Questions on 2 Javanese blades

Green · 5th December 2017, 01:38 PM

Thank you Jean and Alan for your comments.

Jean said that only a keris of suitable quality merit a tangguh.
My understanding is that a tangguh merely denotes when (which era) a keris is made, irrespective of what quality it has, hence a badly made keris could be from say, mataram or segaluh era for example and it can be described as such

Quality aside, if my keris is old, which possible era was it made ? can we make a rough estimate?

Attached are a few more slightly better pics of close ups of the lower part of the blades and with possible hilts. Are they suitable? . I agree with Alan, a badly matched parts will make the keris look inappropriate and jarring at the very least. But my understanding of Javanese keris is too inadequate to make a good judgement if it is a good mix/fit or not. Would appreciate your comment.

A follow up question on the Javanese deder. The one I fit to the blade with tambal wengkon pamor has full carvings and I have not seen this kind of full ornamentation on typical Javanese deder before. Is this a new whimsical style by carvers with too much time on their hand or a legitimate decorative motif? the hilt is made of some form of ivory or possibly deer horn?

Green · 5th December 2017, 01:42 PM

here's the pics of the two blades with the hilts

Jean · 5th December 2017, 03:43 PM

Hello Green,
Thank you for the better pics. I will leave Alan to reply about the tangguh issue if he wishes, I would estimate that both blades were made during the 19th century, the 5 luk blade has pamor tambal only (no wengkon), and the 9 luk blade is quite worn-out and crudely made (pejetan, gonjo, upper pamor pattern).
The carved javanese hilt is in a quite rare but legitimate style I think. The janggelan hilt looks too big for the 9 luk blade IMO.
Best regards

David · 5th December 2017, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

I would estimate that both blades were made during the 19th century, the 5 luk blade has pamor tambal only (no wengkon), and the 9 luk blade is quite worn-out and crudely made (pejetan, gonjo, upper pamor pattern).

I suspect that the 9 luk might be a bit older than 19th century. I think the blade is more worn-out that crudely made.

Sajen · 5th December 2017, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

I suspect that the 9 luk might be a bit older than 19th century. I think the blade is more worn-out that crudely made.

Agree complete with you, I think as well that the blade is older as 19th century and think that the blade is too worn to state that it's crudely made.

Sajen · 5th December 2017, 05:57 PM

For a little better view!

A. G. Maisey · 5th December 2017, 07:55 PM

Yes, the 5 luk keris has no wengkon, what appeared to be the wengkon, is in fact the steel slorok (core). In respect of the age of this keris I hesitate to put an age onto it. If I were to handle it I might feel more inclined to take a punt, but from a pic? Not really --- but still, how about later than 1700, earlier than 1900?

The 9 luk is definitely an older piece, it is not a Central Javanese style, I feel it may have been quite a decent keris when it was new, and I'm inclined to place it as pre-1800.

However, when we involve ourselves in putting dates AS WE UNDERSTAND TIME onto a Javanese keris we are engaging in a pretty silly exercise.

In many cases we can CLASSIFY a keris according to a Solonese originated system that we call "tangguh". Although this system principally uses the names of historic eras to classify a keris, the relationship of the classification to the historic era is part of a system of belief, it is not reality --- except in the case of later classifications, such as Surakarta, or Hamengkubuwanaan, or Kemardikan.

Another problem with tangguh is that the way it is used now is as a part of a selling system, in that everybody who buys a keris wants to hear a tangguh attached to it, and almost everybody who sells a keris wants to name a tangguh for the keris he is selling. This is modern usage, and has little relevance to the reasons for the initiation of the tangguh system.

This is what Jean meant when he said that the quality of the kerises was not high enough to permit giving a tangguh. In the classical sense Jean was absolutely correct. But in the modern sense I'd say that most current generation collectors would throw their hat into the ring and give an opinion for one tangguh or another. In fact, that is the meaning of the word "tangguh" = "opinion".

Here is a link to a few comments I wrote some years ago that may assist in gaining a slight understanding of the idea of "tangguh".

