Interesting big sized javanese keris

sirek · 26th April 2010, 04:18 PM

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

Sajen · 26th April 2010, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirek

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

When both wrongkos unstained, yes!

David · 26th April 2010, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirek

perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures?

The only thing i can see in photos of this size is a difference in the color of the wood which could very well be stain as much as natural. Perhaps you could repost these much larger and explain what differences you see between them.

sirek · 26th April 2010, 08:00 PM

These pictures are from the net, and I forgot to mention the source where I have pictures of, maybe the real pictures on the site are clearer:
(to enlarge the photo press the left Ctrl button and tap the + button.
back to normal: ctrl and -button)

http://www.tjokrosuharto.com/catalog...hp/language/en

or you can have a look at this site:
http://blade.japet.com/KRISS/K-Artisans/K-bois.htm

(and the real names):

Kemuning -(Murraya Paniculata)
Trembalo - (Cassia Glauca)

Gustav · 26th April 2010, 09:42 PM

I just think, we should take earnest what Alan has written about this.

Here an old post about Kemuning in bugis sheath:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

Typically, only the root portion of the kemuning trunk is used to make the sheath and the hilt. As the kumuning is more of a very slow-growing bush than a tree, it has to be a hundred or two hundred years old to have a thick enough root portion for the sheath. Hilts can come from smaller bushes.

The kemuning trees that grow in very harsh environment has the most beautiful grains. Sometimes, the root grows over rocky/sandy soil, and the root envelopes sand or rock within itself. Some pieces of kemuning wood thus have sand within the wood that is so compacted that they have literally become sandstone. This hilt could have had that void because of this. Normally, such kemuning are not used, but for some reason, this hilt is made out of such a piece. Perhaps for esoteric reasons - insertion of talisman, etc?.

The way the grain radiates out of the centre top of the sheath seems to be a Sulawesi characteristic. I don't see this sort of "radiation" (hmm... sounds nuclear

) on kemuning sheaths from other regions.

A. G. Maisey · 26th April 2010, 10:15 PM

These photos are from a sales site.

Please re-read what I have already written about salesmen's descriptions.

On this site is also shown akasia, however, the colour of the wood shown bears no resemblance to akasia.

The wood identified as kemuning is textbook akasia colour and grain. To confirm that it is akasia it would need to be handled.

Wood big enough for a wrongko and with a chatoyant grain must come from either a branch junction (in some instances) or from the root area. You need a very big tree to get chatoyant grain.

It is a very, very long time since there have been big kemuning trees in Jawa. In 40 years I have never seen large pieces of kemuning wood for sale. Never.

However, this wrongko identified on this sales site has every appearance of a new wrongko.

Perhaps the very worst source of information for somebody who knows very, very little about keris is an Indonesian seller of keris.

There is at least one error in the the other site too.

Ria · 27th April 2010, 03:39 AM

Dear Alan,

I have some info to share.

I referred my pictures below. Here in my place, people liked to name it as tumbuk lada instead or siwar/sewar.

When I ordered a new dress for this siwar from tukang in Terengganu, Malaysia, I have specifically asked for kemuning. He admitted this wood very hard to find and managed to get some of it.

I do not know wether he correct about kemuning, but majority people in my place believed it is kemuning.

I provide a picture of the wood before and after polishing.

Regards,

Ria

A. G. Maisey · 27th April 2010, 04:00 AM

I thank you for these photos Pak Ria.

All I can say is that both your chatoyant yellow wood, and the chatoyant yellow wood in the other photograph have the precise appearance of akasia.

If you tell me that you have been told by the tukang wrongko that it is kemuning, I believe you.

The only kemuning that I have seen, and that I know was kemuning, has been in old Peninsula and Bugis wrongkos. It has been hard, and the chatoyant grain has had the nature of a sunburst, rather than the consistent fiddleback grain that I can see in the other wrongko and in your scabbard. I have never seen a kemuning wrongko with this fiddleback grain, but I have seen Javanese hilts with a fiddleback grain.

On the other hand, I have seen a lot of wrongkos made from akasia that do have the consistent fiddleback grain that is shown in your scabbard and in the other wrongko.

We're working with photos here, not the real thing, but based upon what I can see in the photos I would without hesitation say that I'm looking at akasia, simply because I have never seen any verifiable kemuning that looks anything like this, but I have seen a great deal of akasia that looks precisely like it.

I have also seen other woods that are close to kemuning in colour, and that have a fiddleback grain, and that have been used in wrongkos, such as paumarfin--- a South American wood that a dealer in Jawa imported a very large quantity of from Sth America about 30 years ago.

