Keris ID

[David]

Alan, i'm definitely not trying to force a answer out of you regarding origin of this keris. I have long been aware of your preferred concentration of study and that keris like this lie outside those parameters. I only responded to your statement that you saw this as a keris of the Bugis people because to my eyes this keris blade displays nothing that i would identify with what we generally accept as Bugis style blades.Yes, it is certainly diluar Jawa, but i'm sure that you don't believe everything outside Jawa is Bugis. It seems more influenced by Palembang blades than anything else.
Now when i hear the "whole kit & caboodle", it doesn't just mean the keris that we see before we remove the blade from the scabbard. It means everything, INCLUDING the blade that we see once we do remove it from the scabbard. Even so, i am not convinced that this sheath is a type that would be common to the Bugis culture. It's width is much thinner and it seems to have a form that puts me in mind of Minangkabau keris. Likewise the hiltcup. See the example below.
That said, i am much like you in this regard in that the majority of my focus in keris has been placed upon Jawa, Bali and to some extent Madura, so i really am operating more on feelings than solid fact here. But i would not be surprised to find that is South Sumatran, possibly Minang. I also suspect that the gandar is not simple a bad repair, but not at all the original sheath stem, which may have offered more clues to it's origin if it had been intact.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by David

It's width is much thinner and it seems to have a form that puts me in mind of Minangkabau keris. Likewise the hiltcup. See the example below.
That said, i am much like you in this regard in that the majority of my focus in keris has been placed upon Jawa, Bali and to some extent Madura, so i really am operating more on feelings than solid fact here. But i would not be surprised to find that is South Sumatran, possibly Minang. I also suspect that the gandar is not simple a bad repair, but not at all the original sheath stem, which may have offered more clues to it's origin if it had been intact.

Agree with you David, I also would place it as South Sumatra or Minang. And a very good suggestion that the gandar might not be the original one, the weird joint and the overall appearance of the scabbard I am uncomfortable with. The gandar looks Malay IMVHO.

Regards,
Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, you are correct, "whole K&C"does mean in its entirety, I did not phase that well. I'll try to do better.

"entire" was not the best word for me to use, & my phrasing was imprecise.

I'm not quite sure that I have a single word in English that I can use.

I did go into a bit more detail in my later post, #9, where I use the English word “blade”to refer to the keris --- to the Javanese people, only the blade is the keris, all other parts are just dress, but when the keris, ie, the blade, is combined with all those other parts, it becomes a complete entity, expressing a multitude of symbols & ideas. As a complete entity it can be referred to as a “keris”, but again, that depends upon the level of language being used & the situation.

But we’re using English.

Unless we are using Javanese , or perhaps one of the other languages that are used by people belonging to keris bearing societies, then we are limited in how we can refer to a keris & its parts, so if we look at a keris with the blade still in the scabbard, we refer to what we see as a keris, if we look at the keris out of the scabbard & with hilt attached what we see is still a keris.

So, if I look at this keris as a complete entity comprised of scabbard, hilt, hilt cup, blade, then what I see is a keris of the Bugis people, a cultural classification, not a geographic classification.

Once we put any blade at all into the dress items that are identifiable as belonging to a particular culture, society, or region, then we refer to that keris according to what we can see, we do not recognise the identity of the blade until it has been removed and independently addressed.

In my post #9 I did independently address the blade:-

“The blade certainly appears to be outside Jawa, but it could possibly be from one of the areas not under direct kraton influence, however, I'm still inclined to go with what I believe would be the opinion of my teachers:- "diluarJawa" & thus not even worthy of consideration---”
the opinion of my teachers, not of myself.

In recent years there have been several books published on Bugis keris, but it seems to me that if these books represent the sum total of knowledge on geographic origin of blades dressed as Bugis keris, & regarded as Bugis keris, by Bugis people, then there is quite a way to go before we can confidently name the geographic point of origin of the blade used in a Bugis keris when we consider the entirety of a Bugis keris.

