Sumatran Mystery?

David · 5th December 2014, 09:07 PM

This is a strange one. Well, it's a bit of a mystery to me anyway. I have never seen either this dhapur or hilt form before. I don't post the blades of my collection very often, but this one has me stumped and i am curious what the consensus will be. I am calling this a patrem for now as the blade length is only 9 inches, but other than that i am pretty clueless. The hilt is what appears to be very old ivory with black horn at the base. The form seems to fall somewhere between the Javanese planar form and that of the Jawa Demam hilts. There is also black horn at the toe of the sheath stem that helps tie the dress ensemble together. The brass hilt cup is the only thing that seems perhaps a bit off about the flow of the dress. The sheath was obviously made for the blade as the fit is superb with the blade riding purposely high in a style i see more on peninsula keris.
The blade is short and stout.a very sturdy little fellow. There is no visible pamor, but that might change if stained. I think someone was perhaps a bit too aggressive cleaning this once as there are some scratch marks left behind. The blade, as you can see is very narrow at the waist and very leaf like. It appears to have a second gandik of a sort at back of the blade and what, in my imagination at least, is possibly intended to represent a putut, a seated, praying figure. None of the carving of the features appears very expert, but there is an over all feeling of quality about this short, but stout blade.
Any thoughts on this one? I would love to see other blades with a similar dhapur or another hilt with a similar form.

kai · 6th December 2014, 01:51 AM

Hello David,

Thanks for posting yours! Seems it's oddball season...

Quote:

This is a strange one. Well, it's a bit of a mystery to me anyway. I have never seen either this dhapur or hilt form before. I don't post the blades of my collection very often, but this one has me stumped and i am curious what the consensus will be. I am calling this a patrem for now as the blade length is only 9 inches, but other than that i am pretty clueless.
<snip>
The blade is short and stout.a very sturdy little fellow. There is no visible pamor, but that might change if stained. I think someone was perhaps a bit too aggressive cleaning this once as there are some scratch marks left behind. The blade, as you can see is very narrow at the waist and very leaf like. It appears to have a second gandik of a sort at back of the blade and what, in my imagination at least, is possibly intended to represent a putut, a seated, praying figure. None of the carving of the features appears very expert, but there is an over all feeling of quality about this short, but stout blade.

I'd certainly love to see this blade stained!

I believe this blade got crafted with the Bangkinang style in mind; regarding the small size, yours would be in the Bahari class rather than being a real patrem.

However, it's obvious that this blade doesn't follow the classic Bangkinang style and rather presents some exaggerated features. I'm attaching a bad pic of a 13 inch keris blade with similar features from a past auction - will try to get better ones. I am toying around with a (northern?) Malay peninsula origin for both blades - very tentative though!

Quote:

The hilt is what appears to be very old ivory with black horn at the base. The form seems to fall somewhere between the Javanese planar form and that of the Jawa Demam hilts. There is also black horn at the toe of the sheath stem that helps tie the dress ensemble together. The brass hilt cup is the only thing that seems perhaps a bit off about the flow of the dress.

I can't help with the hilt - don't remember having seen anything similar either. Usually an added horn ring is a repair for a broken hilt; however from the ivory carving one might tend to believe this being original. Could you please post pics of the lower side of the hilt without pendokok and also a peek inside the pesi hole? Horn ring tightly attached?

The pendokok does look very crude and also the fit seems pretty dubious. A small one like in the other keris would look much better IMHO.

Quote:

The sheath was obviously made for the blade as the fit is superb with the blade riding purposely high in a style i see more on peninsula keris.

Also not uncommon with some more southern keris. While not typical enough to be really sure, this scabbard may well be from northern Malaya though.

Regards,
Kai

David · 6th December 2014, 02:15 AM

Thanks Kai. I do indeed see the similarity in blade profiles, though with very different treatment to the backside of the blade (greneng et al).
I would have placed the sheath with a Palembang/South Sumatra attribution. Do you have any examples of sheaths from the northern end of the peninsula that have this form?
I shot these images some over a week ago. Since then we've had nothing but dark gray days here. As soon as i get some better light i will try to get those additional images of the hilt for you. I had considered the possibility that the horn could be a repair, though i also note that the figurative elements of the ivory portion (i.e. the feet) appear to be complete. Still doesn't discount repair, but gives me pause.
Given the time of year it will be a while before i might consider staining this blade if at all. I am curious if there is pamor though.

