A Sumatra Keris with twisted core blade und Gonjo

[Tatyana Dianova]

The Keris has an ivory Ukiran and a twisted core blade and Gonjo. I believe it is quite old and from Sumatra. Is it an Aceh Keris? Any comments are welcome.

[Sajen]

Hello Tatjana,

only the hilt and pendokok is from Sumatra, blade and scabbard are from Java, the tilam upih blade is indeed very nice, scabbard is sadang walikat style. The hilt don't belong to this blade. I would put the very nice ivory hilt on a stand and would look for a proper hilt and mendak for the ensemble. Can you show a picture how the blade fit inside the scabbard?

Regards,
Detlef

[Jean]

The scabbard is in sandang walikat style from East Java, the ivory Jawa demam hilt from Sumatra, and the blade looks Javanese to me but I am not sure.
Regards
PS: I agree with Detlef, and the pamor pattern on the sor-soran appears to be Lar Gangsir?

[A. G. Maisey]

The blade is actually Madura Sepuh (old Madura), which of course makes it East Javanese, as is the wrongko.

Blade and wrongko are correct, just get an appropriate hilt for it, East Jawa planar would look good.

[Tatyana Dianova]

Thank you all for your help!
The scabbard is original to the blade.
I have an old Madura hilt which I can use for the Keris. Would it be OK? Alas, I do not have any East Java planar hilts available...

[A. G. Maisey]

Provided the size is in proportion it would certainly be much better than what is on it, but I would advise that you put a distinctly East Javanese hilt on your wants list.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The blade is actually Madura Sepuh (old Madura), which of course makes it East Javanese, as is the wrongko.

Blade and wrongko are correct, just get an appropriate hilt for it, East Jawa planar would look good.

Thank you Alan. For our education and reference, what makes this blade an old Madura piece?
Tatiana, more detailed pictures of the blade would be welcome to allow a better evaluation.
Regards

[A. G. Maisey]

Jean, the opinion I have expressed in respect of the classification of this blade is based upon a process of elimination:-

pawakan; in other words it looks like an old Madura blade; the pamor style and execution, the old style of tikel alis, the proportions. Pretty subjective?

Yep.

So what we do in this sort of situation is run through the patterns of keris that we carry in our mind and compare with those patterns:- can we classify this as something else?

Mataram? Maybe, but have we ever seen a Mataram keris with this sort of pamor?

I haven't, not only that but the proportion is a bit too gangly for M'ram. Too longish. The point tapers a bit too much.

Against Madura, the outside line of gandhik doesn't slope in quite enough, but for me, that's not a good enough negative to outweigh the material characteristics, and the pamor.

Actually, if I see that style of pamor + the material, I start looking for reasons for the piece in question NOT to be Madura.

Same thing with a nice distinct square blumbangan:- I start with the assumption that I'm looking at some sort of M'ram keris, and then I look for reasons why it cannot be.

Segaluh:- I see that long stretch on the gandhik side of the sorsoran and I look for reasons for it not to be Segaluh.

Yeah, sure, there are many identifiers when we begin to use this tangguh system of classification, but most classifications have one or two overwhelmingly strong identifiers that we immediately grab, and then we look for other identifiers that negate those strong ones.

In the case of this keris, we have a nicely curved gonjo, not really Old Madura at all, and the blumbangan does tend a wee bit towards M'ram, but although the outside line of the gandhik doesn't slope in as much as we might expect to see in a Madura keris, the line of the inside of the gandhik is nicely within parameters.

So we ask:- "OK, if its not Old Madura, what else might it be? What do we have to choose from?"

Well, we can forget all the really old stuff, this is not an immensely old keris, and has none of the characteristics of a really old keris.

So --- Tuban? Nope, not with pamor like that.

Pajang? Not even an outside possibility.

M'ram? If so, what sub-division? In my mind it simply doesn't line up with any.

Kajoran? Nope

Kartosuro? Never in a million years.

Surakarta? Let's not joke.

What else do we have available?

