keris palembang

[kai]

the length of the blade is 34cm

Sorry, some nit-picking: If really measured from gonjo (at the center of the pesi) to the tip of the blade, it will be in the range of 330-335mm - pretty much average if there is any such thing with Palembang blades.

As mentioned, this doesn't mean much: I've handled Palembang blades of this dhapur from close to 200mm (8") to well over 400mm (16")!

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Just adding pics in standard orientation:

[A. G. Maisey]

I think I need to clarify exactly what I mean when I use the word "Tangguh".

Firstly, when I use the word "Tangguh" I am using it in the way that my teachers used it, and that means that it does not mean that just because a keris has been made in a particular place, or during a particular era, that automatically confers upon it the right to use the place where it was made, or the era during which it was made as its "Tangguh".

As an example:- I have made a number of keris myself, I have made a couple in styles other than the Surakarta style, but the only keris I made under Empu Suparman's direction was made in Surakarta style, and most others I have made have been made in Surakarta style too.
Several of these keris have been made in Australia, but does that mean that these keris are "Tangguh Old Toongabbie"? Old Toongabbie, a suburb of Sydney, being exactly where they were made.

No, it does not. These keris are Tangguh Surakarta because they are stylistically Surakarta.

In olden times the style of a keris usually indicated where it was made, so when we affix a Tangguh that relates to a particular geographic location we are basing that affixation of location upon style.

Within the Tangguh system that I was taught, there is room for classifications other than Javanese classifications, in the notebook that records my original instruction I can find Madura, Kupang, Bali, Bugis. If I take this a little further, what I find is that Tangguh Kupang actually does not refer to Kupang at all, it refers to keris that came from the islands to the east of Bali, the people who began to use "Tangguh Kupang" knew that these keris came from East of Bali, they knew Kupang was to the east of Bali, so these "East of Bali" keris got named as "Tangguh Kupang".

Then we have "Tangguh Bugis", and the basis for that Tangguh is the keris that is stylistically Bugis, it does not matter where it was made, what matters is its style.

Same with Madura, if a keris has the stylistic attributes of a keris that is KNOWN to have been made in Madura, that keris is Tangguh Madura, even though it may have been made in Malang, on the mainland of Jawa.

One keris that I made was made in the Surakarta style, but with a Balinese level of craftsmanship and finish. Several ahli keris from Solo commented on it in almost the same words:_"This is a Surakarta keris, but it was made in Bali" actually it was made in Australia, but when I gave it to these men for comment I did not initially tell them that I had made it.

Tangguh is NOT the keris equivalent of "Made in China", or "Made in USA".

Tangguh is an opinion of a keris classification that may or may not TRULY relate to the place where the keris was made, or the era from which it came, and it is based upon the style of the keris.

For example, Tangguh Pengging is often given as "Tangguh Pengging Witaradya(Witorodyo)".

Pengging is a real location, it is near Solo airport in the present day district of Banudono and during late Majapahit it was a small administrative area, probably about equivalent to a kabupaten these days. However Pengging Witaradya or Wikaradya is purely mythical and is probably placed in 9th century Central Jawa.

Tangguh is an opinion that is part of a belief system and to understand what it does mean, might mean and can mean we need to be able to think about the concept of tangguh in a Javanese way.

Now, Kai has decided that my original question relating to tangguh was not phrased sufficiently clearly and he has decided to rephrase it in a form that he feels is more correct. Regrettably Kai was unable to understand my question, which was:-

" --- if we saw this blade alone, by itself only, no dress, what classification (ie, tangguh) would we be forced to give it?"

In the above text I have done my best to try to explain what the concept of "tangguh" is and how we need to consider and apply it.

Anybody feel like answering my question?

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I think I need to clarify exactly what I mean when I use the word "Tangguh".

Firstly, when I use the word "Tangguh" I am using it in the way that my teachers used it, and that means that it does not mean that just because a keris has been made in a particular place, or during a particular era, that automatically confers upon it the right to use the place where it was made, or the era during which it was made as its "Tangguh".

As an example:- I have made a number of keris myself, I have made a couple in styles other than the Surakarta style, but the only keris I made under Empu Suparman's direction was made in Surakarta style, and most others I have made have been made in Surakarta style too.
Several of these keris have been made in Australia, but does that mean that these keris are "Tangguh Old Toongabbie"? Old Toongabbie, a suburb of Sydney, being exactly where they were made.

