Quote:
|
Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey
I agree with you David, it is not about those sea-horse things, but it is about keris, and I doubt that Alexish is sufficiently advanced in keris knowledge to discern the fine variations in varying forms of keris. To an uneducated eye there is sufficient similarity in the ornamentation of the sorsoran in Gustav's sea-horse and Alexish's kemardikan to consider both are of a type.
|
You are most probably correct about Alexish not recognizing the difference between these two forms of keris. Hopefully by bringing the matter up he might now knows better.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey
As for ricikan in Alexish's keris being non-Javanese, well, the rules changed when the Jakarta Boys decided that we now had a legitimate name for current era keris. The new tangguh was Kemardikan. These days just about anything goes, it is art in the form of a keris, and Alexish's keris is pure kemardikan, it makes no pretense to be anything else, thus it does not need to conform to tangguh parameters set down in earlier times.
|
I would tend to disagree. Though this blade clearly mixes aspects of styles of blade making i believe there is a pretense towards the Malay peninsula here in the intricate open carvings on the blade as well as the faux batu lapak at the base of the blade, which, though seen on Jawa blades is much more common on Malay keris AFAIK.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey
But if you reckon its too far off-topic to be here, why not open a new thread for it and shift it?
|
Frankly Alan you should feel free to discuss this blade right here if it pleases you. I don't think it worth the trouble to move to its own thread, but if Alexish would like more discussion on it he is certainly free to do so.
