Bronze keris ?

[satsujinken]

in line with pusaka's post here's a bronze keris offered to me by local seller here in Indonesia

Dhapur sinom, with quite nice crisp lines, making me assume the blade is kamardikan era, but the owner said it was Mataram era, and quite old

he said this blade once has certificate from Museum Keris from Taman Mini Indonesia Indah, but now lost

for now I did not have the budget to buy it, so I posted it here for discussion

any opinion is welcome. Enjoy

thanks

Donny

[satsujinken]

label reads :

straight keris : bronze
dhapur : sinom
tangguh : mataraman
Rongko : ladrang solo
wood : sono keling
pendhak : slorok kuningan sari
length : 36 cm, peksi 7.5 cm

Donny

[David]

So Donny, it the seller's story more potent than your own senses and suspicions?

[mariusgmioc]

I don't get it?!

What's such a big deal to make a blade of bronze?!

I guess one can make a Keris blade even of aluminium, solid gold, or even plastic but does this automatically make it an authentic and collectable keris?!

Albeit I wouldn't mind collecting kerises made of solid gold.

[Jean]

Interesting blade, it does not look very recent from the pics, you can see the cleaning product deposits left in the cavities. The style is rather PB than Mataram? Twenty years ago the TMII Museum Pusaka used to sell some quite good and certified krisses.
Regards

[David]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

I don't get it?!

What's such a big deal to make a blade of bronze?!

I guess one can make a Keris blade even of aluminium, solid gold, or even plastic but does this automatically make it an authentic and collectable keris?!

Albeit I wouldn't mind collecting kerises made of solid gold.

Actual Marius, old bronze keris are a real thing and may in some ways be more valuable to a collector of keris than one made of solid gold.
The real question here would be is this a legitimate old bronze keris. I have some serious doubts.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by David

Actual Marius, old bronze keris are a real thing and may in some ways be more valuable to a collector of keris than one made of solid gold.
The real question here would be is this a legitimate old bronze keris. I have some serious doubts.

Thank you David for the explanation!

I would still prefer a gold Keris to a bronze one.

[mariusgmioc]

Regarding the age of the Keris, my bet is on very recent production by casting.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes.

[Battara]

My question is would the bronze make this more powerful or talismanic than the usual kris?

[A. G. Maisey]

Not really, the smith working in iron is a magician, a wizard, who can take sand and turn it into something else, something with a soul. He is closely associated with the concept of death and rebirth. In a farming society in particular he is almost on a direct line to the Gods.

However, bronze keris are rare and an old bronze keris was very probably used in blood sacrifice.

New or recent bronze keris are made by re-cycling damaged gamelan instruments.

[David]

Originally Posted by Battara

My question is would the bronze make this more powerful or talismanic than the usual kris?

I believe that would all depend on the intent and purpose of the keris. I belief that Alan has suggested that bronze may have been used in certain keris because it was seen as a more appropriate metal for a blade used in blood sacrifice. However that is a more practical, albeit spiritual use for a blade, not necessarily talismanic. I could be wrong, but i am not sure there is any metal considered to hold more talismanic properties in this part of the world than iron. But if you are Hindu and making a blood sacrifice bronze might be preferable.
Marius, the only reason i might personally prefer a solid gold keris would be to melt it down and sell the ingot to buy an authentic old bronze one, which i gather are somewhat rarer than ones of gold. AFAIK no other metals are considered appropriate for a true keris other than iron and bronze. A gold one would be nothing more than sculpted money, yes? Does anyone have any photos of a bronze blade that could be considered authentic? If so it would be great to see one here.

[A. G. Maisey]

This was published in my "Interpretation ---" article.

I do not own it.

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by David

So Donny, it the seller's story more potent than your own senses and suspicions?

nah, I always buy the blade, not the story
but I do have my limitations when it comes to knowledge and experience. That's why I come here


Donny

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes.

so my guess is right ? kamardikan ?

I believed the previous owner used metal cleaners to clean the blade, but hey, the metal do looked like metal used in gamelan

Would you mind explaining more about bronze keris and blood sacrifice, Alan ?

thank you in advance


Donny

[David]

Thanks for posting that example Alan.

[A. G. Maisey]

I've forgotten most of this Donny, but in some Hindu sacrifices the preferred blade needed to be bronze, in my memory the Horse Sacrifice required a bronze blade to be used, but don't trust my memory, it is sometimes faulty.

In Jawa it seems likely that blood sacrifice occurred at Candi Prambanan, and blood sacrifice is a part of Hindu ritual --- and of course Islamic ritual.

You won't find this sort of thing reading up about keris, to understand the keris you do not read books about keris, you need to read extensively in anthropology, history, sociology, comparative religion, art.

You do not study keris to learn keris.

[Battara]

Thank you Alan.