No, it does not. These keris are Tangguh Surakarta because they are stylistically Surakarta.

In olden times the style of a keris usually indicated where it was made, so when we affix a Tangguh that relates to a particular geographic location we are basing that affixation of location upon style.

Within the Tangguh system that I was taught, there is room for classifications other than Javanese classifications, in the notebook that records my original instruction I can find Madura, Kupang, Bali, Bugis. If I take this a little further, what I find is that Tangguh Kupang actually does not refer to Kupang at all, it refers to keris that came from the islands to the east of Bali, the people who began to use "Tangguh Kupang" knew that these keris came from East of Bali, they knew Kupang was to the east of Bali, so these "East of Bali" keris got named as "Tangguh Kupang".

Then we have "Tangguh Bugis", and the basis for that Tangguh is the keris that is stylistically Bugis, it does not matter where it was made, what matters is its style.

Same with Madura, if a keris has the stylistic attributes of a keris that is KNOWN to have been made in Madura, that keris is Tangguh Madura, even though it may have been made in Malang, on the mainland of Jawa.

One keris that I made was made in the Surakarta style, but with a Balinese level of craftsmanship and finish. Several ahli keris from Solo commented on it in almost the same words:_"This is a Surakarta keris, but it was made in Bali" actually it was made in Australia, but when I gave it to these men for comment I did not initially tell them that I had made it.

Tangguh is NOT the keris equivalent of "Made in China", or "Made in USA".

Tangguh is an opinion of a keris classification that may or may not TRULY relate to the place where the keris was made, or the era from which it came, and it is based upon the style of the keris.

For example, Tangguh Pengging is often given as "Tangguh Pengging Witaradya(Witorodyo)".

Pengging is a real location, it is near Solo airport in the present day district of Banudono and during late Majapahit it was a small administrative area, probably about equivalent to a kabupaten these days. However Pengging Witaradya or Wikaradya is purely mythical and is probably placed in 9th century Central Jawa.

Tangguh is an opinion that is part of a belief system and to understand what it does mean, might mean and can mean we need to be able to think about the concept of tangguh in a Javanese way.

Now, Kai has decided that my original question relating to tangguh was not phrased sufficiently clearly and he has decided to rephrase it in a form that he feels is more correct. Regrettably Kai was unable to understand my question, which was:-

" --- if we saw this blade alone, by itself only, no dress, what classification (ie, tangguh) would we be forced to give it?"

In the above text I have done my best to try to explain what the concept of "tangguh" is and how we need to consider and apply it.

Anybody feel like answering my question?

Thanks Alan. This isn't new to me as you have described this many times in the past. But this approach to tangguh is one that seems to be consistently ignored these days. You have laid this out rather concisely and clearly here i believe.

[sirek]

Thank you all for the informative contribution!

[drdavid]

Hi Alan
you mention

The variation that is very obvious in the ron dha sections possibly indicates that there will be considerable variation in placement and execution of the features on opposite faces of the blade. High quality workmanship demands that the features perfectly echo each other on each blade face. Perfect means exactly that:- perfect. Almost perfect is not good enough in this case

Am I right in thinking you mean if you flip the blade over the ron dha section should look exactly the same, effectively that would mean that the cuts are exactly level with no taper or tilt OR are you contrasting the right hand side with the left hand side
thanks
David

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, but much, much more than that.

The point of the sogokan (poyuhan) must be exactly, precisely the same distance from the blade base (ie wilah base, excludes gonjo) on each blade face, placement of each single feature must be precisely the same on each blade face.

The rondha and the greneng overall must be exactly the same on each side.

The work on a top level Surakarta blade is expected to be extremely precise, what we can see in these pics would indicate that if we had this blade in hand and examined it under magnification and measured it accurately we might find unacceptable variation. What I mean by "unacceptable" is unacceptable to permit this blade to be regarded as top level. Good, yes, but not good enough.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by kai

Just adding pics in standard orientation:

I have impression that tangguh is towards Jawa. Sorry for my poor knowledge. Is gut feel.

[JustYS]

Originally Posted by Anthony G.

I have impression that tangguh is towards Jawa. Sorry for my poor knowledge. Is gut feel.

My guess-timate is tangguh Lombok/Sumbawa, but my knowledge is surely worse than yours.....

[Gavin Nugent]

One complex world indeed.

tangguh Surakarta for what my 10 cents is worth.... although, and I write this without any real classification working knowledge, just a "stab" in the dark so to speak.... I'd say compared to the example presented, the Surakarta are with a subtle narrowing in the middle where as this example seems to taper more over its whole length.... but its as good as my references and working knowledge go...

