Keris Buda

[A. G. Maisey]

Our discussion group has been very quiet lately.

Friends who live in the Northern Hemisphere assure me that this is simply because the weather is too good to spend sitting in front of a computer. Maybe this is so, but I doubt that I have ever seen such an extended period with no new posts.

Over the last month I have had computer problems, email problems, net connection problems. All sorts of problems. But now I have a new computer, my net connection has been fixed, and I think I might have even corrected the email issues.

So, I am breaking with my usual practice of only starting a thread if I have something to say, and only contributing to a thread if I feel my contribution may be of use.

Here are photos of very early keris, the keris style that we now refer to as "Keris Buda". This is where the keris started. The inspiration for this blade form was the leaf shaped Indian blades that came into Jawa with Indian culture.

In Jawa this leaf shaped blade form was seen as similar to the indigenous Gunungan form, the Javanese "World Mountain", the place of the Gods and the ancestors. So the Keris Buda became , or was originated as, a weapon representation of this socio-religious Gunungan form.

This was the beginning. From this point a lot of things happened and we finally finished up with the keris as we know it today.

So here you are. Please enjoy looking at what the ancestors of the keris of the 15th century onwards looked like.

[rasdan]

G'day Alan,

Thanks for the pictures. Very very interesting kerises. I always wondered, how do we actually authenticate this type of keris?

A link to an older keris buda thread, just in case other forumites wanted other references to expand this discussion:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12168

Rasdan

[David]

Thanks Alan. I was on the verge of posting something myself put some wind in the sails in these doldrum days. Your posts are must appreciated.
On your first example is that a greneng-like feature where the gonjo hooks at the tail end or is it simply blade erosion?

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasdan

As with many things associated with the keris there is no way to give absolutely cast iron guarantees about anything, however authentification of a Keris Buda can be a matter of agreement between equals with considerable experience. Very often the ones that are genuine have been newly found at the time when they are sold, for instance, the one on the left in my photos has deposits sticking to it that look and react like volcanic deposits, it has obviously been in the ground for a very long time. The others I've shown photos of are correct in respect of material and both have been agreed upon as KB's by very senior people.

Authentification probably all comes down to experience and expertise.

I do have other KB's that were clearly made at a later time, not modern times, but probably around 14th-15th century.

David

That hole in the end of the gonjo is erosion.

[Battara]

Great examples to view Alan.

I guess I wonder how the form morphed into the sundang of later periods from Malaysia to the Philippines in a period of 200 years.

[A. G. Maisey]

Battara, I have never looked at that question.

I have looked very closely and over a very extended period of time at development in Jawa itself, but after the keris left Jawa it seems to have followed independent lines of development in the various places that it entered.

I recall an article of some years past by (I think ) Federico Malibago, that impressed me at the time, and made a lasting impression on me. To my mind that was a well reasoned and logical rationalisation for development of the sword form of the keris.

[rasjid]

Hi Alan,

For Keris Buda do you think yours is passing through the hardenning process?
Any idea? Or mostly just made from medium and low carbon steel?
My guess is all low carbon because the steel is not as refined like modern steel?

[Jean]

Originally Posted by rasjid

Hi Alan,

My guess is all low carbon because the steel is not as refined like modern steel?

AFAIK manufacturing low carbon steel is a quite recent process and old steel/iron had a high carbon content and was hard and brittle?
Regards

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasjid and Jean.

Iron and steel are both ferric material.

The difference between iron and steel is that pure iron does not contain carbon, steel does contain carbon.

Pure iron, i.e., ferric material that does not contain carbon or other impurities, is very soft, and because it does not contain carbon, it cannot be hardened.

When ferric material contains too much carbon, that very high content of carbon --- say, above 1.2%--- must be reduced to a level that permits the ferric material to be hardened to a degree that is sufficiently hard for work, but not brittle. This cleansing process in South East Asia was carried out by the repeated folding and welding of the ferric material to remove the excess carbon. In Jawa this is known as "washing the iron". In practice, the material is repeatedly folded and welded until sparks do not rise from a billet at weld heat when that billet is struck with a hammer.