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I've forgotten most of this Donny, but in some Hindu sacrifices the preferred blade needed to be bronze, in my memory the Horse Sacrifice required a bronze blade to be used, but don't trust my memory, it is sometimes faulty.

In Jawa it seems likely that blood sacrifice occurred at Candi Prambanan, and blood sacrifice is a part of Hindu ritual --- and of course Islamic ritual.

You won't find this sort of thing reading up about keris, to understand the keris you do not read books about keris, you need to read extensively in anthropology, history, sociology, comparative religion, art.

You do not study keris to learn keris.

no wonder I never heard of it before. And that's exactly why I come here ... to ask for advice from you

Donny

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This was published in my "Interpretation ---" article.

I do not own it.

got an offer for something like that, recently found buried in rice field near a river in Bojonegoro

this type as you are well aware is (supposedly) from Kabudhan or Majapahit era. They said old keris like this has mendak intergrated as part of the blade, and the pesi is square shaped

looked like bronze, but it rusted ... does bronze rust ? what do you think, Alan ?

Donny

[Jean]

Bronze does not rust since it does not contain any iron but it gets oxidized (blue or black spots). For how long was this kris buried in a rice field?

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by satsujinken

got an offer for something like that, recently found buried in rice field near a river in Bojonegoro

this type as you are well aware is (supposedly) from Kabudhan or Majapahit era. They said old keris like this has mendak intergrated as part of the blade, and the pesi is square shaped

looked like bronze, but it rusted ... does bronze rust ? what do you think, Alan ?

Donny

Nope, bronze does not rust but it oxidizes and gets corroded.

However, this piece does NOT display any typical signs of an antique bronze blade but it appears to be recently made and artificially aged.

The asertion that it was found burried in a rice field my be genuine since I supposed that's part of the artificial aging process.

Regards,

Marius

PS: I have handled a few genuine antique bronze pieces but I believe that for every single genuine bronze piece on the market there are 1000 fakes. The Chinese have become particularly proficient at faking antique Warring States period and Luristan swords. However this example in my oppinion is very far from the "quality" of Chinese fakes that are getting close to perfection these days.

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by Jean

Bronze does not rust since it does not contain any iron but it gets oxidized (blue or black spots). For how long was this kris buried in a rice field?

I honestly don't know, the current owner said he bought it from a farmer in Bojonegoro, who found the blade when digging for irrigation ditch

have to check first whether Bojonegoro has civilisation during Majapahit era


Donny

[satsujinken]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Nope, bronze does not rust but it oxidizes and gets corroded.

However, this piece does NOT display any typical signs of an antique bronze blade but it appears to be recently made and artificially aged.

The asertion that it was found burried in a rice field my be genuine since I supposed that's part of the artificial aging process.

Regards,

Marius

PS: I have handled a few genuine antique bronze pieces but I believe that for every single genuine bronze piece on the market there are 1000 fakes. The Chinese have become particularly proficient at faking antique Warring States period and Luristan swords. However this example in my oppinion is very far from the "quality" of Chinese fakes that are getting close to perfection these days.

you may be right, what I see is actually if the item was buried for 700 years or so, and it was made from iron, the corrosion rate should be higher and evenly spread

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by satsujinken

you may be right, what I see is actually if the item was buried for 700 years or so, and it was made from iron, the corrosion rate should be higher and evenly spread

Exactly! But this is only one of the points.


You can easily check if it is iron or not with a magnet, like for the "wooden" keris.

[Pusaka]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I've forgotten most of this Donny, but in some Hindu sacrifices the preferred blade needed to be bronze, in my memory the Horse Sacrifice required a bronze blade to be used, but don't trust my memory, it is sometimes faulty.

In Jawa it seems likely that blood sacrifice occurred at Candi Prambanan, and blood sacrifice is a part of Hindu ritual --- and of course Islamic ritual.

You won't find this sort of thing reading up about keris, to understand the keris you do not read books about keris, you need to read extensively in anthropology, history, sociology, comparative religion, art.

You do not study keris to learn keris.

At the time the Vedas were wrote (and thus the horse sacrifices) I think they only had copper and bronze blades so there was no possibility of using an Iron or steel blade. Some Indians claim however Ayas is Iron and use this to claim that Indians were the first to forge Iron blades (despite the fact Aryans came into India from the North thus even if it were true Aryans were not Indians)

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for your comment Pusaka.

Just to set the record straight:-

Yes, the Aryan people did enter the Indian Sub-Continent from the North, by about 1500BC they had entered the Sub-Continent and had made contact with the Indus Valley civilisation, which was at the time of contact a bronze age culture. Historians refer to the era that the Aryan Peoples began as the Vedic Age, its duration was approximately 1200BC to 400BC, after which the Hindu belief system supplanted the observance of purely vedic ritual, which is known as shrauta, or belonging to the Vedas.