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/keristangguh.html

In respect of the hilts, the "corn cob" looks old, the planar I have no idea at all if old or recent, nor of material; in the hand I could say with reasonable certainty, from a photo I cannot. The planar hilt appears to be East Javanese in origin.

5th December 2017, 01:38 PM	#1
Green Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Malaysia Posts: 323	Thank you Jean and Alan for your comments. Jean said that only a keris of suitable quality merit a tangguh. My understanding is that a tangguh merely denotes when (which era) a keris is made, irrespective of what quality it has, hence a badly made keris could be from say, mataram or segaluh era for example and it can be described as such Quality aside, if my keris is old, which possible era was it made ? can we make a rough estimate? Attached are a few more slightly better pics of close ups of the lower part of the blades and with possible hilts. Are they suitable? . I agree with Alan, a badly matched parts will make the keris look inappropriate and jarring at the very least. But my understanding of Javanese keris is too inadequate to make a good judgement if it is a good mix/fit or not. Would appreciate your comment. A follow up question on the Javanese deder. The one I fit to the blade with tambal wengkon pamor has full carvings and I have not seen this kind of full ornamentation on typical Javanese deder before. Is this a new whimsical style by carvers with too much time on their hand or a legitimate decorative motif? the hilt is made of some form of ivory or possibly deer horn? Attached Images

5th December 2017, 01:42 PM	#2
Green Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Malaysia Posts: 323	here's the pics of the two blades with the hilts Attached Images

5th December 2017, 05:57 PM	#6
Sajen Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Germany, Dortmund Posts: 9,212	For a little better view! Attached Images

5th December 2017, 03:43 PM	#3
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Hello Green, Thank you for the better pics. I will leave Alan to reply about the tangguh issue if he wishes, I would estimate that both blades were made during the 19th century, the 5 luk blade has pamor tambal only (no wengkon), and the 9 luk blade is quite worn-out and crudely made (pejetan, gonjo, upper pamor pattern). The carved javanese hilt is in a quite rare but legitimate style I think. The janggelan hilt looks too big for the 9 luk blade IMO. Best regards

5th December 2017, 07:55 PM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Yes, the 5 luk keris has no wengkon, what appeared to be the wengkon, is in fact the steel slorok (core). In respect of the age of this keris I hesitate to put an age onto it. If I were to handle it I might feel more inclined to take a punt, but from a pic? Not really --- but still, how about later than 1700, earlier than 1900? The 9 luk is definitely an older piece, it is not a Central Javanese style, I feel it may have been quite a decent keris when it was new, and I'm inclined to place it as pre-1800. However, when we involve ourselves in putting dates AS WE UNDERSTAND TIME onto a Javanese keris we are engaging in a pretty silly exercise. In many cases we can CLASSIFY a keris according to a Solonese originated system that we call "tangguh". Although this system principally uses the names of historic eras to classify a keris, the relationship of the classification to the historic era is part of a system of belief, it is not reality --- except in the case of later classifications, such as Surakarta, or Hamengkubuwanaan, or Kemardikan. Another problem with tangguh is that the way it is used now is as a part of a selling system, in that everybody who buys a keris wants to hear a tangguh attached to it, and almost everybody who sells a keris wants to name a tangguh for the keris he is selling. This is modern usage, and has little relevance to the reasons for the initiation of the tangguh system. This is what Jean meant when he said that the quality of the kerises was not high enough to permit giving a tangguh. In the classical sense Jean was absolutely correct. But in the modern sense I'd say that most current generation collectors would throw their hat into the ring and give an opinion for one tangguh or another. In fact, that is the meaning of the word "tangguh" = "opinion". Here is a link to a few comments I wrote some years ago that may assist in gaining a slight understanding of the idea of "tangguh". http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/keristangguh.html In respect of the hilts, the "corn cob" looks old, the planar I have no idea at all if old or recent, nor of material; in the hand I could say with reasonable certainty, from a photo I cannot. The planar hilt appears to be East Javanese in origin.