dear Alan,
You are right when you said that I wished that we can base our reference on keris to that of Majapahit, but if that is not possible (due to lack of enough information), I would be glad enough to accept Mataram II as the point of reference. Moreover, during Mataram II era, keris had evolved from its primitive design (Budo, sajen etc) into more refined profile as we see it today. What I meant by "keris tradition" was everything about the keris, from the way it was forged, dapor, pamor, how it was worn, who should wear it, maintenance and other related issues including mbesut. I know that both schools would boast that they are the ones following the correct old tradition, but my question is, between these two schools, which one actually observes the old tradition. Similarly, I can post a relative question: would it be acceptable by Mataram II standard that rusty keris be "besuted"?
Mas Raden, I understand what you were trying to tell us about the blood line. It was not me who said that Mas Karebet was just a peasant (I could be biased too if you take into account my nick name here
), but my late grandfather who could trace his linage to the descendants of the 2nd wave immigrants, and my grandmother was from the 3rd wave immigrants. I can understand my grandfather's resentment towards Joko Tingkir appointment as the new Sultan. His great/great grandfather was fighting the foreign power's occupation of Nusantara land, while during / after Demak era, the king/s were busy fighting among themselves. Yes, he was biased, but I am not.