Javanese keris for comment

[Tatyana Dianova]

I bought this keris on Kassel Arms Show last November and try now to find out everything I can about it. The only obvious thing seems to be its origin (Java) and general type of Pamor (Miring). I would like to know more details about its blade and fittings, and also, maybe, its age. To me it looks quite old because the blade surface is very uneven and in reality looks like covered with thick hairs (the pictures do not show it very well). Thanks in advance.

[ronpakis]

Congratulations,
You have bought yourself a very nice central javanese keris, Surakarta region i think. The pamor is also called rongenduru and to some dutch authors very high in ranking. it is absolutly very very good. The whole keris is complete, probably late 19th century. Some authors would rate this as a kratonkeris. This means that it is worn by royal or high ranking persons. Im curious how the blade fits its sheath?
The mendak is probably gilded. The pendok (metal oversheath) could be some kind of alloy, i cant tell what kind.

[Jan]

The exact origin of the fittings confuses me a bit - the sheath is a gayaman surakarta, but the handle looks Yogya style to me. Not really the most common combination. So at least one of these might have been changed once after production and first fittings.

[nechesh]

I would agree with Jan. The ukiran is definitely Yogyakarta while the wrongko is Surakarta. I would be interested in seeing a top shot to see how well the blade fits the sheath. The ukiran is a fine example, with pieced areas and well carved cecekan. Could be 19thC or early 20thC. Nice ricikan and well controlled pamor. I would stop short at saying this keris was worn by royalty (dressed a bit plain for that) or a high ranking kraton official without any provenance to that case, but all and all a very nice keris.

[rasdan]

Just to add, i think the pamor is blarak ngirid rather than ron genduru.

[nechesh]

That was my first impression as well Rasdan.

[BluErf]

Just to point what something potentially obvious -- this keris has a pretty well-done pudak setegal which adds to the 'sweetness' of the piece. Little things on the keris makes a huge difference in the overall aesthetics.

[ronpakis]

Originally Posted by rasdan

Just to add, i think the pamor is blarak ngirid rather than ron genduru.

After looking into the literature i agree with you about the pamor. Any ideas about the material of the pendok?

[nechesh]

Just to add to the confusion of origins, i might suggest that the wilah itself isn't Javanese at all, but perhaps Maduran. The pendok looks like mamas to me.
Sorry Kai Wee, but you lost me with the terminology. Is pudak setegal a peninsula term?

[empu kumis]

Hi Kerislovers,

it seems its necesary to made a comment because there is nothing to congratulate on this blade, even I´m contrary of all my fellow forumites and all yelling on me.

First I´m sure this is an new or let`s say not more then 5 years old blade of typical Maduran origin and not the work of an Empu but a Pande.
Important to say is: blades with a pamor miring without a slorok (steelcore) are always in danger of breaking. Especially if the iron used is a modern material and this is the case for blades like this. The reason is the smith starts with 11 layers of 1 to 2 mm thick iron plates and 10 layers of nickle plated rim stripes of a thickness of about 1 mm. In two welding the result is 20 layers of pamor. From one welded staff sometimes the make two keris blades. So you save time and material (charcoal is expensive) and labour expences. Its an economical calculation because ther are many Pandes in Madura and every Pande is under pressure of his colleagues.

Note:
1. the strong etching, typical for new Maduran blades
2. the very thin pamorlayers (made of rims with some microns of nickle on the surface)
3. the greneng looking weared off, but made for looking old
(here comes the question of faking again)
4. If you looking closer you still see the marks of chisels (in the tikel alis and pejetan)
5. the angle between the centerline (straight line from tip to tumpengan or bungkul, not the ada ada) and the ganja. To stiff (typical for Madura)
6. the direction of the handle or better of the pesi (typical for Madura)
7. the outer ridges of the sogokan and tikel alis are to sharp for an old blade.
8. the form of buntut is also strange.

All togther this has nothing and really nothing to do with any kraton (maby this blade has been closest to palace in the shops of the alun alun, there are things like this sold also in wellknown electronical auctions. This might be the only connection to any palace. With the aestethics of a kerisblade has this also nothing to do.
In my eyes this are is no pudak sategal but only lis-lisan because I see the lis-lisan continue from the connection of the blade and ganja further the normal for the pudak sategal. This are not weared off pudak sategal. There do exist special pudak sategal which has no thorn out of the sharpness but their name I have not present at the moment.
I think its useless to discuss the handle or sheet because the are objects of changes by the owner or dealer many times. They could be old which is not uncommon.

