Nom-noman Keris

Karttikeya · 20th October 2012, 02:17 PM

Need your ID about this blade. Can this blade be classified as Surakarta blade? Or probably Yogyakarta? The blade is quite thick but not wide enough as classified as SKA keris. Seems like Mageti style but pesi shape is not what people call as 'sirah gundolo' pesi as a main feature of Mageti blade. I look forward your opinion on this blade.. Thanks in advance.

kai · 21st October 2012, 12:17 AM

Hello Karttikeya,

Just my 2 cents to get the ball rolling:
This blade looks more like it was made by a Madurese bladesmith, doesn't it?

Regards,
Kai

Jean · 21st October 2012, 10:27 AM

The ganja is curved (sebit ron tal), the greneng is a bit odd and the wadidang is unusually flared, it does seem to be not a typical blade from Central Java, may be a recent piece?

Regards

Rick · 27th October 2012, 04:53 AM

And we hear no more from the O.P. ?

Opinions; refutation ?

Anything ??

A. G. Maisey · 27th October 2012, 07:50 AM

OK, here's "anything".

It does not look like either of the two Mageti keris that I have seen.

It has some similarities to the work of Djeno Harumbrodjo, but is less refined.

Might be Djeno's work on a bad day. Might be an intended copy in the style of Djeno. Might be by one of Djeno's relatives.

Doesn't look like Madura or East Jawa work, but anything is possible from that direction.

Is not the work of any Solo maker I can recognise.

Cannot be classified as Surakarta because the rondha is totally, totally wrong, the pawakan is too slim and wimpy, the blumbangan does not appear to be boto adeg.

Jean · 27th October 2012, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

OK, here's "anything".

It has some similarities to the work of Djeno Harumbrodjo, but is less refined.
Might be Djeno's work on a bad day. Might be an intended copy in the style of Djeno. Might be by one of Djeno's relatives.

I agree with Alan's opinion, however the greneng style is different from Djeno's blades which I have seen (see pages 99 & 281 in the book Keris Mahakarya Nusantara for instance). May be from the Malang connection?
Regards

A. G. Maisey · 27th October 2012, 10:44 PM

Jean, it is obvious that the greneng is not attributable to Djeno, but it is not a greneng that is the "signature" of a maker, it is the ron dha. Throughout history makers have varied the greneng , but it is almost impossible for a maker to vary his ron dha, even if he wants to; he may try to cut it in a slightly different way, but if one is familiar with the work of that maker, it is possible to still have a very good idea who has cut the ron dha, even though it has been altered. It is the ron dha we need to focus on, not the greneng.

The pawakan of Jogja keris are really very different to Solo keris.

The Malang production owes its foundation to Sumenep in Madura. If you consider Malang work you're really considering Sumenep work, one pace removed. I can't see much in this keris that looks like East Jawa, but as I said, anything is possible from that direction.

Jean · 28th October 2012, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Jean, it is obvious that the greneng is not attributable to Djeno, but it is not a greneng that is the "signature" of a maker, it is the ron dha. Throughout history makers have varied the greneng , but it is almost impossible for a maker to vary his ron dha, even if he wants to; he may try to cut it in a slightly different way, but if one is familiar with the work of that maker, it is possible to still have a very good idea who has cut the ron dha, even though it has been altered. It is the ron dha we need to focus on, not the greneng.

Hello Alan,
Thank you and sorry, I used the term greneng in a global sense (this is confusing in many books), and I actually meant the ron dha.
Would you agree that this blade is probably recent or is it not certain from the pictures?
Regards

Karttikeya · 28th October 2012, 11:33 AM

Thank you for your comments, gentlemen. To focus on greneng, I have attached another photo of greneng, hopefully it can help you to identify it furthermore. Greneng seems to form dha but so vague so it will mislead people to say greneng is not pakem. How about tangguh Paku Alam? Could this blade be classified as that tangguh? Any other opinions are welcome..Thank you.

A. G. Maisey · 28th October 2012, 11:39 AM

A bit problematical Jean.

How can anybody know , or even guess, if a blade is old, new, recent, or anything else when it is not any type of standard pattern?

This ron dha is ridiculous. Its a slim blade with an elongated wadidang, like recent Jogja keris, but there is no class, and no distinctive tell.

I didn't want to comment on this blade, and only did so because of Rick's urging:- its best to say nothing if you cannot say something nice.

I think I'm finished here, I've already said all I'm prepared to say. When you see a keris like this it makes you realise just how much has been forgotten in the last 500 years.

I'm sorry I couldn't be more kind, Karttikeya. I've seen a lot of ron dha, in fact that is what I was taught to focus on as one of the primary tells, but I've never seen anything like this.

kai · 28th October 2012, 09:22 PM

Hello Alan,

Please excuse my ignorance (I have been trying to understand things Jawa a bit better but keep stumbling over your recent comment):

Quote:

Jean, it is obvious that the greneng is not attributable to Djeno, but it is not a greneng that is the "signature" of a maker, it is the ron dha. Throughout history makers have varied the greneng , but it is almost impossible for a maker to vary his ron dha, even if he wants to; he may try to cut it in a slightly different way, but if one is familiar with the work of that maker, it is possible to still have a very good idea who has cut the ron dha, even though it has been altered. It is the ron dha we need to focus on, not the greneng.