However, the Iron Age was well and truly under way in the Indian Sub-Continent by 1200BC, and some scholars date the beginning or iron smelting in India to as early as 1700BC. One thing is true:- by 1300BC the working of iron in India was sufficiently advanced to permit the manufacture of large artifacts. In Uttar Pradesh the beginnings of iron technology seems to date from about 1800BC.

The entry of the Aryan people into the Sub-Continent marks the beginning of the Vedic Age in Indian history. It is known as the Vedic age because it was during this period that the Vedas were written. It is generally agreed that there are four Vedas:- Rigveda, Samaveda, Yujurveda, Atharvaveda, and each of these Vedas is further classified into four parts, one of which is the Samhitas, which were originally written before 1100BC, and possibly as early as 1700BC. The Samhitas were the earliest part of the Vedas, and were probably began before entry to the Sub-Continent, however, before 500BC the Samhitas were revised, probably to harmonise their inclusion into the full body of the Vedas. The Samhitas deal with mantras and blessings.

All the other Vedas were written during the Vedic Period in India. Originally they were seen as compilations of knowledge to used be for guidance, rather than purely religious texts. They were written in Vedic Sanscrit.

The record is very clear:- the Aryan People did not bring the Vedas with them into the Indian Sub-Continent, the Vedas were written in the Indian Sub-Continent.

Nor did the Aryan People initiate the iron technology of India, the role of the Aryan People, or more correctly, the Vedic People, was to develop and spread material culture into the Sub-Continent. The people who were indigenous to the Indian Sub-Continent initiated iron technology long before the Vedic Age began, but the Vedic People helped to develop and spread this technology.

The correct name of the Horse Sacrifice is Ashvamedha.

In ancient India kings used this ritual to prove their right to rule, very briefly it involved allowing a horse to roam free for a year, and all the land that it walked upon became the domain of the king. After the year was over, the horse was sacrificed.

However, this sacrifice of a horse was not limited to kings proving their right to rule. Horse sacrifice also had a place in some burial rites and in the entry of a person from another social division into the warrior division of society. Mobility between social divisions was possible in early times. If a member of the warrior division was raised in rank, and a ritual was deemed to be appropriate, horse sacrifice was also used.

By the time that Shrauta rituals, including the Horse Sacrifice, were common practice in India, iron technology was already well established, thus there was a choice of bronze or of iron, as the material for the implement to be used in the carrying out of the sacrifice.

Were the Indian people the first to use iron?

In classical history terms, the Hittites were credited with initiating iron technology, and that usage dates from about 1500BC.

Discoveries in recent years seem to date the beginning of iron technology in India to at least a similar date and very possibly much earlier. At Lahuradewa in Uttar Pradesh iron artifacts dating from the period 1800BC to 1100BC have been found. There is general agreement in academic circles that the Indian Iron Age began in the 13th century BC, by which time there was a lot of iron smelting going on in India.

However, both the Hittite and the Indian use of iron do not come anywhere near the use of iron in ancient Mesopotamia, where the evidence suggests usage that dates back to around 3000BC. Then we have a tomb discovery of an iron dagger blade in Anatolia (ancient Turkey) that dates from around 2500BC.

[mariusgmioc]

Very interesting! Thank you Alan for this concise introduction to history!

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Marius, I've always found this sort of stuff interesting, and the metal working skills that were developed on the Indian Sub-Continent are truly amazing.

It has been said that the peoples of the Sub-Continent are the Masters of Metal.

In fact, it is entirely possible that there would be no pamor construction in Javanese weaponry, but for the influx of Indian metal workers, especially smiths, to the North Coast of Jawa.

However, here we talk about keris, and that means Maritime South East Asia, and the interesting thing in this area is that there was no distinct bronze age nor a distinct beginning to the use of iron. Both technologies appear to have begun and developed at the same time.

[Pusaka]

A. G. Maisey

One problem is why shouldn't Iron be mentioned in the Vedas when everything else is. If at the time the Vedas were composed they knew about it they would have wrote about it. The term Ayas is often translated Iron however many scholars do not believe Ayas is Iron.

According to the mythology long before the Aryans entered India an Asura King called maya had escaped the destruction of tripura. He was a master astronomer, metallurgist, architect, herbalist, linguist and siddha. He is known to have wrote many texts among them the prenarva veda, the first veda.

So in India first we have an assuric civilisation followed by an aryan civilisation. The aryans however appear to be later relatives of the asuras.

The homeland of the Aryans in vedic text is called Arya Varta, Airyana Vaeja in Zoroastrian text. Maya the Asuran king was born in Romakapura. Both the asuran homeland and the later aryan homeland are noted as being in the same geographic area, both being at the immediate base of the Sumeru therefore they are as peoples related.