Gavin

[A. G. Maisey]

Well Gavin, you're not bad.

Got no kewpie dolls to hand out, but for a non-keris sort of bloke that's a real good ten cents worth.

Yes, Surakarta.

If we were to work through the indicators one by one we would see that it agrees very heavily with Surakarta. The only questionable indicator is the blumbangan. Kai tells us it is square, but on my monitor it is just marginally elongated. Camera angles and monitors can distort the exact proportions, and it is not the classic long narrow blumbangan that is typically Surakarta.

But putting that blumbangan to one side, everything else is there, however, it is there in what I would call a "comic book" rendition, as if the maker has heard all about what the Surakarta blade looks like, but maybe is not very familiar with them in his hand.

For a Surakarta blade, I could not consider this blade to be high quality work, there is too much variation in the ron dha sections of the greneng. These ron dha are definitely Surakarta and are primary indicators, once we see this ron dha form we then begin to look for something that will tell us that the keris cannot be Surakarta, something that will without argument eliminate Surakarta. In this keris there is no negative indicator that will positively eliminate Surakarta.

The variation that is very obvious in the ron dha sections possibly indicates that there will be considerable variation in placement and execution of the features on opposite faces of the blade. High quality workmanship demands that the features perfectly echo each other on each blade face. Perfect means exactly that:- perfect. Almost perfect is not good enough in this case.

I believe this keris was made in Sumatera, but that does not make it Tangguh Palembang or Tangguh Jambi. However, the entire ensemble is a very nice example of a Palembang keris.

If it were mine I would not change a thing on it, everything hangs together nicely exactly as it is.

There are solid cultural reasons, apart from personal preferences, why men choose to wear humble clothing and non-ostentatious accoutrements, and when such a nice example as this comes our way it is perhaps a little arrogant of somebody who is not a part of the originating culture to take it upon himself to override the taste of the previous owner.

This thread might be of interest:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=GINJEI

Gavin, your comments on the overall form of the blade are quite perceptive, a Surakarta blade should ideally have a defined "chest" on the front edge, and on the back edge and placed a little lower, more towards the gonjo, there should be a defined swelling that is the "back". It is not so much a narrowing in the centre but a swelling that protrudes beyond the line of the edge, front higher, back lower.

[Anthony G.]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Well Gavin, you're not bad.

Got no kewpie dolls to hand out, but for a non-keris sort of bloke that's a real good ten cents worth.

Yes, Surakarta.

If we were to work through the indicators one by one we would see that it agrees very heavily with Surakarta. The only questionable indicator is the blumbangan. Kai tells us it is square, but on my monitor it is just marginally elongated. Camera angles and monitors can distort the exact proportions, and it is not the classic long narrow blumbangan that is typically Surakarta.

But putting that blumbangan to one side, everything else is there, however, it is there in what I would call a "comic book" rendition, as if the maker has heard all about what the Surakarta blade looks like, but maybe is not very familiar with them in his hand.

For a Surakarta blade, I could not consider this blade to be high quality work, there is too much variation in the ron dha sections of the greneng. These ron dha are definitely Surakarta and are primary indicators, once we see this ron dha form we then begin to look for something that will tell us that the keris cannot be Surakarta, something that will without argument eliminate Surakarta. In this keris there is no negative indicator that will positively eliminate Surakarta.

The variation that is very obvious in the ron dha sections possibly indicates that there will be considerable variation in placement and execution of the features on opposite faces of the blade. High quality workmanship demands that the features perfectly echo each other on each blade face. Perfect means exactly that:- perfect. Almost perfect is not good enough in this case.

I believe this keris was made in Sumatera, but that does not make it Tangguh Palembang or Tangguh Jambi. However, the entire ensemble is a very nice example of a Palembang keris.

If it were mine I would not change a thing on it, everything hangs together nicely exactly as it is.

There are solid cultural reasons, apart from personal preferences, why men choose to wear humble clothing and non-ostentatious accoutrements, and when such a nice example as this comes our way it is perhaps a little arrogant of somebody who is not a part of the originating culture to take it upon himself to override the taste of the previous owner.

This thread might be of interest:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=GINJEI

Gavin, your comments on the overall form of the blade are quite perceptive, a Surakarta blade should ideally have a defined "chest" on the front edge, and on the back edge and placed a little lower, more towards the gonjo, there should be a defined swelling that is the "back". It is not so much a narrowing in the centre but a swelling that protrudes beyond the line of the edge, front higher, back lower.