I know that the ron dha is seen as a signature of the maker, at least for keris blades of good quality. If a seasoned maker has ingrained a certain style of ron dha, I can see that this style may still shine through minor modifications. However, IF a maker were to decide to cut a really different kind of ron dha, what would make this still identifiable (except social hormat & adat constraints not to change anything like this on a whimp)?

BTW, is it really that tough to copy a single ron dha of about any prominent empu if you really want to? While it is difficult to fake many handwritten signatures or the way a world-class painter is known to do the strokes, etc., there are still some gifted talents who craft copies that fool expert eyes. Why would be a ron dha be that much different, even given its very subtle nuances (which could still be carefully approached by repeated file work)?

I'd guess that a full series of greneng will be much tougher to copy perfectly, especially getting proportions and the "flow" of the work correctly represented. Why the paramount reliance on the ron dha except for social norms and its unique status in keris lore?

Regards,
Kai

A. G. Maisey · 28th October 2012, 10:34 PM

Kai, I'm only talking about Javanese keris here.

The style of the ron dha is not the choice of the maker. Each classification of keris has a different style of ron dha.

How the maker cuts that ron dha is the product of his hand and mind. He may not vary outside very strict parameters; he must conform to the prescribed style, his only latitude, if there is any latitude is in the way he makes the shape. Makers did not "decide to cut a different ron dha". It was never their choice.

It could possibly be likened to telling 100 different people from the same societal group to draw a circle, a square, and an isosceles triangle. The figures they have been told to draw are all drawn free hand, they must not be larger, nor smaller than a particular designated size, and they must all be placed within a space that has been preset.

Those three figures drawn by 100 different people will all look the same at first glance, but as you study them in detail you will find very small variations in the form, variations that have been caused by the physical form and abilities of the individual person who has done the drawing. Some of these miniscule variations may be able to be altered, other miniscule variations will not be able to be altered. It is the unalterable variations that say who drew the figures, similarly, it is the unalterable variations that say who cut a ron dha.

Have a look at page 165 of "Keris Jawa".

You will find a number of examples of greneng in the Kartosuro/Surakarta style.

These are complete greneng, and looking at them you could easily be influenced to believe that each of these empu cut exactly the same greneng each and every time he made a keris. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is that the complete greneng is made according to the available space, the request of the person who placed the order, the requisite iconic content, the requisite talismanic content --- and maybe some other factors. These things can vary for each keris, but the ron dha is the constant component and is virtually invariable.

Now, keep looking at P. 165.

There are six examples of greneng in the same style by six different makers. At first glance they all look the same. Now look carefully at each ron dha:- there is enormous variation ; no two are even close to the same.

Kai, this is the essence of Javanese keris study. You do just look at the entire keris, or even a part of the entire keris. You examine it in microscopic detail.

Now let's fast forward to post 1970.

Could a talented maker decide to copy the ron dha of somebody else?

Yes, I guess so, but why would he want to?

He cannot produce an entire keris that is worth any serious money, in the style of one of the greats. I'm not talking about the type of thing that is worth a few hundred dollars, or even a few thousand dollars, I'm talking about serious keris that are worth serious money. To my knowledge nobody has yet displayed the necessary talent to do this, at least not at a sufficient level to dupe anybody who does understand keris.

If he copies somebody else's ron dha, where is the profit? Nobody wastes their time for no return.

Incidentally, for those with the time and level of interest, here is a pretty good site. It is in English and Indonesian. It may give a slightly better understanding of the current Javanese world view.

http://www.jagadkejawen.com/

20th October 2012, 02:17 PM	#1
Karttikeya Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 54	Nom-noman Keris Need your ID about this blade. Can this blade be classified as Surakarta blade? Or probably Yogyakarta? The blade is quite thick but not wide enough as classified as SKA keris. Seems like Mageti style but pesi shape is not what people call as 'sirah gundolo' pesi as a main feature of Mageti blade. I look forward your opinion on this blade.. Thanks in advance. Attached Images

27th October 2012, 04:53 AM	#4
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,293	Two Responses And we hear no more from the O.P. ? Opinions; refutation ? Anything ??