I`m sorry if I do not meet what you have expected but as an eyewitness who has studied on the spot may tell the truths even it hurts.

Empu kumis

[Rick]

Empu Kumis has brought this subject up .

I got the initial impression of 'new' about this blade myself , and have had it since I first saw the pictures .

I can't speak to the rest of the dress .

I believe the pendok may be white brass / German silver, I have a similar example , it is fairly heavy gauge material and tends toward yellow in color when left unpolished .

[nechesh]

I am inclined to follow Empu Kumis' lead here. Even though i was willing to concede to an earlier 20thC date as this type of keris has been made in Madura since at least then, i believe E.K.'s expertise in this matter is certainly far greater than mine. I thank you for your detailed explanation as to why you date this keris as you do. This is just the type of information that is often lacking in people's assessments and is crucial to our understanding and learning of this very complex subject.
All other terms are clear to me, but i am still not quite clear on pudak sategal.
BTW, i understand E.K. holds keris to a very high standard. I still think this is a nice keris, it is just not a kraton piece.

[Rick]

Agreed !
Very well executed work .

[DAHenkel]

Thank you Empu Kumis for once again teaching us all on the subject of Javanese blades.

Just to add - the garap of this piece is only average in my opinion and while the pamor is above average for a tangguh Madura Muda piece it is not exceptional. The quality of newly produced kerises has improved over the last 2 decades but it is still not as good as it had been.

You will also notice that the keris is incorrectly dressed. The wrangka is gayaman Surakarta while the hilt is Yogyakarta.

No offense to the owner intended. Its not a bad keris per-se, but its not a great one either.

[Ria]

Hi all,
Hi Dave,

What about this one? Newly made made from Madura. Overall the pamor looks good to me.

Ria,

[DAHenkel]

Ria's keris is a better quality piece than the previous one but is still not a first rate piece.

If you want to know a bit more about why, I suggest you go back and read through the two magnum opus threads "What Constitutes a Good Keris."

[Tatyana Dianova]

Thank you all very much for your input! I am glad that this subject have provoked such an interesting discussion. Now I would like to clear some points mentioned after I have looked closer on the Keris:
1. The mendak really looks like it was covered with some kind of let's say old and weared off gold, if you judge from the look, but not much of it left and it doesn't look bright.
2. The sheath probably belonged to the other blade before, because it was fitted with the pieces of wood in the corners, but this wood looks also quite old.
3. The etching is not as strong as it looks on most pictures - I have enhanced them all digitally. In reality it looks like the right picture in the first row, but even more subdued and not blueish but brownish. For the example of the picture directly from the camera look below.
4. There seems to be a steelcore, at least it is visible at some places on the cuttting edge of the blade (you can also see it on the pictures).
5. I was not able to see any chiesel marks anywhere on the blade, also no such marks on the tikel alis and pejetan. The surface there is exactly the same as anywhere else: each nickel layer is much higher then iron layer between them and also sharp, the surface looks like a very coarse and deep file and is a hell to care for. I would like to say that it is not possible to have unseen chiesel marks on such kind of surface. The so called steelcore is also looks pitted and quite old.
6. The outer ridges of the sogokan and tikel alis are also not so sharp as they look on the pictures.
Hope it clears something. Anyway, the keris can still be a new one that was very skillfully made looking old. It was NOT sold to me by dealer as an old, precious, expensive, kraton keris; it is just a keris whose looks I liked and then wanted to know more about it.
I live also in Germany (Chemnitz) and can show the keris in person.

[BluErf]

Thanks to Empu Kumis for the pointers.

Well, maybe we should give the Madura smiths a little break. At least they are working on improving their keris-making craft... short-cuts or not. And while I hope that would not be the way it goes, but these Madurese smiths may be one of the few last 'bastion' of keris-making. Hopefully out of the chafe, a few of these smiths will rise to be nearly as good as the smiths and empus of old. But 1st they must visit more museums and read more books with pictures of good old kerises...

[ronpakis]

Well, id know it wasn't to old (late 19th) but newly made?? They are getting really good out there. I must say i find it more easy to see that ria's keris is newly made than the other one. Too bad, old blades with this kind of pamor are not easy to find and are not made for the average man. thanks e.k.