For ferric material to become sufficiently hard to be used for tools that are required to hold an edge, and not break because of brittleness, the carbon content should be between +/- .4 % and +/- 1.2% . For example, a very useful modern simple carbon steel is 01 :- oil hardening steel with 1% carbon.
After steel has been hardened by heating to its critical temperature and quenched in the appropriate medium, it is hard, but it is also brittle, and that brittleness needs to be reduced. This is done by heating the steel to a temperature below critical, indicated by a heat produced colour band on the steel and then quenched to hold the steel at the degree of hardness indicated by the colour band.

Although Jawa did and does have sources of iron ore, mostly contained in beach sands, it seems that the iron produced from these sources was of a low quality and that it contained a high percentage of phosphorus, an impurity which causes iron to be very brittle. High phosphorus irons are usually lighter in colour than most other irons.

In Maritime S.E. Asia the Iron Age and the Bronze Age seem to have arrived at approximately the same time and to have progressed together. This very probably occurred because both iron and bronze were introduced to Maritime S.E. Asia by trade originating from other countries, notably China and the Indian Sub-Continent.

In Jawa the sources of iron used were principally imports from China and India in the early years of the first millennium, and later from Europe, China and India after European contact. Thus, although Jawa did have its own iron, it was more practical to use the iron imported from other countries, and this imported iron appears to have been mixed by the forge welding process with the local high phosphorus iron, thus producing mixed iron, which was called "pamor". Use of this mixing technique had two very useful factors, firstly it extended the quantity of the expensive imported iron and secondly it produced a product that had a high degree of resistance to breaking, however, this material was not able to hold a cutting edge for long, so a wafer of steel was inserted into the blade to produce an edge that could be hardened. There were several methods used to insert this wafer of steel.

When iron is produced from iron ore by smelting , the resultant product is called "pig iron", or "cast iron". This is very brittle and contains a number of impurities including carbon. The most primitive form of smelting is by use of a bloomery, which produces a "bloom" of very dirty sponge iron. The pig iron, and the sponge iron is then refined to produce wrought iron. Useable steel can be produced by working bloomery iron or cast iron to a degree sufficient to leave a low carbon content, or by producing carbon free wrought iron and then reintroducing carbon to that wrought iron.

These processes have around for about 4000 years.

So, although the modern, industrialised production of steel with varying degrees of carbon content is a comparatively recent occurrence, mankind has been able to produce iron and steel with varying degrees of carbon content for a very long time indeed.

When steel has been heat treated to make it hard, the quenching process leaves a signature in the material:- the hardened section of the material is darker in colour than the unhardened section.

To address your specific question Rasjid. All three of these blades are iron blades. I think it is possible that at least a part of the edges might have had carbon introduced by the case hardening method, however it is now impossible to know that with any certainty, because case hardening results in only a very shallow penetration of carbon to the iron, and erosion has removed any evidence of this.

[rasjid]

Ok noted your explanation. Is your KB in the hand also "feel" heavy as well?
I understand it has been coroded long time and lost alot of its steel, but does it feeling heavy on hand? Because I think your KB is quite thick as well.

I'm trying to make a note for myself here. I have seen a few KBs newly made material is heavy and corrosion can be adjusted for whole blade or certain areas. The hardest part is when people start using very old material to make one as you have mention in the previous post. So how we distinguish?

I'm not playing tangguh game here, but for keris KB can we start by:
1. Look at the whole blade pawakan and imagine in their original form if the whole blade fits and feels right?
2. Corosion on the blade? Questionable?
3. Material used. Sometimes difficult to see texture or maybe heavily corroded with rust so hard to see. Here, maybe the weight can play a part to distinguish the material used?

May be others can add or discuss above points?

Thank you.
Rasjid

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasjid, I think your question comes down to one very simple thing:-

How do we know if a KB is genuine or not?

The answer to this question is also very simple;-

Knowledge and experience.

