Thread: Comment?
View Single Post
Old 30th November 2018, 12:40 PM   #18
A. G. Maisey
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,701
Default

You are correct Gustav, the blumbangan of the current era nginden keris does not appear to be textbook Surakarta, however the only keris that do stay more or less strictly within the parameters of tangguh indicators are those that have been made by a karaton empu for use within a karaton, with all other keris there can be greater or lesser degrees of deviation from the guidelines that provide our indicators. When this deviation is present it becomes a matter of forming an opinion based upon the weight of evidence. "Tangguh" means "opinion".

There is another thing that also needs to be understood in assessing the form of a blumbangan, it is sometimes not really possible to assess form from a photograph, the internal barrier of the blumbangan can vary, depending upon how the palemahan and the bungkul have been carved, so a blumbangan that appears to be one form in a photo, can be different in the hand.

In the case of the keris under discussion the weight of evidence points firmly at Surakarta. Bear in mind, this is a current era keris. In other words it was made by somebody who is still living or has only recently passed away. We know where keris of this type were produced. We know the people who were capable of producing a keris like this. In the applicable period, those who were capable of producing this keris lived in Surakarta. Nowhere else. Just Solo.

Then we have the ron dha. In a young keris this form of ron dha is uniquely Surakarta. Couple the ron dha with the pawakan and you have an inarguable attribution of Surakarta, even without any other indicators being in compliance.

The agreed characteristic of a Madura kembang kacang is that it is whispy, one of the characteristics of a Surakarta kembang kacang is that it is substantial and heavy through its base. The KK on this keris is not at all typical of a Madura KK.

In respect of the work of Jayasukadgo. He was renowned for being able to do anything with pamor, however, he did not only produce keris that bore pamor, for those who could not afford his highest quality work he produced keris with no pamor, and with deviant features.

For the last 40 years I have been the custodian of one of these Jayasukadgo keris that has no pamor and possesses deviant characteristics. I do not own this keris, it is a pusaka keris, the previous family custodians are known, the maker is known. I have been entrusted with the care of this keris until the person who should have it is ready to accept it. Regrettably, although this person is already 50 years old he is still not ready to accept responsibility for his family's keris.

This keris is very definitely a Jayasukadgo, the family knows who made it, it has been recognised as Jayasukadgo by Javanese people who are sufficiently well educated to reliably recognise his work. But although it is a Jayasukadgo, and although it is recognisably Surakarta, it has some characteristics that are not typically Surakarta.

We really do need a very great depth of hands on experience to be able to apply the indicators that we use in classifying a keris.

Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 30th November 2018 at 12:51 PM.
A. G. Maisey is offline   Reply With Quote