28th October 2012, 11:33 AM	#9
Karttikeya Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 54	Thank you for your comments, gentlemen. To focus on greneng, I have attached another photo of greneng, hopefully it can help you to identify it furthermore. Greneng seems to form dha but so vague so it will mislead people to say greneng is not pakem. How about tangguh Paku Alam? Could this blade be classified as that tangguh? Any other opinions are welcome..Thank you. Attached Images

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

21st October 2012, 12:17 AM	#2
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,254	Hello Karttikeya, Just my 2 cents to get the ball rolling: This blade looks more like it was made by a Madurese bladesmith, doesn't it? Regards, Kai

21st October 2012, 10:27 AM	#3
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	The ganja is curved (sebit ron tal), the greneng is a bit odd and the wadidang is unusually flared, it does seem to be not a typical blade from Central Java, may be a recent piece? Regards

27th October 2012, 07:50 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	OK, here's "anything". It does not look like either of the two Mageti keris that I have seen. It has some similarities to the work of Djeno Harumbrodjo, but is less refined. Might be Djeno's work on a bad day. Might be an intended copy in the style of Djeno. Might be by one of Djeno's relatives. Doesn't look like Madura or East Jawa work, but anything is possible from that direction. Is not the work of any Solo maker I can recognise. Cannot be classified as Surakarta because the rondha is totally, totally wrong, the pawakan is too slim and wimpy, the blumbangan does not appear to be boto adeg.

27th October 2012, 10:44 PM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Jean, it is obvious that the greneng is not attributable to Djeno, but it is not a greneng that is the "signature" of a maker, it is the ron dha. Throughout history makers have varied the greneng , but it is almost impossible for a maker to vary his ron dha, even if he wants to; he may try to cut it in a slightly different way, but if one is familiar with the work of that maker, it is possible to still have a very good idea who has cut the ron dha, even though it has been altered. It is the ron dha we need to focus on, not the greneng. The pawakan of Jogja keris are really very different to Solo keris. The Malang production owes its foundation to Sumenep in Madura. If you consider Malang work you're really considering Sumenep work, one pace removed. I can't see much in this keris that looks like East Jawa, but as I said, anything is possible from that direction.

28th October 2012, 11:39 AM	#10
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	A bit problematical Jean. How can anybody know , or even guess, if a blade is old, new, recent, or anything else when it is not any type of standard pattern? This ron dha is ridiculous. Its a slim blade with an elongated wadidang, like recent Jogja keris, but there is no class, and no distinctive tell. I didn't want to comment on this blade, and only did so because of Rick's urging:- its best to say nothing if you cannot say something nice. I think I'm finished here, I've already said all I'm prepared to say. When you see a keris like this it makes you realise just how much has been forgotten in the last 500 years. I'm sorry I couldn't be more kind, Karttikeya. I've seen a lot of ron dha, in fact that is what I was taught to focus on as one of the primary tells, but I've never seen anything like this.

28th October 2012, 10:34 PM	#12
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	Kai, I'm only talking about Javanese keris here. The style of the ron dha is not the choice of the maker. Each classification of keris has a different style of ron dha. How the maker cuts that ron dha is the product of his hand and mind. He may not vary outside very strict parameters; he must conform to the prescribed style, his only latitude, if there is any latitude is in the way he makes the shape. Makers did not "decide to cut a different ron dha". It was never their choice. It could possibly be likened to telling 100 different people from the same societal group to draw a circle, a square, and an isosceles triangle. The figures they have been told to draw are all drawn free hand, they must not be larger, nor smaller than a particular designated size, and they must all be placed within a space that has been preset. Those three figures drawn by 100 different people will all look the same at first glance, but as you study them in detail you will find very small variations in the form, variations that have been caused by the physical form and abilities of the individual person who has done the drawing. Some of these miniscule variations may be able to be altered, other miniscule variations will not be able to be altered. It is the unalterable variations that say who drew the figures, similarly, it is the unalterable variations that say who cut a ron dha. Have a look at page 165 of "Keris Jawa". You will find a number of examples of greneng in the Kartosuro/Surakarta style. These are complete greneng, and looking at them you could easily be influenced to believe that each of these empu cut exactly the same greneng each and every time he made a keris. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is that the complete greneng is made according to the available space, the request of the person who placed the order, the requisite iconic content, the requisite talismanic content --- and maybe some other factors. These things can vary for each keris, but the ron dha is the constant component and is virtually invariable. Now, keep looking at P. 165. There are six examples of greneng in the same style by six different makers. At first glance they all look the same. Now look carefully at each ron dha:- there is enormous variation ; no two are even close to the same. Kai, this is the essence of Javanese keris study. You do just look at the entire keris, or even a part of the entire keris. You examine it in microscopic detail. Now let's fast forward to post 1970. Could a talented maker decide to copy the ron dha of somebody else? Yes, I guess so, but why would he want to? He cannot produce an entire keris that is worth any serious money, in the style of one of the greats. I'm not talking about the type of thing that is worth a few hundred dollars, or even a few thousand dollars, I'm talking about serious keris that are worth serious money. To my knowledge nobody has yet displayed the necessary talent to do this, at least not at a sufficient level to dupe anybody who does understand keris. If he copies somebody else's ron dha, where is the profit? Nobody wastes their time for no return. Incidentally, for those with the time and level of interest, here is a pretty good site. It is in English and Indonesian. It may give a slightly better understanding of the current Javanese world view. http://www.jagadkejawen.com/