GIO · 7th December 2014, 06:08 PM

Hi David,
very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris. I think that the blade has no pamor, but, before using warangan, you can easily check if you apply a mild acid (lemon juce or acetic acid) on the blade: a faint design of the pamor should appear.
Looking forward to see the result on the forum, I hope to read the opinions of other members more experienced than I.

Jean · 7th December 2014, 07:36 PM

Hi David,
I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows:
To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra.
The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra.
The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent.
So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members...
Regards

David · 7th December 2014, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Hi David,
I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows:
To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra.
The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra.
The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent.
So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members...
Regards

Thanks for your response Jean. I don't think this has been reshaped, just not very well shaped in the first place (see my suggestion in my response to Gio). I think the file marks remain because the keris wasn't very well finished in the first place. I agree with both you and Gio that there is most probably no pamor in this keris.
I can't tell when the horn may have been added to the ivory hilt, though as Kai suggested it may be a means to continue the life of an old valued ivory hilt that became deteriorated at the base. The pendokok seems the most out of place part so i might be looking for suggestions on what to replace it with. Since this one seems hard to place geographically exactly what the pendokok should look like is difficult to determine.
To your knowledge is the "V" shaped buntut used in any part of Sumatra? I believe Kai suggested perhaps a peninsula origin.

David · 7th December 2014, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIO

Hi David,
very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris.

hmmm…well, i appreciate your response Gio, but personally believe that calling this a "keris-like-object" is perhaps taking it a bit far. No, this certainly isn't the work of an empu and does not seem to follow any known pakem. I have entertained the notion that perhaps this was created by a village smith without much previous experience in crafting keris who may have been working from memory without a clear example to copy from. I do realize that for some collectors anything that does not fall into a keraton pakem is not a legitimate keris, but from my perspective if it was created indigenously to serve the cultural purpose of a keris then it is a legitimate keris regardless of a lack of detailed excellence in execution. I tend to reserve the term "keris-like-object" for things like those nasty Bali tourist "keris" with the painted on pamors.
What is for certain is that somebody considered this keris important enough to spend the time and money to dress it well. I have no doubt that this sheath was created specifically for this blade.
Kai, i am attaching a shot up the hole of the hilt as you requested. To answer your question, the horn piece is indeed tightly attached to the ivory.

A. G. Maisey · 7th December 2014, 09:59 PM

I'm with you David:- this is a genuine keris, but it has been produced outside the area of influence of a major cultural center.

Yes, many people hold the opinion that any keris that does not follow a defined pattern that has been set down either by tradition, or in an authorised guide-book (pakem) is outside the guidelines and thus not a keris.

To a degree, this is legitimate point of view, and it is reasonable to apply this standard to those keris which are of superior workmanship of a level that indicates production by a knowledgeable and skilled maker.

However, we often tend to forget that there were vast areas of S.E.Asia that were not under the direct influence of any cultural center, or center of power, and these areas were occupied by ordinary people --- subsistence farmers, fishermen, forest workers. If one of these people needed a keris to be made, they would most likely turn to the nearest smith. If there was no existing keris available for the smith to copy, he had to work from memory. The result is most often a simple keris of rather pedestrian workmanship.

A similar thing happened with dress:- in the palace environment, or urban setting, it was essential that a man's keris should be dressed in the correct fashion, however, in a village setting away from a major center, the rules were (and are) not nearly so strict. If it was necessary to produce a scabbard, or a hilt, the owner himself would often produce these himself. In fact, in days long past, the production of all weapon dress was most probably done by the owner as a display of his skill in carving, the male balance to the female skill of weaving.

Skilled craftsmen lived in towns and cities and were paid for their work, but these skilled craftsmen were not available to everybody.