But if you tell me that your scabbard is kemuning, I believe you; its just that this is the only piece of kemuning that I've ever seen that looks like this --- except for the wrongko in the previous linked site.

One of the facts of life is that akasia is a wood that has only begun to be used in the recent past. It has no history, and no esoterica attached to it. In fact, although it is sourced from Indonesian trees, I'm not even certain that it is an Indonesian idigenous wood. Its always easier to sell something if that something can be linked to a little bit of tradition. Akasia has no tradition.

EDIT

Above I said

"I have never seen a kemuning wrongko with this fiddleback grain"

This is possibly an incorrect statement.

What is perhaps more correct is:-

I have never seen wood in a wrongko atasan with a fiddleback grain that I knew was definitely kemuning

Sajen · 27th April 2010, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gustav

I just think, we should take earnest what Alan has written about this.

Here an old post about Kemuning in bugis sheath:

I second the opinion from Gustav. Both, Alan as well as Kai Wee will know it better than most of the others.

A. G. Maisey · 27th April 2010, 11:47 PM

I've been thinking about this discussion on kermuning.

It seems to me that the main reason we're going around in circles on this one is that there is a tendency for people to confuse wood grain and/or colour with variations in wood types.

The chatoyant, fiddle back grain that has been shown by some of us as an example of kemuning can occur in a variety of woods, and the grain itself, and colour, are not indicative of the type of wood we are looking at. To know the type of wood, you need a very great depth of knowledge, probably specialist training over many years, and to have the wood in your hand.

My profession is audit and risk management, but my family background is fine art cabinet making, and I have dabbled in wood work at times, for instance, back in my twenties I had a nice little hobby business going, making custom built rifle stocks.

There are a number of fancy grains that we use in wood work in Australia that are also identifiable as wood grains known in Jawa:-

Fiddle back = nginden
Feather crotch = simbar
Bird's eye = semburatan
Burl = gembol
------ and so on.

Here is a link to a site with a number of examples of fancy grains that are known and used in western cultures;

http://www.hobbithouseinc.com/person...cs/_figure.htm

select a term from the list on the left of the page, and then click on the link to the photo examples.

Most, if not all of the grains shown here are known in Jawa.

However, these grains can occur in a number of different timbers, so the grain by itself is not an identifier of the wood type, and colours of the same wood type can run through a range, so colour by itself is not an indication of the wood type.

With a great deal of knowledge and experience a person can take a piece of wood in hand and possibly name the wood type, if he has experience with that wood, but from photos all we have are colour and grain, so we tend to relate that colour and grain to what we have learnt from physical examples of material.

It is very difficult to be certain about a wood type from a photo, but we can be certain about a wood grain from a photo

A. G. Maisey · 28th April 2010, 04:25 AM

The following 20 or so images are examples of similar wood grains.

I cannot correctly name all the different types of wood that are shown here. I can name some with absolute certainty, I can guess at others, and there are some that I do not know.

I am inviting everybody to nominate the images which are images of kemuning.

26th April 2010, 04:18 PM	#1
sirek Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 170	perhaps you can see the differences in these pictures? Attached Images

27th April 2010, 03:39 AM	#7
Ria Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 14	Kemuning Dear Alan, I have some info to share. I referred my pictures below. Here in my place, people liked to name it as tumbuk lada instead or siwar/sewar. When I ordered a new dress for this siwar from tukang in Terengganu, Malaysia, I have specifically asked for kemuning. He admitted this wood very hard to find and managed to get some of it. I do not know wether he correct about kemuning, but majority people in my place believed it is kemuning. I provide a picture of the wood before and after polishing. Regards, Ria Attached Images