[Battara]

On the dress, I would agree with Rick and even suggest that it may be simple brass with less copper in it. Polished brass looks lighter in color than one would think. Nice assessment Rick. Thank you Empu for your observations.

[capt.smash]

I realy like both these blades ....i feel that age isnt that importabt as long as the quality and character are there.

[BluErf]

There are many ways to make a blade look older, one common way is to leave the blade in acid for long periods of time. Sometimes, the blade is buried for a while. All of these artificial aging process has one common consequence -- the corrosion on the blade is too even.

Wear and tear on a keris blade that has taken place naturally is a 'random' affair, meaning that the rust takes hold on a few spots only. When cleaned off, it leaves a corroded spot while the other spots are not so corroded. Over long periods of time, this 'uneven' corrosion becomes more and more evident. Plus, natural corrosion of the blade by rust is also accompanied by constant rubbing of blade against sheath when it is put in and taken out of the sheath, so the blade surface while corroded, is smoothened out and has a 'not so sharp' surface. Artificially aged kerises, especially those with pamor miring, has a 'sharp' surface. Looking at the blade above, it is easy to see the superb evenness of the corrosion.

As for the blade having no slorok, you can see in spots of the blade where there is a gap between the pamor lines, but there appears to be no metal underneath. This is not the 1st time I've seen such a kind of blade with no slorok. The other example I've seen actually seemed to be of Riau or Peninsula origins as the pamor is of the non-contrasting form, and the dapur is also quite un-Javanese or Madurese. But then again, these kerises are meant to be 'lookers' and its not surprising that the modern day smiths take shortcuts to produce better-looking pieces faster.

At the end of the day, its what we are looking for as a collector that determines whether we should buy a keris or not, but we should buy it with our eyes open.


And as to the question of good kerises, it is recommended to read the "What makes a good keris" thread, but it is also true that 'good' is a relative term. When the market is flooded with poorly-made new pieces, the slightly better average pieces would look much better in comparison. While there are good old examples in museums (sometimes museums display questionable and not so good kerises too) and books for reference, they are usually forgotten because we don't see them every day, and there is a sense that those are kerises of a different level and not for the common collector. And so the 'good' applied to the kerises (including all the thousands of Madura Muda pieces) floating in the present world is of a different standard.


Anyway, enough of my ramblings, but just to show why I have faith in these Madurese smiths -- here's my example of a Madura Muda keris with pamor blarak ngirid, made properly with a slorok, and not artificially aged. Think many of you have seen this before.

[BluErf]

Btw, is this keris considered to have a pudak setegal? I know I have seen pudak setegal that sticks out of the profile, but what is the defining feature of a pudak setegal vs a lis-lisan? Thanks.

(Picture taken from previous thread)

[capt.smash]

Wow that madura muda is fantastic ,realy beautiful

[nechesh]

OK, now that i understand the term pudak setegal (thanks Adni, i found it on your site after asking twice here to no avail and failing to find it in a few books and other web sites ) i will give the subject a shot. I think many diagrams on the parts of the keris don't include this feature because it is fairly rare. I don't see this feature in either Tatyana's keris or the last keris you posted Kai Wee. I believe that sticking out from the profile IS the defining factor here. If it don't, it ain't. Though rarely found on keris, i guess it would be on my ultimate ricikan tricked-out uber-keris.
I agree with Blu that Maduran keris making, with a few other spots, is keeping modern keris making alive. But these keris, for the most part, are not being made to fool collecters into believing they are old. Unscrupulous dealers may do that, but high quality modern keris are being turned out for those who collect such art pieces. Many of these keris are "artificially aged" not to fool anyone, but because this is the style of surface finish these collectors are looking for. So even blade wear is not really a cosequence at all, unless you intend to try to pass the keris off as an old one. As for quality, i am not surprised that some short-cuts are being made. Still, in terms of pamor control i think some (some) of these modern smiths show a higher degree of technical skill than many of the empus of the past. Remember also that these keris are not intended for combat, but as works of art, so blade strenght is not necessarily an issue here.
Sad or not, the art of keris making is an evolving thing. The days of the keris as a true culture icon is wanning. It is now, for the most part, a cultural artifact. It is becoming less and less a part of the society even on the ceremonial level. It is not worn in public anymore and only occasionally in ritual such as weddings. Families sell off their pusaka to make ends meet. The western world creeps in more and more every day. We will not see a return to the old glory days when empus fasted and recited and brought spirit into iron and pamor. A very, very few still know how. I think our best hope for the modern keris is that the artform survives and continues to technically improve and create things of beauty.