Maybe somewhere along the North Coast, or even into the heartland of East Jawa, if so, where? And wherever we care to nominate you can bet on it that even if it was done in Surabaya or Malang, or Jember, the bloke that did was Madurese, either born or descended.

Tangguh is all about opinion, and that opinion is based on what we can see --- and if possible , feel --- and experience. It becomes a balance of the things for and the things against and the opinion becomes the best of the possibilities. This is particularly so for a very ordinary keris like this one. Its different ballgame entirely for a keris of very high quality, in such a case we expect to be looking at very clearly defined indicators that do not really permit any argument.

My opinion is Madura Sepuh, and that is a classification that sometimes indicates a geographic point of origin, other times does not.

I'd put money on it that most people, or at least most experienced motor vehicle drivers, can identify the make, and often the model of a vehicle from a distance and with only a glance.

Why?

Because they see vehicles all the time, every day, over many years and they know what they look like. Will they mistake a 1960 Fiat for a 1995 Toyota? Pretty unlikely I think.

That's the way keris classification works:- you form a snap opinion and then try to disprove it.

[Jean]

Thank you Alan, brilliant analysis! I leaned towards East Java without finding a clear clue but I did not consider Old Madura because I thought that the pamor pattern is too complex for this origin, good to know that it is not!
Regards

[Tatyana Dianova]

Breathtaking! Thanks!
A bit better pictures on request.

[A. G. Maisey]

Jean, this pamor motif is old, and common in Madura blades, it occurs not only in keris but in other blades as well.

"Old Madura" (that is, "Madura Sepuh") I find to be a bit of a catch-all, and pretty freely applied.

What is "old" exactly?

To me "old" is probably something that goes back past, maybe, the beginning of the 19th century. Other people will place it as older, for instance back in the 1970's & 1980's I was often told by keris people in Solo that Sultan Agung was a "new" keris, "old" keris were those that had a tangguh preceding Sultan Agung.

However, now it seems that any Madura keris that precedes WWII can get a classification of "old", even though there are several quite distinct Madura styles that are obviously pre-1940-ish.

The whole idea of tangguh is very, very spongy when we try to apply it to blades of less than excellent quality and less than excellent condition. It was never meant to be used on ordinary blades in the first place. However, everybody now wants to stick a tag on everything. In reality, all this obsession with name tags only clouds the water. It doesn't really mean anything, and it means even less if understanding is missing.

In "Indo-Javanese Metalwork", Lohuizen-Leeuw, Linden-Museum Stuttgart, there is photo of a blade that has been identified as a spear head, it's on Page 158, item 133. It is made of bronze, and attributed to the Eastern Javanese Period (probably King Sindok--C10th.-- through to the collapse of Majapahit). In the photo it looks more like an early keris than a spear head, but that's a bit beside the point -- so to speak -- the interesting thing is that in this very early blade we can clearly see the elements that indisputably place the keris as a representation of the Gunungan, ie, Mt.Meru.

The Gunungan is a representation of Mt. Meru.

The body of the blade is a clear Gunungan form, OK, no surprises there, but when we look at the base of the blade what do we see? Ornamentation that can only be interpreted as foliage. The lower slopes of Mt. Meru are covered with foliage. This blade is a very clear statement that this blade is intended to represent the Gunungan, and with that all of the associated cultural bonds.

Fast forward to the periodic money grabbing, self-congratulatory, egocentric keris festivals that occur in places which might better remain un-named.

How many of the organisers, exhibitors and attendees at these kerisfests have any understanding at all of what they are dealing with?

Their ancestors must be spinning in their graves --- the ones who were not cremated, that is.

We cannot understand any language unless we understand the meanings of the words of which the language is comprised, and the inflections used in its spoken form. Being able to pronounce the words without understanding is useless.

The same applies in the case of the keris:- we cannot understand it, just because we know what one looks like and know a handful of words associated with it. And without understanding, what is anything worth?

In the case of the keris, it seems to me that a great deal of understanding has been irretrievably lost.