There are good, solid reasons that with Javanese keris we have a very deep well of knowledge & belief, and for other keris bearing societies we have a well of knowledge that is in many cases dry, or almost so.

I do not wish to address this problem.

To summarise:- in my opinion, this keris in its entirety is a keris of the Bugis people, I am not able to defend an opinion that might place the geographic origin of the blade of this complete keris in any specific geographic location. Further, based upon my own field research & my own experience, I am not prepared to name with confidence the geographic locations that contributed the parts other than the blade to this keris as a complete entity. Any opinion I might express in respect of this keris is based upon the opinions of other people.

To compress this into a few words:- I do not know.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

To summarise:- in my opinion, this keris in its entirety is a keris of the Bugis people, I am not able to defend an opinion that might place the geographic origin of the blade of this complete keris in any specific geographic location. Further, based upon my own field research & my own experience, I am not prepared to name with confidence the geographic locations that contributed the parts other than the blade to this keris as a complete entity. Any opinion I might express in respect of this keris is based upon the opinions of other people.

To compress this into a few words:- I do not know.

Thanks Alan, i appreciate your response and will add, as i believe i have already stated, that i don't really know either. But i am still confused by you opinion that this is the product of the Bugis people because i do see this hilt form, with it's narrow width, to be much more common to Minangkabau people than Bugis. The blade remains a bit of a mystery to me, but as is often the case with the keris i can often tell what something it NOT even when i am still not sure what is actually IS. And this blade does not display Bugis elements to me either.
Of course, with the above view images it is clear to me that this sheath has not been made for this blade, nor has there been any real attempt to properly fit it, so it is very possible that all these parts have completely different origins and that it can't really be said that it is of ANY particular people. Could it be a dealer special? Who knows? We can probably leave it at that.

[A. G. Maisey]

David, I tend to disagree that we can leave this discussion up in the air.

My knowledge of Bugis society, culture & history is presently very limited, & my way of thinking about the keris is that we should gain that foundation understanding before we try to understand the keris itself.

Going back twenty or so years we did have active members of this Forum who had some knowledge of Bugis keris forms:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...+keris+comment

in this thread we do have some people who seem to be quite positive of geographic locations associated with various forms of Bugis keris dress.

They might be correct, they might not be, but I do believe that their comments are worthy of taking note of.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

David, I tend to disagree that we can leave this discussion up in the air.

What i meant by leave it at that was that you and i, two people who have admitted that we don't know all that much about keris outside the Jawa/Bali/Sumatra nexus (and even there i know relatively little compared to you) could "probably leave it at that". I was in no way suggesting that people who understand these areas better than us should not share their knowledge on this keris if they have any.
That said, we do have a keris that obviously has been placed in a sheath that was not made for it, nor that anyone bothered to properly refit. That sheath seems very likely to have a gandar that is not original to the sheath. And not knowing enough about it, to my eyes the hilt seems oversized and out of proportion to the ensemble as a whole. So what i see is a keris that was very possible assembled from parts from numerous origins. I do, however, welcome being proved wrong on that if somebody can show a single origin for this ensemble as a whole.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yeah, sure it is possible that it is a dealer's or collectors montage, but this can happen in an indigenous society as well. In Bali it is not at all uncommon to see Javanese blades in Bali dress, & a lot of Bali pusaka keris are in fact Jawa keris in Bali dress. In Jawa we find both Bugis & Bali blades in Jawa dress.

I remember a keris that I once saw that had excellent provenance, it had been acquired many years previously on the North Coast of Sumatera & each and every part of that keris was from a different geographic location.

The scabbard fitted neatly to the blade that collectors like to see is in my experience not particularly usual outside of areas where the keris is a required part of formal dress. Even in those areas, somebody who wants to redress his keris might not be able to afford the services of a m'ranggi, so he buys a new ready made wrongko in the market and fits it himself, not everybody is all that skilled at this.