[Adni Aljunied]

Just to share as a comparison, a recently made keris by Empu Jeno Harumbrodjo.

[nechesh]

That is sweet! Empu Djeno is one on the last true empus left. I don't know enough to know if he has been training his sons or anyone. He is getting on and years and won't be with us forever. Let us hope he passes his skill and knowledge on.

[BluErf]

Ok, since we are talking about Madura Muda pieces, here's one more. They have their attractions, but the main problem with them is that they do not conform totally to traditions. Its like a hotch-potch keris pulling together bits and pieces from various origins and putting it together. Its like a stitched-together chimera. I suppose that puts off collectors with a more traditionalist preference. This piece for example, has a dapur with Solo origins (I believe), a Madurese gayaman sheath which was not originally made for it, but refitted well enough. The mendak is not Madurese in style, for sure. The ukiran is Madurese, and with some age, but this style is most commonly found on Madurese or E Javanese ladrang sheaths. There you have it -- the cons, but then, take a step back and look at the keris for what it is.

I think the present-day Madura smiths had been concentrating on pamor in the past. Only recently have they put in more efforts into the dapur. But still, their kerises have the 'stiff' look. Also, because time and money features heavily in their production, 'shortcuts' are taken, and they show, like pamor lines that can go broken half-way through the blade. With a traditionally-made keris, I believe this would not happen. And because time spent is limited, the smith does not have time to comtemplate the really minute details and lines that makes the keris truly graceful. But I think they are slowly picking it up. Who knows, maybe they are reading this forum right now and taking down all that we are saying.

[tom hyle]

There's still too much English in the posts; they can't understand them yet.....

[empu kumis]

Hi Kerislovers,

yeah, the pictures becomming better and better. Thanks to Ria and Blue i like to see that, here you still can differentiate between the iron and pamorlayers. Both pamor are well executed and the surface is not etched to much. Only about 18 layers. with nice contrast and no pamorfree patches. Its a pamor of the order nginden and the name of this pamor PB X. The lower part just above the sor-soran seems to me to small and the greneng are not nice. But anyway if somebody collecting new Kerisses on this standard i`m happy. Please go on. The garapan is also much better but there is still a lot to improve.

Blues keris is nice but also not perfect ( to my experience i always say under 10,000 blades, there is one good blade and i can just sorry for my high standards) i always say there is blade with sheet seems to me very high and the tlamaan (aereal of connection between ganja and blade) is bend in the wrong direction. The outer lis of the tikel alis should not meet with the tampingan and the janur should be more bended. The lambe gajah ahd the jalen is nice too but the buntut and greneng to wide. The sogokan could bee better. The bangkekan is ok but the waduk of the blade is to close to the point. The wrangka seems nice but i would prefer a pendok. The wrangka seems to be new but nice and the handle ? old ?.

The Madurese pande`s has a long break of almost 20 years and its really time their quality improves.

Several month or weeks ago there has been a Megantaro close to this style.

But i`m not sure who made them. Somebody remember ?
Has somebody seen the work of Sukoyo from Surabaya ?

For some time i haven`t been in Madura but i see it will be important to go there again. My next voyage will be soon (hopefully !) and i will have stopover in Singapore wether incoming or on the way back Europe. So i hope to see you in Singapore. For sure I wiil give you a notice by email.

Probably the blade attributed to Ki Jeno is not made by himself but from his pupils. Ki Jeno has already given over to his adopted son. But its not a masterpiece because of the proportions of the blades lenght and ganja. To me the gandik is to short and the buntut to long. But most disturbing are the pamorfree pachtes on the sor-soran and on the wilah. Overall i would say i can`t feel the personalty of this blade. He don`t speak to me.

About the pudak sategal normally sticking two thorns out of the sharpnes and to my knowledge if they look like yours (picture keris Malaysia) has the name pudak sategal bungkem, so far i remember. Lis-lisan is the frame between the landep and the kruwingan. Between you have the gusen. In your picture the pudak sategal and the lis-lisan are connected just where the sor-soran is ending.

Empu Kumis