New keris

[Alam Shah]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Alam Shah, I appreciate your comment on my kerises, but I wonder why you are so negative about the old keris blade. True, it's not in perfect condition. But I feel that this old blade still has something. I don't know what attracted me to it.
By repeatly washing the blade, it's a natural process that the blade becomes thin and starts losing some 'ricikan', don't you think so ? People in Indonesia, cherish their old family kerises. I've seen pictures of kerises in the same condition, which were and are respected for their age.

Negative? On the contrary, I think it's nice that you could appreciate such antiquity. (Not many people can.)

As Rick said "Keris collecting seems to be a very subjective activity."
Many people collect for different reasons.

I do have an old piece which I had grown attached to over the years.
This piece, I had kept for more than a decade (16 years.) Click here to see.

Sorry, if I didn't make myself clear. I have handled pieces in worse state than yours. Family heirlooms, almost to a point of disintegration and some are so fragile that if you exert a little force, it tends to crumble.

I agree with your comments above. Older blade have this 'x' factor which can draw one's attention.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Alam Shah

As Rick said "Keris collecting seems to be a very subjective activity."
Many people collect for different reasons.

I agree with your comments above. Older blade have this 'x' factor which can draw one's attention.

You are right, keris collecting, and in fact all collecting, is very subjective. I can appreciate the workmanship in a new keris. Sometimes I wonder how it's possible to 'create' the intricate pamor motifs.

But still, with an old keris I feel that there's a story behind the piece. That would be the so-called 'X' factor, no ? Unfortunately, the story is mostly lost as the keris goes from hand to hand before it comes in our possession. And this is especially true for old kerises in Western collections.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Freddy

You are right, keris collecting, and in fact all collecting, is very subjective. I can appreciate the workmanship in a new keris. Sometimes I wonder how it's possible to 'create' the intricate pamor motifs.

But still, with an old keris I feel that there's a story behind the piece. That would be the so-called 'X' factor, no ? Unfortunately, the story is mostly lost as the keris goes from hand to hand before it comes in our possession. And this is especially true for old kerises in Western collections.

Freddy, I think you have expressed exactly why I tend to collect new pieces .

[nechesh]

Interesting discussion. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but it needn't be an either/or decision in terms of old vs. new keris. I must admit a strong tendency towards older keris, keris that have truly seen use as ethnographic objects. My interest in keris is not necessarily a technical one, but one of sociologic and anthropologic study. I am drawn towards the keris for it's magickal/mystical qualities. While i can certainly appreciate the technical aspect i will probably never be able to give anyone more than a cursory explanation on the metalurgy of keris. At the same time i also recognize Freddy's lament, the story is lost and so much more. Still, that "X" factor allure remains, though i do not fool myself into thinking that merely acquiring an old keris automatical opens oneself up to the (possibly) generations of magickal/mystical intention and charge that accumulate in a true ethnographic keris. I am afraid i am of the belief that pusaka ceases to be pusaka once it is "collected" and the generational chain is broken. This isn't to say that energy work can no longer be done with such a keris, but it is surely not the same as when the great-great grandson of the original owner works with the keris. You do not acquire magick merely by acquiring a magickal object. There is a lot more work involved than that.

On the other hand there is the "B" factor (Beauty), which i have certainly fallen prey to. I own a beautiful Madurese keris that was probably made in the 1980s for the collectors market (not the same as the "tourist" market). The style and execution of this piece i could probably never afford in an old keris. It caught my eye and called to me and so i bought it. It probably won't be the last time i buy a new keris. It's also important to understand that, like it or not, these newly made high level "art" keris are the evolution of the keris form. For the most part the keris as a spiritual/mystical/magickal ethnographic object is past in the Indonesian society. Yes, there are a VERY FEW empus who still know all the old tricks, or at least claim they do, but the call for their work is not increasing as time passes. These high level "art" keris are the future of the keris form. I suppose that if all collectors were to shun them that the art form itself would die out all together and that would be a real shame.

[Alam Shah]

Originally Posted by Freddy

But still, with an old keris I feel that there's a story behind the piece. That would be the so-called 'X' factor, no ? Unfortunately, the story is mostly lost as the keris goes from hand to hand before it comes in our possession. And this is especially true for old kerises in Western collections.

Freddy, the 'x' factors are more towards the 'mysterious', esoteric elements, ...the spiritual nature of the pieces. From a technical viewpoint, it would be the metal composition used, the natural blade aging, the patina of the dressing...etc.

The rule of thumb that I employ to make a decision would be my gut feeling.
If I feel connected or have the 'calling' to get the piece, I'll go ahead and get it, whether new or old. I like new for the artistic beauty.

As most had said before, some rare old pamor patterns and dapurs are hard to come by (even in the olden days). You can see new pieces sporting the rare pamors and dapurs. Click here for an example. It's a good sign.

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Now we came to discuss a subject some traditional keris expert reluctant to discuss. It's the isoteric subject, or the "X" factor.

