It seems that we almost agree on something
Regarding the “quality” of the old blades, it all depends on what you’re looking for. But as far as I know there is no rational way to measure the “quality” of an old blade.
Lot depends indeed how a keris was kept, how it survived the tests of aging or maybe even the quality of the metals used .(although mpu’s centuries ago simply didn’t have “good” metals (fine grains) and needed to work in very primitive conditions).
But probably more important, how would the spiritual and creative part of an Mpu be measured? No doubt that there have been master (keraton) MpuMpu who’s work is appreciated still by many..But how about the work from their students, followers or good amateurs from a village nearby?
To clarify (and for the clarity of not getting banned) I will use a simple analogue with paintings; Conditions of old oil paintings do effect their value, but they hardly do when the creator was considered a master. On the other side there is however masterpainter (Jeroem Bosch for example) who created art in a very primitive way. If we would place such an artist in the wrong timeframe (lets say he would have lived in the 19th C), his works would have been near worthless. Same probably counts for Da Vinci and others.
On top of this, there has been tons of good painters that never were considered “masters”, or worse….How about the nice old paintings without a sign!
To conclude, the keris isn’t a “Da Vinci”, but as an old ethnological creation it is an interesting object. Regarding the “painter”, I think its clearly made by someone who was skilled enough to create a keris that would maintain its proportions (and strength btw) after hundreds of years. Maybe not a “master”, but who knows…Clearly he (or she) left the work unsigned. And yes this keris could use a bath
I’m off now, finding some of those plenty cheap old blades again and visit the mranggi for some new dresses.
Cu