27th April 2010, 04:00 AM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,013	I thank you for these photos Pak Ria. All I can say is that both your chatoyant yellow wood, and the chatoyant yellow wood in the other photograph have the precise appearance of akasia. If you tell me that you have been told by the tukang wrongko that it is kemuning, I believe you. The only kemuning that I have seen, and that I know was kemuning, has been in old Peninsula and Bugis wrongkos. It has been hard, and the chatoyant grain has had the nature of a sunburst, rather than the consistent fiddleback grain that I can see in the other wrongko and in your scabbard. I have never seen a kemuning wrongko with this fiddleback grain, but I have seen Javanese hilts with a fiddleback grain. On the other hand, I have seen a lot of wrongkos made from akasia that do have the consistent fiddleback grain that is shown in your scabbard and in the other wrongko. We're working with photos here, not the real thing, but based upon what I can see in the photos I would without hesitation say that I'm looking at akasia, simply because I have never seen any verifiable kemuning that looks anything like this, but I have seen a great deal of akasia that looks precisely like it. I have also seen other woods that are close to kemuning in colour, and that have a fiddleback grain, and that have been used in wrongkos, such as paumarfin--- a South American wood that a dealer in Jawa imported a very large quantity of from Sth America about 30 years ago. But if you tell me that your scabbard is kemuning, I believe you; its just that this is the only piece of kemuning that I've ever seen that looks like this --- except for the wrongko in the previous linked site. One of the facts of life is that akasia is a wood that has only begun to be used in the recent past. It has no history, and no esoterica attached to it. In fact, although it is sourced from Indonesian trees, I'm not even certain that it is an Indonesian idigenous wood. Its always easier to sell something if that something can be linked to a little bit of tradition. Akasia has no tradition. EDIT Above I said "I have never seen a kemuning wrongko with this fiddleback grain" This is possibly an incorrect statement. What is perhaps more correct is:- I have never seen wood in a wrongko atasan with a fiddleback grain that I knew was definitely kemuning Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 27th April 2010 at 11:12 PM.

27th April 2010, 11:47 PM	#10
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,013	I've been thinking about this discussion on kermuning. It seems to me that the main reason we're going around in circles on this one is that there is a tendency for people to confuse wood grain and/or colour with variations in wood types. The chatoyant, fiddle back grain that has been shown by some of us as an example of kemuning can occur in a variety of woods, and the grain itself, and colour, are not indicative of the type of wood we are looking at. To know the type of wood, you need a very great depth of knowledge, probably specialist training over many years, and to have the wood in your hand. My profession is audit and risk management, but my family background is fine art cabinet making, and I have dabbled in wood work at times, for instance, back in my twenties I had a nice little hobby business going, making custom built rifle stocks. There are a number of fancy grains that we use in wood work in Australia that are also identifiable as wood grains known in Jawa:- Fiddle back = nginden Feather crotch = simbar Bird's eye = semburatan Burl = gembol ------ and so on. Here is a link to a site with a number of examples of fancy grains that are known and used in western cultures; http://www.hobbithouseinc.com/person...cs/_figure.htm select a term from the list on the left of the page, and then click on the link to the photo examples. Most, if not all of the grains shown here are known in Jawa. However, these grains can occur in a number of different timbers, so the grain by itself is not an identifier of the wood type, and colours of the same wood type can run through a range, so colour by itself is not an indication of the wood type. With a great deal of knowledge and experience a person can take a piece of wood in hand and possibly name the wood type, if he has experience with that wood, but from photos all we have are colour and grain, so we tend to relate that colour and grain to what we have learnt from physical examples of material. It is very difficult to be certain about a wood type from a photo, but we can be certain about a wood grain from a photo Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 28th April 2010 at 12:32 AM.

28th April 2010, 04:25 AM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,013	The following 20 or so images are examples of similar wood grains. I cannot correctly name all the different types of wood that are shown here. I can name some with absolute certainty, I can guess at others, and there are some that I do not know. I am inviting everybody to nominate the images which are images of kemuning. Attached Images

26th April 2010, 08:00 PM	#4
sirek Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 170	These pictures are from the net, and I forgot to mention the source where I have pictures of, maybe the real pictures on the site are clearer: (to enlarge the photo press the left Ctrl button and tap the + button. back to normal: ctrl and -button) http://www.tjokrosuharto.com/catalog...hp/language/en or you can have a look at this site: http://blade.japet.com/KRISS/K-Artisans/K-bois.htm (and the real names): Kemuning -(Murraya Paniculata) Trembalo - (Cassia Glauca)

26th April 2010, 10:15 PM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,013	These photos are from a sales site. Please re-read what I have already written about salesmen's descriptions. On this site is also shown akasia, however, the colour of the wood shown bears no resemblance to akasia. The wood identified as kemuning is textbook akasia colour and grain. To confirm that it is akasia it would need to be handled. Wood big enough for a wrongko and with a chatoyant grain must come from either a branch junction (in some instances) or from the root area. You need a very big tree to get chatoyant grain. It is a very, very long time since there have been big kemuning trees in Jawa. In 40 years I have never seen large pieces of kemuning wood for sale. Never. However, this wrongko identified on this sales site has every appearance of a new wrongko. Perhaps the very worst source of information for somebody who knows very, very little about keris is an Indonesian seller of keris. There is at least one error in the the other site too.