What makes a keris "pusaka" while others are not ? Nechesh had made a good point, one of them is Family Heritage / Heirloom. But heritage isn't the only way for someone to own a pusaka-rated keris. Sultan Hamengkubuwono V (reign early 19th C.) in Jogjakarta known for buying some kerises and made them as Court Heirlooms. The "Kyai Pamungkas", once a keris pusaka belongs to Prince Tejokusuma, were acquired by buying it for 1000 gulden (early 20 c.). Sure, family heritage heirloom might had a long story, but in fact, every keris had it's own story, isn't it ? So, what the "pusaka" really is ? IMHO, pusaka might be interpreted as "Masterpiece". In keris's world, it MUST fulfill BOTH the exoteric and isoteric criterias. It were the Empus who really made some kerises rated as "pusaka" or "ageman", and only Master Empus who able to made such (considered) "powerful" pusaka. (In fact,most of the court in Java consider a spear/lance as their most powerful pusaka, not the keris). According to Java's tradition, pusakas were named Kyai (male)/Nyai (female) ..<something>. Usually, Kyai/Nyai is a title given to respected elder or spiritual teacher. The name isn't only a form of admiration to the art, but in fact, the pusakas itselves are really "teaching" a lesson and the empu's intention to the owner/spectators, in symbolic languages. Only those who understand the language might learn the precious lesson the pusaka (ultimately, the Empus) tried to convey. Treating pusaka as only an amulet is really a derogating way, if not considered as humiliation to the Empu. But treating it as an ordinary blade with no respect at all might also do so.

Thus, in old days, looking at someone's pusaka might reveal his philosophical view and intentions, knowledges, and also his identity. For many Javaneses, it might felt like naked. So, they try to "hide" this, by very selectively showing their pusaka, and also, by using the "ganja wulung". But today, it might means nothing, because there is so little keris owner who understand the language, and I'm afraid, many of this symbolic languages had lost.

But in the end, it is the owner who makes the decision, whether his keris is pusaka or not. What ever the owner decides, any wise spectator should treat it as a pusaka.

So, how could we tell ones is pusaka while other isn't ? As I mentioned before, a pusaka must fulfill both exoteric and esoteric criterias. Exoteric very much related to quality, those are, the materials used and the workmanship, which certainly shows the empu's mastery. The esoteric is much more difficult, as Alam Shah already said, just use your gut feeling Sorry, seems I give no help at all. But for the hints : pay attention to the iron. Old book say "the steel gives the sharpness, the iron gives the power, the pamor gives the glow/shine". Contrary to popular belief, pamor should be considered only as a "book cover/title", where the empu put his title to his intention. It is the iron, which really contains "the power". No named pusaka (that is, pusaka which bear a name, "Kyai") I've already seen had bad, rough and porous iron. In fact, many of them just show a minimalistic pamor, scattered-rice type (beras wutah), which convey a high-degree philosophical lesson. Good understanding on keris making process and metallurgy will show why.

Last but not least, I must admit that what I've been saying is only from Jogjakarta's view. Surakarta might say something differently, because of the different philosophical approach. Bali, Makasar/Bugis and Malay will certainly say something else.

[Alam Shah]

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

Last but not least, I must admit that what I've been saying is only from Jogjakarta's view. Surakarta might say something differently, because of the different philosophical approach. Bali, Makasar/Bugis and Malay will certainly say something else.

Boedhi, thank you for sharing Jogjakarta's philosophical approach. I agree with you, different regions have different philosophical approach. The Malay/Bugis approach is different.

[Rick]

Well , I guess this brings up another question (at least for me) ; When does a Panday become an Empu ?
Is this strictly a spiritual matter ?

[marto suwignyo]

Prior to continuing with comments relevant to this thread, I wish to make it known that ten years ago today, on Sabtu Wage, 28 Juli 1995, Bapak Suparman KRT. Supowijoyo, known as Empu Suparman, departed this realm. Today is the tenth anniversary of the death of Empu Suparman.



The question of exactly what the word "pusaka" conveys, is able to be answered in several ways, dependent upon the intent of the person using the word.

In colloquial use in present day Java it can serve as a substitute for the specific name of an item of wesi aji, that is, a keris blade may be referred to as "pusaka", or a tombak blade , or a pedang blade. In colloquial use it can be used to refer to all these items.

In modern Javanese it carries the meanings of :-1-an heirloom, a revered object passed down from an ancestor; 2- an inheritance (krama inggil for warisan); 3- a ricefield owned by one family through several generations.

The word has come into Indonesian, and in this language it carries the meaning of "heirloom".

As applied in correct usage, to a keris, it can only mean a keris that has been inherited from one`s forebears.

From the above it will be understood that the word pusaka does not apply only to keris and other items of wesi aji. It applies to any material object which is inherited from one`s ancestors.

