![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 852
|
![]()
Hello dear members,
I'm not specialised in Keris, I just receiveded these two, The incomplete model seems recent and of poor quality, the second one seems really better and a bit older, maybe a signature on the brass? mounts ? an old blade on a more recent scabbard ? ( fits well in ) Any help, comment is welcomed. Kind regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]()
Both krisses are in Solo dress (Central Java), may we see the younger blade in full please?
Regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Eastern Sierra
Posts: 436
|
![]()
I've always wondered why the Solo pendok is open in the front while the Dogya completely covers the wood of the gandjar. Is it for symbolic reasons or is it purely aesthetic?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]() Quote:
Regards Last edited by Jean; 8th March 2021 at 04:59 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]()
The engravings on the pendok apparently read as 1807, but if the date uses the Javanese calendar, you have to add 78 so it is equivalent to 1885 AD.
Regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 852
|
![]()
Hello,
thank you all for your comments !! 1885 is already a nice surprise ! Thank's a lot Jean for the translation !! For the second Kriss , I have these pictures for the moment... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]()
Hum, this is a recently made and common quality blade indeed
![]() Please keep in mind that the dates engraved on the pendoks are not always correct (tricky sellers!) ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,100
|
![]() Quote:
The engraving on the pendok on the first one seems to have age IMHO, though it's hard to say if it originally belongs on this sheath or was merely an old piece that was used to assemble this keris for sale by a dealer. However, the blade seems to be old as well anyway so i see no reason not to regard this as an antique keris and take the 1885 at face value. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]()
Yes, the blade looks old indeed and fitting quite well into the scabbard but the top of the pendok does not adjust well with the warangka on the reverse side (see first pic) so this is not an original setting IMO.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 90
|
![]()
I may be peremptorily dismissing out of hand any keris with a pendok upon which a date is engraved/stamped/chiseled, but...I usually do the same with pendok showing any lambang keraton...
There probably are in existence pendok with bona-fide dates on them, but almost all the examples I've seen are [to me] obviously bogus. I don't have time to get into what I consider to be telltale signs of fakery. Perhaps I should do so, however, when I have more time. I may or may not have mentioned previously that I immediately lose all interest in any keris described as "previously owned by a senior abdi dalem of the court of Solokarta", again for reasons I don't have time to get into. I once saw for sale a ploncon with a prominent date on the front [from the 1800s] in Javanese script, for an even number of keris. Perhaps it was completely genuine; it's possible. There was no way in hell that I was even going to bother calculating the exchange rate for this particular article, however, for reason(s) which I may get into if asked to do so, at some future time. (And my reasons may be completely wrong). Now that I think about it, perhaps I really should write up a list of all the features which I (as an inexperienced keris accumulator, not a knowledgable collector) consider to be telltale indicators of fakery, as well as my reason(s). There may well be a thread regarding this subject in the forum already; I'd be surprised if there was not. Or...now that I think about it...perhaps there isn't... Short of carbon dating and other forensic techniques...so much comes down to experience and education, and even with keris Sombro, it's not like we have her fingerprints to verify the genuine keris with... I have one or two hilts which I believe to be carved from bone. I suspect that the prominent burn/ scorch marks on both of them are from a previous owner trying to ascertain whether or not they are synthetic... Perhaps I should have just kept quiet; but it's 03:51 and I've spent too much time writing this to not post it. Last edited by Mickey the Finn; 6th April 2021 at 12:12 PM. Reason: correction of spelling & grammar |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | ||||||
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,100
|
![]() Quote:
But what you have failed to take into account is that it is just as likely that 1807 isn't a date at all, but rather some bit of numerology added to this pendok by the owner for reasons you and i will never know. We can't assume it is a date and so it might well be a mistake to dismiss it out of hand...certainly not "peremptorily". ![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,855
|
![]()
One little thing I think I'd like to comment on, I emphasise "comment", I'm not interested in debating or arguing the point, I'm just expressing a personal opinion, accept if you will, reject if you will. Makes no difference to me either way.
Sixty or so years ago I would have accepted the idea of "fake" keris without a moment's thought. I would accept that anything with value could be presented as something that it was not and thus it had become a fake, the usual & obvious motivator for creation of a fake being to increase value. Over the years my attitude has undergone some change. I still think that there can be keris that have been deliberately falsified in one way or another to make them more valuable and more attractive to a potential buyer. However, my parameters for assessing a keris to be "fake" have altered. The things that make a keris "fake" for most collectors who are outside core keris culture do not necessarily make a keris "fake" for somebody who is a part of that culture. For example, going back 20-30 years the wise collectors of keris who were outside core keris culture would immediately identify as "fake" a keris that presented evidence of comparatively recent manufacture, but also appeared to have a slightly eroded finish to the blade surface. The overwhelming opinion amongst these experienced, knowledgeable collectors who were not a part of core keris culture was that such a keris was a deliberate fake, there had been an attempt to make it look old when in fact it was not. The evil forgers were at it again, trying to rip off the unwary. As time has passed the truth of the matter has emerged from Darkest Jawa Tengah, and most collectors of keris now, whether experienced or not, seem to have become aware that the eroded blade surface on a recently made blade is something that is certainly done intentionally, and for a very good reason:- the biggest market for new keris is the local market in Indonesia, the keris is a required part of formal dress in many parts of Indonesia and there are only so many old keris to go around, so just like neckties, new keris need to be continually produced for local buyers, and the local market wants that slightly eroded finish. The customer is always right, so you give the customer what he wants --- at least you do if you want to stay in business. The fact that collectors of keris who are outside the core keris culture consider that slightly eroded surface as an attempt at forgery is of absolutely no interest to the makers whose primary market is the local one. There are many similar examples that could be quoted, but the simple fact is this:- as one learns more about the keris it becomes obvious that a number of things that are acceptable or desired by the local buyers of keris in Jawa & other places where the keris is a part of the culture, are things that for buyers outside that local market, are things that are regarded as fake, or forgery, or highly undesirable. It is a matter of the applicable standard. Very often collectors from a different cultural base will have different standards for objects from a culture that is not their own to the standard that actually applies within the other culture. Collectors make their own rules that apply to their own ideas of what should, and should not be regarded as authentic. Now, be all of the above as it may. Yes, there are definitely deliberate keris forgeries floating around, and believe me, they are very, very difficult to detect. But almost nobody in the general collector market is ever going to have to worry about these forgeries, quite simply because the prices on these genuine forgeries are so high that they are beyond the means of most people. The real forgeries are priced about in line with motor vehicles, the lower priced ones are at about the level of a good used Toyota with low mileage, the higher priced ones are at about new Mercedes Benz level. True forgeries are not designed to rip somebody off to the tune of ten or twenty bucks, or even a couple of hundred, they are intended to rip somebody off to the tune of around 10K to over 100K. I really don't think that we need to worry too much about forged dates on things kicking around down at the bottom of the market. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 138
|
![]() Quote:
Just a bit of reflection regarding these keris forgers (please let me know if my logic is flawed). In my opinion, these keris forgers must be: 1. Very talented keris makers 2. Do not started their career as forgers However their original works must be rejected/dismissed by the collectors, therefore they turned to forgery. Is it because collectors tend to buy the stories or the “brands” (famous keris makers) than the keris itself? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,855
|
![]()
Sorry YS, I cannot answer those questions.
I do not know the makers of the type of thing that I'm talking about, anything I said would be guesswork only. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|