[drdavid]

Hi Alan
just to clarify when you say

The body of the blade is a clear Gunungan form, OK, no surprises there, but when we look at the base of the blade what do we see? Ornamentation that can only be interpreted as foliage. The lower slopes of Mt. Meru are covered with foliage. This blade is a very clear statement that this blade is intended to represent the Gunungan, and with that all of the associated cultural bonds.

are you talking about the bronze blade in "Indo-Javanese Metalwork" or Tatiana's keris
cheers
David

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In the case of the keris, it seems to me that a great deal of understanding has been irretrievably lost.

Unfortunately, I don't think that is only the keris affected by this phenomenon. I think the whole mankind is moving towards a society characterized by superficial relations of convenience and run by money.

[A. G. Maisey]

Sorry David. Pretty sloppy construction.

I left Tatyana's keris behind when I began to talk about the book.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Jean, the opinion I have expressed in respect of the classification of this blade is based upon a process of elimination:-

pawakan; in other words it looks like an old Madura blade; the pamor style and execution, the old style of tikel alis, the proportions. Pretty subjective?

Yep.

So what we do in this sort of situation is run through the patterns of keris that we carry in our mind and compare with those patterns:- can we classify this as something else?

Mataram? Maybe, but have we ever seen a Mataram keris with this sort of pamor?

I haven't, not only that but the proportion is a bit too gangly for M'ram. Too longish. The point tapers a bit too much.

Against Madura, the outside line of gandhik doesn't slope in quite enough, but for me, that's not a good enough negative to outweigh the material characteristics, and the pamor.

Actually, if I see that style of pamor + the material, I start looking for reasons for the piece in question NOT to be Madura.

Same thing with a nice distinct square blumbangan:- I start with the assumption that I'm looking at some sort of M'ram keris, and then I look for reasons why it cannot be.

Segaluh:- I see that long stretch on the gandhik side of the sorsoran and I look for reasons for it not to be Segaluh.

Yeah, sure, there are many identifiers when we begin to use this tangguh system of classification, but most classifications have one or two overwhelmingly strong identifiers that we immediately grab, and then we look for other identifiers that negate those strong ones.

In the case of this keris, we have a nicely curved gonjo, not really Old Madura at all, and the blumbangan does tend a wee bit towards M'ram, but although the outside line of the gandhik doesn't slope in as much as we might expect to see in a Madura keris, the line of the inside of the gandhik is nicely within parameters.

So we ask:- "OK, if its not Old Madura, what else might it be? What do we have to choose from?"

Well, we can forget all the really old stuff, this is not an immensely old keris, and has none of the characteristics of a really old keris.

So --- Tuban? Nope, not with pamor like that.

Pajang? Not even an outside possibility.

M'ram? If so, what sub-division? In my mind it simply doesn't line up with any.

Kajoran? Nope

Kartosuro? Never in a million years.

Surakarta? Let's not joke.

What else do we have available?

Maybe somewhere along the North Coast, or even into the heartland of East Jawa, if so, where? And wherever we care to nominate you can bet on it that even if it was done in Surabaya or Malang, or Jember, the bloke that did was Madurese, either born or descended.

Tangguh is all about opinion, and that opinion is based on what we can see --- and if possible , feel --- and experience. It becomes a balance of the things for and the things against and the opinion becomes the best of the possibilities. This is particularly so for a very ordinary keris like this one. Its different ballgame entirely for a keris of very high quality, in such a case we expect to be looking at very clearly defined indicators that do not really permit any argument.

My opinion is Madura Sepuh, and that is a classification that sometimes indicates a geographic point of origin, other times does not.

I'd put money on it that most people, or at least most experienced motor vehicle drivers, can identify the make, and often the model of a vehicle from a distance and with only a glance.

Why?

Because they see vehicles all the time, every day, over many years and they know what they look like. Will they mistake a 1960 Fiat for a 1995 Toyota? Pretty unlikely I think.

That's the way keris classification works:- you form a snap opinion and then try to disprove it.

Thank you Alan,

great learning lesson!

Regards,
Detlef

[Tatyana Dianova]

I put the Madura hilt on the Keris - I hope it doesn't look that awful...

[A. G. Maisey]

Looks good Tatyana.

Very nice.