The Javanese blade age guessing game

[RSWORD]

It has been a little quiet on the forum and we did this once before and it seemed fun and informative. I am posting pictures of 5 Javanese blades and am curious as to thoughts about age. I'll post thoughts with each individual detail picture for sharing and to open the door for alternate opinions.

[RSWORD]

So if I go left to right this first one has a very robust blade, very thick ganja and seems quite old to me. I would guess 17/18th century for the blade. I understand all,opinions are taken from pictures and are not to be taken as fact when there isn't the opportunity for hands on examination. Opinions are for fun and information.

[RSWORD]

Blade #2 is a robust stout blade. It is a fairly recent addition so my apologies for it not being properly cleaned and oiled. Will get to that. My guess is that this one is 19th century.

[RSWORD]

Keris #3 has a fairly thin blade. Seems to have been through a number of ritual washings in its life. Nice pattern with floating islands of silver pamor. I suspect this one is sneaky old. My guess is 18th century or earlier.

[RSWORD]

Keris #4 seems a fairly ordinary blade. Not thin nor robust it sits in the middle from a heft perspective. Longitudinal pamor might grade up if it was in stain but as is seems fairly ordinary. I'm guessing 19th century to maybe early 20th century.

[RSWORD]

Keris #5 has a fairly bold "chicken feather" pamor. It seems a lot of this style of pamor are contemporary. This one seems different because the feathered pattern is captured between the edge ridges. Not a good description of what I am seeing but hopefully the pictures illustrate what I am talking about. I don't know how old this type of pamor is but my guess is that it is fairly recent. So I will guess this blade is late 19th to early 20th century.

[RSWORD]

This is intended to be fun and share our guesses as to age. Again, caveat that this is being done from pictures on a computer screen so I won't hold anyone to it. Curious if folks agree or disagree with my guesses. I'm also curious if the consensus tends to be the same or if any of the pieces illicit a variety of opinions.

[A. G. Maisey]

Post #5, keris #4, is the oldest blade, the others I'm not prepared to give an opinion on, simply too many missing pieces and absolutely no knowledge of the history.

Just based on what I can see in the pics, I'd probably be prepared to place all except #5 into the 1800's, but there are a couple that could be earlier, and one that could be very old indeed.

But from pics?

Nope, not possible for me I'm afraid.

[RSWORD]

Alan,

Thanks for the thoughts. For the 2 that could be earlier and the one that could be very old are there additional pictures or information I can provide to help?

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for asking, but no, no additional pics or info would assist, I'd really need to handle them.

I have a whole heap of photos of old keris that are in museums in Europe, many were collected pre-1800, some pre-1700. If these keris were stripped of dress and even very, very good photos were presented for opinion probably most people would guess them at less than 100 years old. You just cannot tell very much from a photograph.

Even when you have it in your hand, it becomes an educated guess to put an age on it.

The major problem with trying to put age on a keris is that within Javanese culture nobody takes any notice, nor has any desire to establish the true age of a keris. Keris people use the tangguh system, which is really a system of classification originally developed for reasons other than to establish age per se, but it is still the foundation of any attempt to establish age.

Sound contradictory?

It is.

But we can more or less establish a tangguh from the relevant indicators, and if those indicators point to a recent period, such as, for example, Surakarta, we can have a reasonable degree of certainty that in fact we are looking at a keris from the Surakarta era, and condition will provide a broad guideline to actual age --- not that this is particularly important to the people who own this cultural artifact, that is, the Javanese, because what they base their appreciation on is not age at all, in fact nothing at all to do with age, but rather artistic content, and in some cases whether the keris is "alive", or "empty".

Yes, age is very often important to collectors in the western world, but these collectors have constructed their own value system, and it relates only very faintly to the value system that applies in Jawa, which is constructed on artistic interpretation and the esteem in which any particular historic era is held, this esteem is principally related to the concepts of honour and power.

Many Javanese keris conscious people will align tangguh to the historic era that has provided the name for the tangguh, but very often this belief is based as much on myth and legend as on reality.

Only a couple of hours ago I was handling a keris that in my opinion dates from the late 16th through to the early 17th century. I can provide reasons for my opinion, but that opinion is based on my very lengthy experience with some input from the tangguh system. It is not in the terms of the Western World an opinion which can be defended.

This is the crux of the matter:- we can fly our opinions to our hearts' content, but if we cannot defend those opinions, of what value are they?

Quite simply, there is no reasonably reliable system in existence that will assist in establishing the true age of a keris blade. With experience we can differentiate between old and recent, but the overlaps are considerable, as is the possibility of error.

[Bob A]

Since age is not a factor that enters into the understanding or appreciation of the keris, according to the lights of those people whose artifacts they are, is there any notion of provenance or continuity of existence which might be a factor in their appreciation?

Art, in the West, seems to have relational linkage to the time in which it was created. Is this at all the case with keris? What factors of aesthetic appreciation are most easily grasped by the western sensibility, that can be used in understanding what a Javanese might sense within a given artifact?

And under what conditions or circumstances are intangible qualities such as "life" or "emptiness" capable of being apprehended? Does this depend on a cultural submersion, or is it rendered sensible absent training and exposure?

I recognise that the ability to formulate a question might not have any correspondence to the possibility of a meaningful answer. Even so, a glancing blow can strike a spark, if conditions are correct.

