No SLOROK / WOJO for keris sepuh??? Really???

Neo · 27th August 2010, 05:16 PM

I just learned from some NET sources that kerises from Majapahit and before do not have wojo or slorok. Is this true?

Just to clarify, we are talking about that greenish part near the edges that is distinctly different from the darker, blacker iron part that are sandwiched within the pamor area. I will try to find pictures later.

Is this a definitive guide? Any exception to the rule? Is it not possible to see an authentic keris with distinct sepuh style of daphur (Pajajaran, Segaluh, Singasari, etc) with wojo?

Neo · 29th August 2010, 04:29 AM

Some pictures of what I am talking about. The one that resembles kupu tarung / tumpuk is said to be tangguh Majapahit by the owner. Note that different lighting produces different color hue of the iron.

A. G. Maisey · 29th August 2010, 05:48 AM

Would a full length photo of these blades be possible?

Yes, we do understand that different lighting can produce different effects in the image produced.

Neo · 29th August 2010, 01:16 PM

Unfortunately, no ... the owner sold the keris to someone else not long after I took the picture about 7 months ago. Back then I was such a neophyte that when I took pictures I only cared about the detail texture of the iron. I haven't learned the importance of dhapur and wangun yet ...

I will find some other photographs to illustrate what I meant. Meanwhile, without considering the overall dhapur (let's assume it's within the acceptable tangguh standards), is it possible for krisses from Majapahit or before to have different color tone of iron and slorok as seen from the picture?

Thanks for looking at the thread

I'll be back with more images.

A. G. Maisey · 29th August 2010, 02:08 PM

Neo, there is no need for you to find other photos to illustrate your point. I was interested in seeing the complete keris that was made of the material shown in your photo and that was claimed to be Majapahit.

Were I you, I would not concern myself much about not having obtained it.

Tangguh is an opinion.

It is an opinion of a classification that can be applied to a blade.

Keris that are classified as Majapahit normally do have a core (slorok)

Keris that are classified into the eras that fall prior to Majapahit also will usually have a core.

However some keris which truly date from the actual time period prior to Majapahit will most often not have a core, however, these keris will not be classified as Jenggolo or whatever, but as Buda.

There are at least two ways of accepting the tangguh system:- you can accept it as a classification system that uses the names of Javanese eras and historical periods as the names of those classifications, or you can accept that the classifications truly relate to the era or historical period. In the first instance you are subscribing to belief in a system of classification, in the second instance you are subscribing to an element that is part of a system of belief.

One acceptance is not more correct than the other, the relevance of the acceptance depends upon your state of mind.

Neo · 29th August 2010, 04:20 PM

Many thanks for the clarification, Mr. Maisey. As for now, I am more interested in recognizing an ORIGINAL keris from a fake one than in correctly putting a tangguh label on the keris. By original, I mean it may be a Budo, a sepuh, a nem, a kamardikan contemporary, or even an antique putran, but at least it's not a modern pretender made to fool collectors.

Prior to your answer, I had suspected that a sepuh keris is not supposed to have distinguishable slorok, no matter how subtle. So, based on this understanding, kerises that has Pajajaran features (high gandik, matching iron grains and pamor characteristics, among others), but then it after looking at the blade closely under strong lighting it has subtle different color tones indicating that it has a slorok, then that means the blade is either an antique retrofit (it was made in the past as a putran of an earlier style) or a modern pretender made from old material.

Perhaps I misinterpreted information from the following website: http://www.kerisdanuri.fotopic.net/c1655009.html

Many thanks for your answer.

A. G. Maisey · 29th August 2010, 10:49 PM

It is not yet 7am here, and in 20 minutes I'm off to Canberra to visit the National Gallery. Right now I do not have time to provide the comments needed from your last post. I'll try to get to this as soon as I can.

In the interim, could you oblige by letting us know where you are located?

Are you a native speaker of Indonesian?

Thanks.

Neo · 30th August 2010, 07:20 AM

Take your time. I'm sorry I just read this message on 1:20pm Bali time. I live in Bali and Indonesian is my native tongue. PM me if you need more info.
Thanks!

A. G. Maisey · 31st August 2010, 01:54 AM

Neo, prior to writing this response I have been back into the previous threads that you have contributed to, and I have read those threads.

I have looked at the site that is associated with the link you have provided in this current thread.

I have read the opinions of the owner of this site, and associated correspondence, which is to be found at :-

http://mykeris.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/memiliki-keris/

I am not going to get bogged down in discussion of the examples given in the link you have provided, however, I will say this:-

old keris of the Buda type almost never have a core; the concept of "old" in this context means prior to +/- 1300AD, however, this time estimate is very subject to the application of circular reasoning, so it is necessary to be as objective and as logical as possible

some keris of more recent periods also do not have a core

the presence or absence of a blade core in a keris of any period cannot be understood in isolation as an indicator of its age

I understand that your dominant desire in respect of keris knowledge is to be able to differentiate between genuine older blades, and blades that have been treated, or altered, in some way or another, with the intent to deceive a prospective buyer into the belief that the blade is something that it is not.

We have already given you a very comprehensive and accurate answer to this question. I would suggest a re-reading of this thread:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12057

you will find the answers to your questions there.

In summary it is only possible to gain the knowledge you seek by long term experience and instruction from knowledgeable teachers with access to the requisite examples.Even this is no guarantee that you will never make a mistake.

Neo · 31st August 2010, 07:13 AM

Thanks for the reply, Mr. Maisey.

Yes, yes, the teacher issue. I've been working on it ...

