Has anybody considered the possibility that this gonjo is a replacement?
Have a look at the front of the gonjo, above the gandhik. This is clumsy work that lacks flow, it is inconceivable that this was carved by the same person who created the ricikan in the rest of the blade. Then there is the amateurish work in the greneng where it exists on the gonjo.
The blade point has been re-cut to buntut tumo.
Gustav, I'm not so sure that the kembang kacang has been re-shaped. Certainly it may have been, when we consider the other alteration work that has very probably been done, but if it has been re-carved, the original KK must have been very large, and if you add in the necessary transitional flows, a normal KK on this blade would have been much out of proportion.
On the other hand, the variation in surface textures of the KK and the blade surface alongside it do seem to indicate that there has been some fiddling going on in this area. I think that for me, this falls into the area where I would need to handle the blade before I declared myself one way or the other.
|