I've spent a lot of time looking at the pics of this keris.
I will preface my remarks by putting it right up front that I am no expert on tajong style keris. Yes, I own a few, some old, some more recent, but I am certainly no expert.
However, if I look carefully at this keris, what I can see is this:-
the blade shows grain, and a surface that does not appear to be artificially aged; the ada-ada is the same style as a tajong, the other ricikan look as if they have been done from memory, without a clear guide; the waves are inconsistent. I feel that this blade was made by a smith, rather than by a pandai keris. In other words, to me it looks like the product of a fairly unskilled person,possibly working in a rural area, working to the limit of his ability.
the handle shows uneven patina and open grain, and probably some wear; I do not think that this handle is anywhere near recent---always depending on what we mean by "recent".
the scabbard is worn and heavily patinated; from what I can see in the photos, it has age.
the pendongkok is well crafted, and a nice thing.
My assessment of this keris is that it does have some age, but that it is a not a high quality production, and is non-typical.
As such, and bearing in mind the problems of buying from photos, I don't really think that the price paid is too extreme yes, certainly I would not have gambled on it, principally because it obviously lacks quality, and I do not buy for rareity, but for quality.
But I don't think I can go along with the general feeling of condemnation of this keris.
|