[A. G. Maisey]

Age per se is not an important factor, but perceived age, as related to perceived era is a relevant factor.

For a Javanese keris conscious person the base system of reference is the tangguh system, and this tangguh system is based on a belief system. Here is a link to a page in my site that gives a brief outline of tangguh:-

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

In respect of the Javanese artistic appreciation of keris art, the first principle is to relate the blade to human body language and form, as understood within Javanese society. Following on from that, more universal standards that apply to excellence of craftsmanship and achievement of pre-determined objectives can be applied.

The ideas of a blade being "empty" or of being "alive" are largely dependent upon individual perception within the framework of the keris belief system. To a degree this can be regarded as a culturally related concept, but instances have occurred where people outside the Javanese culture system, and with absolutely no understanding of it have encountered a perception of a presence related to a keris.

[RSWORD]

Thanks very much for the feedback and discussions so far.

An opinion without a solid stream of reasoning is useless? Depends on the context. If you are an appraiser you can't do that. You must provide your supporting evidence to support your conclusion. If you are a dealer and you are putting a premium value on an item because of reason XYZ you need to support that with evidence. All that makes perfect sense and I agree completely. But in a less rigid environment of say a think tank or a brainstorming session sometimes an unsubstantiated opinion can spark a direction which ultimately leads to the fact finding to support it. It's the chicken and the egg. Sometimes we don't have the ability to support an opinion until many, many years later. Is the world flat or round? Einsteins theory of relativity. It took many years to support the hypothesis mathematically.

In this scenario, the guessing game was intended to be fun, maybe educational and to hopefully spark some discussion. We learned about how the Javanese look at dating a blade. They don't. They use Tangguh to classify it and within that cultural context that is most important. For me personally I respect that and want to understand it. I also have a vivid imagination and thinking about the actual age of the blade sends me on a journey in my mind. What all has this blade seen. How many hands has it been exchanged. What countries has it seen. With one of the blade having the potential to be very old really sparks my imagination about what the journey of this blade has been like. Some might say that is pointless since I will never know for sure. I say it never hurts to let your imagination wander from time to time.

So perhaps a better question would have been if anyone would care to hazard a guess as to the Tangguh of these Keris again with the caveat they are from my poor pictures?

[Sajen]

Hello Rick,

I only can tell you that blade #1, #2 & #5 seems to be better blades to my eyes. I am correct that I see traces of gilding at the gonjo by blade #1?

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

I don't think that anybody has said that an opinion without a solid stream of reasoning is useless.

Of course it is not, however, if one wishes to put forward the opinion that it is raining, one must be able to either see, hear or feel the rain. Any opinion that rain is falling without some relevant evidence to support the opinion that rain is falling can be regarded as an opinion without foundation. This type of opinion is based upon physical evidence.

Alternatively, where an opinion can be based upon a recognised system, application of that system can be used to support the opinion. This type of opinion is based upon reason and/or logic.

However, in the case of the Javanese keris, no recognised system exists that can be used to support an opinion in respect of true age of a keris, thus such an opinion depends upon the experience of the person giving the opinion, in effect it becomes a subjective opinion, and can only be given in the presence of the subject, which by its presence, provides the evidence.

Where an opinion on keris age is given upon the basis of a photograph, and in the physical absence of the keris it is simply not possible to support such an opinion in any rational way.

Where the photograph is of a keris of very high quality, in excellent condition, and of a recognisable form, probably most experienced keris conscious people would be prepared to give a qualified opinion, I know that under these circumstances I would be prepared to give such an opinion, however, that opinion would not be firm in respect of age, it would be a qualified opinion in respect of classification or tangguh.

I learnt keris appraisal from a man who was probably the most respected authority in Jawa, on the Javanese keris, in the period from the late 1970's, until his passing in 1995. I was taught that if I wish to provide an opinion on a keris I must be able to support that opinion, it is worse than useless to provide an opinion if one cannot support the opinion. This is especially so if a person is already in a position where his reputation is on the line every time he makes a statement.

One must be able to support one's opinion.

I am regularly called upon to appraise keris, and I do not give an opinion unless I can support that opinion.

If we are now looking for tangguh classifications, rather than age estimates, that's a game that I'm quite prepared to play, in spite of the fact that these keris under discussion are not of very high quality, nor in particularly good condition. However, I need some more photos.

I need the hilts to be removed from all keris, and close ups provided of the top of each gonjo, looking directly down on to it, and with the pesi not obstructing the gonjo top.

I also need a close up of each pesi.

I need a close up of the mid-section of each blade , this should be of only about 3 or 4 inches of blade.

For blade #5 I need several close ups of both sides of the gonjo joint (ie, where the gonjo joins the blade), and close ups of the base of the pesi where it enters the gonjo taken from both sides. These base of gonjo shots should be taken at an angle looking down onto the edge of the hole where the pesi enters the gonjo.

If I can see those photos I'll do my best to provide a qualified opinion in respect of tangguh.

Incidentally, where blade quality is concerned, keris #2 appears to be far superior to anything else in the line up. To a degree this opinion can be confirmed by close examination of the entire blade:- if the side we cannot see matches perfectly the side we can see, then this is a very competently made blade. By "match perfectly" I mean that the placement, size and form of all features is precisely the same on each side. "Precise" means exactly that.