Quote:

the presence or absence of a blade core in a keris of any period cannot be understood in isolation as an indicator of its age

This one sentence pretty much answers my question while at the same time makes me realize that I haven't progressed much in my quest

27th August 2010, 05:16 PM	#1
Neo Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	No SLOROK / WOJO for keris sepuh??? Really??? I just learned from some NET sources that kerises from Majapahit and before do not have wojo or slorok. Is this true? Just to clarify, we are talking about that greenish part near the edges that is distinctly different from the darker, blacker iron part that are sandwiched within the pamor area. I will try to find pictures later. Is this a definitive guide? Any exception to the rule? Is it not possible to see an authentic keris with distinct sepuh style of daphur (Pajajaran, Segaluh, Singasari, etc) with wojo?

29th August 2010, 04:29 AM	#2
Neo Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	Some pictures of what I am talking about. The one that resembles kupu tarung / tumpuk is said to be tangguh Majapahit by the owner. Note that different lighting produces different color hue of the iron. Attached Images

29th August 2010, 01:16 PM	#4
Neo Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	Unfortunately, no ... the owner sold the keris to someone else not long after I took the picture about 7 months ago. Back then I was such a neophyte that when I took pictures I only cared about the detail texture of the iron. I haven't learned the importance of dhapur and wangun yet ... I will find some other photographs to illustrate what I meant. Meanwhile, without considering the overall dhapur (let's assume it's within the acceptable tangguh standards), is it possible for krisses from Majapahit or before to have different color tone of iron and slorok as seen from the picture? Thanks for looking at the thread I'll be back with more images. Last edited by Neo; 29th August 2010 at 01:26 PM.

29th August 2010, 05:48 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,896	Would a full length photo of these blades be possible? Yes, we do understand that different lighting can produce different effects in the image produced.

29th August 2010, 02:08 PM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,896	Neo, there is no need for you to find other photos to illustrate your point. I was interested in seeing the complete keris that was made of the material shown in your photo and that was claimed to be Majapahit. Were I you, I would not concern myself much about not having obtained it. Tangguh is an opinion. It is an opinion of a classification that can be applied to a blade. Keris that are classified as Majapahit normally do have a core (slorok) Keris that are classified into the eras that fall prior to Majapahit also will usually have a core. However some keris which truly date from the actual time period prior to Majapahit will most often not have a core, however, these keris will not be classified as Jenggolo or whatever, but as Buda. There are at least two ways of accepting the tangguh system:- you can accept it as a classification system that uses the names of Javanese eras and historical periods as the names of those classifications, or you can accept that the classifications truly relate to the era or historical period. In the first instance you are subscribing to belief in a system of classification, in the second instance you are subscribing to an element that is part of a system of belief. One acceptance is not more correct than the other, the relevance of the acceptance depends upon your state of mind.

29th August 2010, 04:20 PM	#6
Neo Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	Many thanks for the clarification, Mr. Maisey. As for now, I am more interested in recognizing an ORIGINAL keris from a fake one than in correctly putting a tangguh label on the keris. By original, I mean it may be a Budo, a sepuh, a nem, a kamardikan contemporary, or even an antique putran, but at least it's not a modern pretender made to fool collectors. Prior to your answer, I had suspected that a sepuh keris is not supposed to have distinguishable slorok, no matter how subtle. So, based on this understanding, kerises that has Pajajaran features (high gandik, matching iron grains and pamor characteristics, among others), but then it after looking at the blade closely under strong lighting it has subtle different color tones indicating that it has a slorok, then that means the blade is either an antique retrofit (it was made in the past as a putran of an earlier style) or a modern pretender made from old material. Perhaps I misinterpreted information from the following website: http://www.kerisdanuri.fotopic.net/c1655009.html Many thanks for your answer.

29th August 2010, 10:49 PM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,896	It is not yet 7am here, and in 20 minutes I'm off to Canberra to visit the National Gallery. Right now I do not have time to provide the comments needed from your last post. I'll try to get to this as soon as I can. In the interim, could you oblige by letting us know where you are located? Are you a native speaker of Indonesian? Thanks.

30th August 2010, 07:20 AM	#8
Neo Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	Take your time. I'm sorry I just read this message on 1:20pm Bali time. I live in Bali and Indonesian is my native tongue. PM me if you need more info. Thanks!

31st August 2010, 01:54 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,896	Neo, prior to writing this response I have been back into the previous threads that you have contributed to, and I have read those threads. I have looked at the site that is associated with the link you have provided in this current thread. I have read the opinions of the owner of this site, and associated correspondence, which is to be found at :- http://mykeris.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/memiliki-keris/ I am not going to get bogged down in discussion of the examples given in the link you have provided, however, I will say this:- old keris of the Buda type almost never have a core; the concept of "old" in this context means prior to +/- 1300AD, however, this time estimate is very subject to the application of circular reasoning, so it is necessary to be as objective and as logical as possible some keris of more recent periods also do not have a core the presence or absence of a blade core in a keris of any period cannot be understood in isolation as an indicator of its age I understand that your dominant desire in respect of keris knowledge is to be able to differentiate between genuine older blades, and blades that have been treated, or altered, in some way or another, with the intent to deceive a prospective buyer into the belief that the blade is something that it is not. We have already given you a very comprehensive and accurate answer to this question. I would suggest a re-reading of this thread:- http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12057 you will find the answers to your questions there. In summary it is only possible to gain the knowledge you seek by long term experience and instruction from knowledgeable teachers with access to the requisite examples.Even this is no guarantee that you will never make a mistake.