Awesome Gavin. Thanks Alan for sharing..........

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Well Gavin, you're not bad.

Got no kewpie dolls to hand out, but for a non-keris sort of bloke that's a real good ten cents worth.

Yes, Surakarta.

If we were to work through the indicators one by one we would see that it agrees very heavily with Surakarta. The only questionable indicator is the blumbangan. Kai tells us it is square, but on my monitor it is just marginally elongated. Camera angles and monitors can distort the exact proportions, and it is not the classic long narrow blumbangan that is typically Surakarta.

But putting that blumbangan to one side, everything else is there, however, it is there in what I would call a "comic book" rendition, as if the maker has heard all about what the Surakarta blade looks like, but maybe is not very familiar with them in his hand.

For a Surakarta blade, I could not consider this blade to be high quality work, there is too much variation in the ron dha sections of the greneng. These ron dha are definitely Surakarta and are primary indicators, once we see this ron dha form we then begin to look for something that will tell us that the keris cannot be Surakarta, something that will without argument eliminate Surakarta. In this keris there is no negative indicator that will positively eliminate Surakarta.

The variation that is very obvious in the ron dha sections possibly indicates that there will be considerable variation in placement and execution of the features on opposite faces of the blade. High quality workmanship demands that the features perfectly echo each other on each blade face. Perfect means exactly that:- perfect. Almost perfect is not good enough in this case.

I believe this keris was made in Sumatera, but that does not make it Tangguh Palembang or Tangguh Jambi. However, the entire ensemble is a very nice example of a Palembang keris.

If it were mine I would not change a thing on it, everything hangs together nicely exactly as it is.

There are solid cultural reasons, apart from personal preferences, why men choose to wear humble clothing and non-ostentatious accoutrements, and when such a nice example as this comes our way it is perhaps a little arrogant of somebody who is not a part of the originating culture to take it upon himself to override the taste of the previous owner.

This thread might be of interest:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=GINJEI

Gavin, your comments on the overall form of the blade are quite perceptive, a Surakarta blade should ideally have a defined "chest" on the front edge, and on the back edge and placed a little lower, more towards the gonjo, there should be a defined swelling that is the "back". It is not so much a narrowing in the centre but a swelling that protrudes beyond the line of the edge, front higher, back lower.

Thanks Alan,

Your posts are very educational. The last paragraph above again helped me understand more on the subtleties, thank you for the perspective.

A lot of it all eludes me but every now and then I grasp a little. I can't claim any real credit or knowledge though. You proposed a question, I hit the books. I really wish I could read many other languages as it was Haryono Haryoguritno's work Keris Jawa that eventually got me on point, but not until I thumbed through every page a few times did things slot in to place... my kingdom for an English translation!

Gavin

[kai]

Hello Alan,

If it were mine I would not change a thing on it, everything hangs together nicely exactly as it is.

There are solid cultural reasons, apart from personal preferences, why men choose to wear humble clothing and non-ostentatious accoutrements, and when such a nice example as this comes our way it is perhaps a little arrogant of somebody who is not a part of the originating culture to take it upon himself to override the taste of the previous owner.

This thread might be of interest:-
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=GINJEI

If there was any evidence suggesting that this keris is an ensemble that was traditionally worn by a former owner as-is (or even a decent likelihood only), I’d fully agree not to change anything. However, very few keris have enough provenance to suggest them likely being genuine ensembles.

Usually we have to go by indicators when trying to estimate whether any given keris may survive as an original ensemble.

For keris Palembang, we have a pretty good number of extant examples to reconstruct how original status ensembles looked like; this one doesn’t feel right to me at all…

As already mentioned (post #12), it is wise to keep any replaced parts. And to pass them on to any future owners so that any changes are fully reversible.

I believe the majority of keris in collections worldwide got sold/traded (usually via several middlemen) and many ensembles got altered during this process. While there are certainly genuine examples with fittings that are of thoroughly mixed origins and also reflect the genuine choice of the last traditional owner within his(/her) cultural environment, this seems to be a bit farfetched as a default assumption for most extant ensembles with strong discrepancies in style and/or quality, I believe.

(I'm not sure what you refer to regarding to Si Ginjei or Palembang vs Jambi - feel free to expand, please!)

Regards,
Kai