View Single Post
Old 2nd December 2012, 08:46 PM   #14
A. G. Maisey
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,704
Default

Yes, it does appear to be narrower, and you could well be correct about the hypothetical pudak setegal, but don't forget we are looking at a photo, and a pretty poor photo at that. A very small variation in camera angle can create quite a disparity in symmetry; I tend to ignore this sort of thing when I'm looking at a photo.

This could be error on my part, in that I always expect an inaccurate representation. However, even if we allow that there was a pudak there, that does not alter the pawakan, and that in my mind is a major factor. But a missing pudak would explain the feeling of looking at a cripple, and the conflict with aesthetics.

Although I do not feel that the kinatah pattern is "ending nowhere", as it does echo the pattern on the other side of the blade --- for as far as it goes --- you could well be correct about a missing pudak since extending the pattern to finish exactly as the other side does would equalise the pattern.

I'm not convinced Gustav, but this is simply because we're working from photos. If we had the thing in our hands and could see the surface, the edges, and feel the balance, I might agree with you completely. I just cannot get enough information from this photo to allow me to agree with you based upon what I can see.

Your ideas would explain a lot, but the one major thing that they do not explaion is the pawakan. Where can we place a pawakan like this? And bear this in mind:- if there was a pudak there as you suggest, the pawakan would be even more ludicrous.

However, putting all that to one side, you do have very acute powers of observation and you have drawn our attention to some elements in this weapon that are certainly worthy of consideration.

Edit:- I have questioned the pawakan a lot, but there is a Peninsula style of keris that does place the point at an extreme offset such as this keris has; the type of keris I have in mind is a blade without luk, but with a very pronounced curve. If we combine this blade offset with the flat blade faces that are a feature of Bugis style blades, maybe we are indeed looking at a Peninsula blade, which would make the "Malay" attribution more attributable to actual Malaya, rather than as a generic as I initially proposed. But then we still have that Jawa style gonjo and sorsoran.
Based on what can be seen, I don't think it is possible to go any further with this thing, we would really need to handle it.

Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 2nd December 2012 at 08:59 PM. Reason: clarification.
A. G. Maisey is offline   Reply With Quote