It’s the same as knowing if a particular art work is truly the work of van Gogh, or Rubens, or whoever. An authority on this type of art can write volumes about how to tell the real from the not real, but unless one has a similar level of knowledge and experience as that authority all this written information only tends to confuse.

With a KB, the perceived weight of a blade is no guide.

Pawakan is no guide, because KB's come in a number of forms. I've got 5 or 6 I think, and no two are exactly the same.

The corrosion pattern can be a partial guide, but it is more in the nature of a negative guide, that is, a real KB may have a corrosion pattern that appears to be manufactured, but a fake KB will not have a pattern that appears to be real.

Material can vary a bit, and then there is the fact that KB's were made over a long period of time and in a number of locations, which of course means that the material will vary. It can help if you also have a knowledge of tools made in the KB era. I bought a box of old iron tools once, and I learnt quite a lot from these. They'd all been found in the same place by a farmer. In fact, most KB's and old iron objects are found by farmers. Some old weapons are found as burial goods. There used to be graveyard near Jogja that the local people used as a source of old iron to make tools. The people buried there had had their weapons and tools buried with them.

The most reliable indicator of authenticity is if the balance of opinion of knowledgeable and experienced people comes down on the side of a KB being genuine. For instance, present a blade to, say, 5 recognised experts (ahli keris), do it in private so that opinion is not influenced by the presence of somebody acknowledged as an expert of higher knowledge. If three say genuine, one says not genuine, and one says not sure which, then it has a good likelihood of being the real thing.

Occasionally it may be possible to have knowledge of the person who found it in the first place, and this can be a very valuable endorsement.

The three KB's that I have shown have all been agreed as genuine by a couple of very senior people, and they are genuine in my opinion also.

[rasjid]

Thanks Alan for the update.
The Keris below was given to me from my friend who are not interested to keep it anymore due to personal reason. After getting permission from his two uncles and two years waiting period, this one and few keris and others belong to me now.

The physical blade is quite thin compared to Alan's. Is this also one of the transitional type from KB?
Any comments?
Thanks in advance.

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasjid, when I talk about a "transitional" keris I have in mind a keris that is not a KB, but that has some of the features of a KB. I cannot recall ever hearing anybody else use this term; mostly an ahli keris in Solo will place a dubious old blade between two tangguhs, not committing to either one.

I cannot recall ever having seen a KB with gonjo iras.

Is the tang of your keris square, rather than round?

Is the top of the gonjo the correct shape for a KB?

Has a core been used or not?

Is the material dense, well packed, or tending to porosity?

The long gandhik is not something I would expect in a keris that followed the KB line, rather, I would expect this in a Pajajaran or even a Tuban keris.

[rasjid]

G'day Alan,
The tang is square, and from my understanding this has core but laminated differently not sandwich like normally seen. The picture taken after warangan done and given oil on the blade.
The blade is dense and well packed, I like the material used.
Agreed Pajajaran or Tuban and the owner's family history has relationship with Mangkunegaran and lived in Kebumen.
Ok noted that the long gandhik as shown is probably not a "transitionall" keris KB.

"Is the top of the gonjo the correct shape for a KB?"
Could you elaborate more by what you mean?

Thank you.
Rasjid

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasjid

Have a look at image 12 for the gonjo.

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/INTERPRETATIONPAGE3.html

Image 11 shows a keris that seems to be between a KB and a recognisably Modern Keris. The gonjo of this old waved keris is KB style, material conforms, but then we've got that long gandhik, and of course the waves. I've opted to call this "transitional", but we could equally call it "early Modern". Maybe the same line of thought could apply to your keris.

Yeah, based upon what you say, I think we could probably think of your keris as a transitional form, the square tang is possibly the decider, if you get that plus a few other things then its a bit hard to say that it is purely Modern in form.

You say the core is not a side to side core. Is it fitted like a "V", so that it only provides cutting edges?

