiates it from Bugis blades from the South.

You could consider a buntut like the type on the example below (not my keris).

Alam Shah · 16th November 2007, 09:35 PM

For the buntut, I would suggest the type BluErf suggested. Another example is something like the one below (see example). Looking at your existing sheath's buntut, it would be easier to reshape to BluErf's example. Most probably the earlier buntut look like that.

archer · 16th November 2007, 11:41 PM

Thank you all, for your interesting input and advice. I'll send a "better closeup"
of the blade base. Here in Alaska were not seeing a lot of photographic sun light so it's a flash or nothing. I found a related keris called a debduk image enclosed.
I'll start the finish shaping with as much taper as remaining material permits.
Thank you, Steve

archer · 22nd November 2007, 01:26 AM

With the material onhand this is as much as I could shape the bun tut. When more ivory comes my way I'll try again.

Thank you All for your help and comments.

Steve

Alam Shah · 22nd November 2007, 04:11 AM

Actually, with your existing material is more than enough to create the shape of a semi-circle. Re-look at the shape again... make it rounder.

Something like this buntut shape...

archer · 22nd November 2007, 04:58 AM

Hi Alam, I would love to round it out but The stem goes too close to the bottom as it is and further rounding would cause it to break through. So I'll have to try again with a bigger piece later.

Alam Shah · 22nd November 2007, 05:28 AM

I see. ok then...

Perhaps you might want to consider a dark hardwood instead?

BluErf · 24th November 2007, 02:53 AM

In my opinion, as it is, the reshaped buntut is acceptable; no need to make any more changes to it. I think the sheath looks good already.

tunggulametung · 24th November 2007, 03:27 AM

In my opinion, think I would agree with Alam Shah that the buntut should be rounder. I'm feeling 'an unfinished job' on the current buntut. It is done when we cannot do anything into it, a final harmony with the sampir.

BluErf · 24th November 2007, 04:53 AM

Perhaps the unfinished job would be best undertaken by a proper tukang.

14th November 2007, 11:17 PM	#1
archer Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 373	Replacement bun tut I'm trying to replace a missing bun tut and realizing I am less sure about the correct shape for this sabit bulan type sampir. Any help identifying the kerises correct place of origin and most importantly photos of proper shape for the bun tut are desperately needed. thanks, Steve Attached Images

15th November 2007, 06:26 PM	#4
archer Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 373	Re Replacement I'm wondering if it's really a Bugis blade. The ganja seems too perpendicular to the blade on the aring side. The sampir still remains similar to those mentioned;but, definately different. Could the blade and sampir be from Thailand? The buntut is still loosely fitted and roughly shaped. I added A couple of blade closeups. I tried to upload three Minang kabau keris from Van Zonnevelds traditional weapons, top of page 64, with no luck. It was the ganjas on those keris that were sharply angled and confusing me. The older you get the easier for confusion to errupt. Attached Images Last edited by archer; 16th November 2007 at 01:12 AM.

16th November 2007, 06:05 PM	#6
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Taking a long hard look, I think this keris is a keris debek from N Malaysia/S Thailand. The sampir is rather compact, but is definitely more akin to the other keris debek sampir I've seen. The other possibility is Banjarmasin, but that form does not have overhanging daun like this. As for a Minang origin, the roundedness of the underside is something I've not really seen in Minang kerises. Another point is that if this is Minang, the batang should be tapering, but this specimen here does not. Blade-wise, first impression was that this was a coteng-type blade. Meaning it comes from the Singora area in S. Thailand. Such blades can look very very Bugis, but the styling of the base of the keris is the part that differentiates it from Bugis blades from the South. You could consider a buntut like the type on the example below (not my keris). Attached Images

16th November 2007, 09:35 PM	#7
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	For the buntut, I would suggest the type BluErf suggested. Another example is something like the one below (see example). Looking at your existing sheath's buntut, it would be easier to reshape to BluErf's example. Most probably the earlier buntut look like that. Attached Images Last edited by Alam Shah; 17th November 2007 at 12:53 AM.

16th November 2007, 11:41 PM	#8
archer Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 373	Re Replacement Thank you all, for your interesting input and advice. I'll send a "better closeup" of the blade base. Here in Alaska were not seeing a lot of photographic sun light so it's a flash or nothing. I found a related keris called a debduk image enclosed. I'll start the finish shaping with as much taper as remaining material permits. Thank you, Steve Attached Images

15th November 2007, 01:17 AM	#2
Newsteel Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 132	Hi Steve, That sampir is not bulan sabit or sari bulan type but it is of Minang Kabau, more towards central Sumatra. Nice fossil hilt too. About the buntut, my opinion is that it need to flow down harmonously from the stem (batang) down to the buntut. I found that yours is slightly too big. Maybe other members (like VVV, AlamShah) can show some better pictures for example.

15th November 2007, 02:46 AM	#3
PenangsangII Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 401	Minangkabau sampir, I thought it looked more Palembang, but of course when discussing Sumatra, it could very tricky I think that the sarung is not original to the blade because the blade looks Bugis or Bugis inffluence with the Northern Malaysia/ Southern Thai hilt and pendokok. But the previous owner could have used the sarung for the blade, maybe more than 60 years or so. Just my 0.02 cent.

15th November 2007, 07:10 PM	#5
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,061	looks Bugis to me, but some close-ups would help.

22nd November 2007, 01:26 AM	#9
archer Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 373	Re Replacement With the material onhand this is as much as I could shape the bun tut. When more ivory comes my way I'll try again. Thank you All for your help and comments. Steve Attached Images

22nd November 2007, 04:11 AM	#10
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	Actually, with your existing material is more than enough to create the shape of a semi-circle. Re-look at the shape again... make it rounder. Something like this buntut shape...

22nd November 2007, 04:58 AM	#11
archer Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 373	Re Replacement Hi Alam, I would love to round it out but The stem goes too close to the bottom as it is and further rounding would cause it to break through. So I'll have to try again with a bigger piece later.

22nd November 2007, 05:28 AM	#12
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	I see. ok then... Perhaps you might want to consider a dark hardwood instead? Last edited by Alam Shah; 22nd November 2007 at 05:38 AM.

24th November 2007, 02:53 AM	#13
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	In my opinion, as it is, the reshaped buntut is acceptable; no need to make any more changes to it. I think the sheath looks good already.

24th November 2007, 03:27 AM	#14
tunggulametung Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 238	In my opinion, think I would agree with Alam Shah that the buntut should be rounder. I'm feeling 'an unfinished job' on the current buntut. It is done when we cannot do anything into it, a final harmony with the sampir.

24th November 2007, 04:53 AM	#15
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Perhaps the unfinished job would be best undertaken by a proper tukang.