5th December 2014, 09:07 PM	#1
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,123	Sumatran Mystery? This is a strange one. Well, it's a bit of a mystery to me anyway. I have never seen either this dhapur or hilt form before. I don't post the blades of my collection very often, but this one has me stumped and i am curious what the consensus will be. I am calling this a patrem for now as the blade length is only 9 inches, but other than that i am pretty clueless. The hilt is what appears to be very old ivory with black horn at the base. The form seems to fall somewhere between the Javanese planar form and that of the Jawa Demam hilts. There is also black horn at the toe of the sheath stem that helps tie the dress ensemble together. The brass hilt cup is the only thing that seems perhaps a bit off about the flow of the dress. The sheath was obviously made for the blade as the fit is superb with the blade riding purposely high in a style i see more on peninsula keris. The blade is short and stout.a very sturdy little fellow. There is no visible pamor, but that might change if stained. I think someone was perhaps a bit too aggressive cleaning this once as there are some scratch marks left behind. The blade, as you can see is very narrow at the waist and very leaf like. It appears to have a second gandik of a sort at back of the blade and what, in my imagination at least, is possibly intended to represent a putut, a seated, praying figure. None of the carving of the features appears very expert, but there is an over all feeling of quality about this short, but stout blade. Any thoughts on this one? I would love to see other blades with a similar dhapur or another hilt with a similar form. Attached Images

6th December 2014, 02:15 AM	#3
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,123	Thanks Kai. I do indeed see the similarity in blade profiles, though with very different treatment to the backside of the blade (greneng et al). I would have placed the sheath with a Palembang/South Sumatra attribution. Do you have any examples of sheaths from the northern end of the peninsula that have this form? I shot these images some over a week ago. Since then we've had nothing but dark gray days here. As soon as i get some better light i will try to get those additional images of the hilt for you. I had considered the possibility that the horn could be a repair, though i also note that the figurative elements of the ivory portion (i.e. the feet) appear to be complete. Still doesn't discount repair, but gives me pause. Given the time of year it will be a while before i might consider staining this blade if at all. I am curious if there is pamor though.

7th December 2014, 06:08 PM	#4
GIO Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 313	Hi David, very interesting item. In my VERY HUMBLE opinion though this is a keris-like object. The manufacture is very crude and has no detail which can be attributed to a keris. I think that the blade has no pamor, but, before using warangan, you can easily check if you apply a mild acid (lemon juce or acetic acid) on the blade: a faint design of the pamor should appear. Looking forward to see the result on the forum, I hope to read the opinions of other members more experienced than I.

7th December 2014, 07:36 PM	#5
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Hi David, I never saw a similar piece but offer my opinion as follows: To me the blade seems to have been reshaped especially on the back side (wadidang), I can apparently see some traces of filing of the greneng and above it. It may have been shortened also and I doubt that it has pamor. As Kai showed a similar but apparently more original blade with a Malay/ East Sumatra JD hilt and full greneng, it may be a little-known local type of blade from Malaysia or East Sumatra. The odd scabbard is reminiscent of the Palembang style without the "rudder" at the back but with a V shaped buntnut which is not used in South Sumatra. The ivory hilt is old and of an unknown design & origin but the horn insert and crude pendokok seem recent. So overall I would describe it as an assembly kris but not a KLO and I am open to other opinions especially from our Malaysian members... Regards

7th December 2014, 09:59 PM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	I'm with you David:- this is a genuine keris, but it has been produced outside the area of influence of a major cultural center. Yes, many people hold the opinion that any keris that does not follow a defined pattern that has been set down either by tradition, or in an authorised guide-book (pakem) is outside the guidelines and thus not a keris. To a degree, this is legitimate point of view, and it is reasonable to apply this standard to those keris which are of superior workmanship of a level that indicates production by a knowledgeable and skilled maker. However, we often tend to forget that there were vast areas of S.E.Asia that were not under the direct influence of any cultural center, or center of power, and these areas were occupied by ordinary people --- subsistence farmers, fishermen, forest workers. If one of these people needed a keris to be made, they would most likely turn to the nearest smith. If there was no existing keris available for the smith to copy, he had to work from memory. The result is most often a simple keris of rather pedestrian workmanship. A similar thing happened with dress:- in the palace environment, or urban setting, it was essential that a man's keris should be dressed in the correct fashion, however, in a village setting away from a major center, the rules were (and are) not nearly so strict. If it was necessary to produce a scabbard, or a hilt, the owner himself would often produce these himself. In fact, in days long past, the production of all weapon dress was most probably done by the owner as a display of his skill in carving, the male balance to the female skill of weaving. Skilled craftsmen lived in towns and cities and were paid for their work, but these skilled craftsmen were not available to everybody.