Really Rasjid, in this whole area of KB's and very early keris, we're swimming in strange waters. To my knowledge nobody else has ever looked really closely at these questions. The whole time I've been studying keris the focus has been on art and to learn how to apply the tangguh system in a way that doesn't divorce you too much from the consensus of opinion. I've gone off to one side.

[rasjid]

Alan,

Thank you. I have very limited knowledge about Keris, especially never actually make one myself (from folding the material itself). For me to understand better about Keris itself we also need to understand how the keris is folded, the core and the pamor as well.
Back to my previous keris picture, I'm not 100% sure if its fitted like "V" or like Japanese sword or not. From what i can see, after the warangan - i can see the different material is used from that blade.

Mine also do not have the steel mendak, just plain square peksi.
Thanks

[A. G. Maisey]

Maybe the easiest way to gain an understanding of what happens when we fold and weld material is to duplicate the process with plasticine. I seem to recall Pauzan used this when he was working out how to weld ron duru.

I can understand what you mean when you say that different material is used for the core than for the blade, we can expect this, but what causes you to think that the core has been put into the blade in a manner that varies from the common side to side sandwich?

Re mendak, is that mendak ferric material? It looks like brass in the photo. Or maybe you have replaced the original ferric one with a brass one?

[rasjid]

Just my imagination, if the middle is the core ( different colour from other blade material surrounding it) the maker could sandwhich the core and Turn 45 degree before hammering so that the core in the middle. Straight through the peksi... and again I could be wrong

There is was old mendak attached when I received it but unusable anymore. I replace it with cirebonan handle and brass mendak as personal preference.

[A. G. Maisey]

When we put the core in, its just like making a sandwich, bottom layer of pamor, thin layer of steel, top layer of pamor. Then it gets welded in the forge. So, under normal circumstances and in this sort of keris, we could expect to see the core in the pesi running side to side , the same orientation as in the blade.

The way I understand what you told us, Rasjid, is that the line of the core does not continue through the pesi in the same orientation as it is in the blade, but rather it has been turned 45 degrees so that it now runs perpendicular to the blade surface.

If this is so, its a bit hard to understand why this would be done. In any case, its unusual. Can you see where the orientation of the core occurred? Can you see the core running through the top of the gonjo? Under microscopic examination, can you see any obvious joins in the blade or pesi?

I wonder if it is the result of a miscalculation in manufacture, and the smith made a virtue of necessity.

I cannot recall seeing a blade like this one. It appears to be Jawa, but an old Jawa blade with a kebo gandhik, KB tang, iron mendak---or probably more correctly metuk --- plus gonjo iras. Very peculiar. I think it is possible that at the time it was made the smith might have been struggling with the technique and this led to production of a rather unique blade.

I'd like to have a close look at this blade some day.

EDIT

I've just had another look at this blade pic. I can clearly see the core, or perhaps more correctly the cutting edge on the front of the blade,I cannot see an edge at the back of the blade, there may have been one that has been lost to erosion. I can also see a dark line running down the middle of the blade face. Is this maybe what you can see in the pesi? Not the core, but an attempt at a pamor pattern, or an accident in mixture of material?

[rasjid]

The blade is in Jakarta, you are always welcome to view it and in case you need to update yourself about Jakarta also.

I looked again the blade, may be you are right. Under proper sun light, the core is sandwich as normal, the middle line maybe an attempt as pamor or different type of material used (like sodo saler). The left darker colour is the core but none on the other side. The blade is welded tight and no visible joints.
I dont think any pamor here, just different material is being used and welded with the core.

thanks

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, possibly Rasjid, but if this dark line also appears on the other side, I'd be inclined to think it might have been an attempt at a defined motif. Not all keris are masterpieces and not all makers were masters; a lot of the rank and file very obviously struggled with what they were trying to do.

Yes. Well. Jakarta. You're right I should visit. Haven't been there since 1978. But I doubt that I have the strength to endure Jakarta. First few times I went there it was fun, I quite enjoyed it, that was more than 40 years ago. Been a lot of changes both to Jakarta and me since then.