In traditional Hindu/Javanese society, the possession of the royal pusakas were deemed to be essential to legitimise the right of the ruler to rule, however, the events following the surrender of Amangkurat III to the Dutch in 1708, demonstrate that a ruler could hold his position in the absence of the royal pusakas.One of Amangkurat III`s conditions for surrender to the Dutch was that he be permitted to retain the pusakas of the realm of Kartasura. Pakubuwana I (PB I), who ruled Kartasura following Amangkurat III was very upset by this loss of the pusakas, the more so because these pusakas were no longer even in the Land of Jawa, but had gone to Batavia.However, as disturbed as PB I was, he said to Cakrajaya, his chief councillor :-

"It is my feeling, Patih,that even if all the pusakas of the Land of Jawa are taken to Batavia, those that are the pikes and kerises,it concerns me not just as long as there are still the graveyard of Kadilangu and the mosque of Demak. Yea, know that these two are the pusakas of the Land of Jawa which are essential, there are no others."

PB I may well have been trying to validate his right to rule and in effect saying that the royal pusakas other than the mosque and graveyard were not important, but in the context of our present discussion, I believe that this usage of the word "pusaka" clarifies exactly what is meant by the word when used correctly in the Javanese language.

By the time PB I declared that the only pusakas that were really essential were a mosque and a graveyard, Islam had already assumed a dominant role in Javanese society, and in effect, PB I was maintaining the traditional cultural values by his stance that these two things were all that were essential, but he was maintaining the values in an Islamic fashion. In the Balinese cultural tradition, which can in many respects be regarded as a continuation of the culture of pre-Islamic Java, the pusaka keris binds the current custodian of that keris to his ancestors, and to members of his kin group who are still living. This is the cultural role of the keris pusaka. PB I substituted the Mosque of Demak, and the Graveyard of Kadilangu for the keris pusaka, as the things which bound him to his ancestors, and to his kin group, and thus bestowed upon him the right to rule.

So, in a cultural context, not only is a keris pusaka one that has been inherited from one`s ancestors, it is also the physical object that binds the present possessor of that keris pusaka to his ancestors, and to the other members of his kin group.

Regarding the use of the word "empu".
Empu is the title bestowed upon an outstanding poet, writer, artist, or armourer.
In Java, normally one could expect that this title would be bestowed by a Kraton, however, there were instances of famous empus who were not designated thus by a Kraton, but rather came to be known as empu by the wider community. Whereas a Kraton appointed , Javanese empu might be regarded as a part of Kraton heirarchy, and carry a Kraton rank, the empus of Bali were not a part of the Kraton heirarchy, but rather members of the Pande caste, having their own priests, living within their own community, and serving both the common people and the Kraton, upon request.

A pandhe is a blacksmith; this is Javanese usage.
A pandai is a craftsman in metal; this is Indonesian usage.
A pandai besi is a blacksmith (Indonesian).
A pandai keris is a keris craftsman.(Indonesian)

A pandai keris in Java could become an empu if invited to join the heirarchy of a kraton, and given a rank within that heirarchy.

[purwacarita]

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

What makes a keris "pusaka" while others are not ? Nechesh had made a good point, one of them is Family Heritage / Heirloom. ...IMHO, pusaka might be interpreted as "Masterpiece". In keris's world, it MUST fulfill BOTH the exoteric and isoteric criterias. It were the Empus who really made some kerises rated as "pusaka" or "ageman", and only Master Empus who able to made such (considered) "powerful" pusaka.

Hi Boedhi Adhitya. I'm confused here, is pusaka, keris with historical values though without exoteric & isoteric criteria fulfilled, or keris with both exoteric & isoteric criteria fulfilled though not yet inherited through generations? I recall that Kyai Klerek is treasured for its historical values instead of what called yoni.

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

(In fact,most of the court in Java consider a spear/lance as their most powerful pusaka, not the keris).

Sorry if I compare it to (hi)story of battle of Arya Penangsang with keris Setan Kober and lance Kyai Pleret and how the lance could only wound him very badly, and it was the keris said which did the kill.

It is said too that keris (or X-keris) is only used to end a fight instead of used during a fight, sometimes it is also used for executing extra-ordinary casualties of war. I don't know if it's true, was it always keris or lance was sometimes also used?

I'm sure the court in Java have many good reasons. Please verify if I'm wrong. Btw, I read in newspaper that several pusaka of kraton Surakarta are indicated missing. I feel sorry about that, do kraton people have documentation of their pusaka and photograph of the missing ones? I hope that spreading the photo could help finding.~IBS

[Alam Shah]

Originally Posted by purwacarita

Btw, I read in newspaper that several pusaka of kraton Surakarta are indicated missing. I feel sorry about that, do kraton people have documentation of their pusaka and photograph of the missing ones? I hope that spreading the photo could help finding.~IBS

It's sad that these things happens (missing). Spreading the photos (if any) with intent to help find it could instead cause more confusion. Instead of helping to find it, we would probably find replica copies of it made by forgers.