Yes, that was the way I read your post, but if you say that your intention was not to debate the matter, fair enough, my comment is withdrawn.
However, my position is still the same, in simple terms:-
1)-- the form of this hilt is Central Javanese.
2)-- this form has been associated with Central Jawa since at least the mid- 1700's ( see Jensen)
3)-- it is the Central Javanese form that follows Surakarta form
4)-- it may have been made anywhere
5)-- the line engraving, ( or perhaps the correct term may be incising, as the technique used does not involve cutting, and equally does not involve the embossing process, but rather is carried out by inscribing a line into the surface of the metal with a blunt tool that is pressed and drawn), is similar to that used on old Banyumas pendok; I have not seen this technique used on metal work associated with Surakarta, nor have I seen it on work that can be clearly identified as coming from other areas, but I have seen a few examples on old Jogja pendoks.
6)-- I am not putting forward an opinion on where this hilt may have been made, nor am I putting forward an opinion where it may have been worn, nor am I providing a hypothesis on the conditions under which it may have been worn. I have made a number of comments that are based upon my personal experience, and the opinion given relates to the similarity of workmanship in this hilt with the workmanship to be found in old Banyumas pendok, it also relates to the form of the hilt.
Do not interpret these very limited opinions to construe more than they are intended to construe.
|