strange pamor

[Marcokeris]

During my last trip to Yogya this Cirebon keris with an unusual pamor met me.

[Sajen]

Very nice and interesting pamor! A very nice Cirebon keris, thank you for sharing.

Regards,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Residual lawe setukal.

Old Madura.

Hilt possibly Cirebon, wrongko Madura kacir, mendak Madura, blade Madura.

[Sajen]

Hello Alan,

isn't this wrongko not nearly the same form like shown in Jensen's kris disk at chapter 4, page 21, pic. 31d? I ever have thought that this wrongko form is attributed to old Cirebon / North coast Java.

Regards,

Detlef

[GIO]

Wonderful keris, Marco. Congratulations for your find.
Could you show the whole blade ?

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Detlef, there are similarities.

My classification is based on what I have learnt from several tukang wrongko in Solo, and several salesmen from Madura.

In my opinion this wrongko appears to be a Madura kacir.

I have no problem at all if Mr. Jensen calls it Cirebon, and I also have no problem at all if anybody else wishes to call it Cirebon.

[Sajen]

Hello Alan,

thank you for reply. My base of "Knowledge" is from books and what was told me and is surely small-sized compared to your knowledge. And I am far away to start a dispute with you about the origin of this sheath, my only intention is to learn.

You may remember this thread: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11947

There were shown this two examples from similar sheaths (see below). May it be possible that this sheath form in question is a very old one and was used in both region?

Regards,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, its possible that the form was more widespread than just Cirebon, or just Madura. The way people see things now is not the way they were 300, 200, 100 years ago.

Also possible that miniscule differences existed between various interpretations of the form, these tiny differences could have indicated a different ruler in the same area, a different ruler in a different area, or diiferent interpretation by a different maker. At this remove, who can tell?

To be honest, I have a heap of books on keris, I have made a general rule of buying every keris book published that I have been able to obtain. The ones I've missed have mostly been Indonesian low run ones, and a few in languages I cannot read.

However, I usually read these books once, find (mostly) a lot of stuff that does not agree with what I've been taught, or is just plain idiotic or wrong, put the book away and don't open it again.

The exceptions to this are Solyom, because there is nothing between its covers that I can consider wrong, a few things I don't agree with, but that doesn't mean they're wrong, only that we went to slightly different schools; Haryono Haryoguritno, and Harsinuksmo. I use the last two named as references for names that are generally acceptable to the bulk of present day collectors, even if I myself do not agree with these names. Most other books I would not open from one year to the next, except if somebody asks me a question about something in one of those unopened books.

On this whole subject of specific names and attributions for anything , I am very relaxed. I really do not care what anybody calls anything, nor how they attribute it. To me this something of very little importance. The big questions with keris are not tied into this attribution/classification thing.

I just never think about classifications nor attributions. What time I spend thinking about keris is pointed in an entirely different direction.

So, if Jensen wants to call something a name that I don't agree with, I don't care.

If anybody wants to build a case that this wrongko under discussion is from Cirebon, that's fine with me.

Its just not important to me.

I might get a whisker more interested if anybody disputed blade origin, but even then it is something of no great moment. Just a difference in opinion.

The name game is one of the most futile wasters of time in any field of study.

[Montino Bourbon]

What do you consider important in keris? I'm asking as a relative neophyte, because I'm interested.

I hope I'm not opening a can of worms!

[A. G. Maisey]

It is a can of worms Montino.

To begin with, for a very long time I have not really regarded the keris as something that I collect. With most collectibles the people who collect those things want to classify, codify and pigeonhole. This is what collectors do, not just keris, but any sort of collectible. I've been down this road, but as I say, for a long time this has been of very little interest to me.

My interest lays in trying to gain an understanding of what the keris was in pre-Islamic Jawa. This means that I do not have very much interest in those things that can be identified as a part of the keris once it came under the influence of Islam.

I do not ignore these Islamic things, it would be impossible to do so, but they just don't interest me very much.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Residual lawe setukal.

Old Madura.

Hilt possibly Cirebon, wrongko Madura kacir, mendak Madura, blade Madura.

Dear friends,
A similar kris from my collection, also supposedly from Northern Java but may be Madura? The blade is 36.5 cm long excluding the peksi. Was pamor Lawe Satukel common with old Madura blades? (I never saw one myself).
Best regards
Jean

[A. G. Maisey]

Jean, I have needed to play with your photo so that I could see the blade properly, sorry, but it is simply not possible for me to adequately assess a blade in any orientation other than the one I have placed your blade into.

This blade is a very typical Madura blade:- the gandhik that seems as if it is sloping towards the center of the blade, the gandhik shape which tends to be cone-like, the wispy kembang kacang, the straight, awkward gonjo, the less than elegant pawakan, the clumsy uneven waves, the long point, the coarse material. Everything I can see here is typical of an old Madura blade.

The mendak in the top photo is also typical Madura.

The hilt I am not sure of, it looks Cirebon, I could change my mind with it in my hand.

We now have two keris attributed to Cirebon/North Jawa that I understand to be from Madura.

Why?

In my opinion because for some people at the present time a Cirebon attribution is extremely desirable, and a Madura attribution is close to poison.

Say "Madura" and the price goes down.

Say "Cirebon" and the price goes up.

Say "North Jawa" and neither thing happens, and you're no lying, because Madura is a part of East Jawa, and lays north of Jawa.

It is absolutely certain that the people who sell keris in Jawa know more than anybody else about keris. Much more. But they do not give free lessons.

Jean, I don't think this pamor was all that common, at least I haven't seen a lot of examples of it. I have only one excellent example, and I can remember selling one.I've seen maybe two photos of one. This particular interpretation of lawe is pretty scarce.

[Jean]

Hello Alan,
Thank you for your very interesting and documented input, sorry I have no better pictures to show as the piece is not with me at present. The Ganesha hilt on the top picture is from Cirebon (I replaced it) and the mendak was replaced also so they are not original. This kris was found in Solo and it could originate from anywhere.
I take this opportunity to indicate that Teguh Iman Santosa from Yogyakarta is preparing a new book related to the various types of Northern Java krisses (focusing on the warangkas especially), I hope that it will be published soon.
Best regards
Jean

[David]

Originally Posted by Jean

The Ganesha hilt on the top picture is from Cirebon (I replaced it) and the mendak was replaced also so they are not original.

In the two photos you present it looks as though the mendaks are different and possibly even the hilt. The stain looks better on the on presented on white background. Is the blue background shot then this keris as you recieved it and the white background after hilt/mendak replacement and a cleaning?

[Jean]

Originally Posted by David

In the two photos you present it looks as though the mendaks are different and possibly even the hilt. The stain looks better on the on presented on white background. Is the blue background shot then this keris as you recieved it and the white background after hilt/mendak replacement and a cleaning?

Hello David,
Good observation! The picture with light blue background was the original one from the seller and the one with light grey background was shot by myself after staining the blade and replacing the hilt & mendak. My issue was just to discuss the origin of the warangka and blade.