Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Mans · 20th October 2006, 10:24 AM

Hello dear all,

Just want to give my humble opinion relating the Tangguh.
And I'm sorry not give opinion about the Bugis keris which posted first on this thread

About the Tangguh, we can read about the definition of it on many keris book. The knowledge of Tangguh for Jawanese keris learned well since Mataram Sultan Agung period (17th century).

To know the Tangguh of keris, we cannot used just style of blade and characteristics of ricikans form, moreover by the wrangka which used. The style of keris can be copied and the wrangka can be changed.

But we must know well about the kind of iron which used, application of pamor work and material of pamor which used, also the region and geography. That because every period and region used different iron and pamor material, also tecnique of pamor worked.

And we must know well about styles or forms of every ricikans like greneng, kembang kacang, pucuk, tikel alis, etc..

And to know about the deep meaning (phylosophy) of every keris (dapur and pamor), we must know well about the cultures and histories of every kingdoms were the keris was made.

So, to estimating the tangguh of keris, we must have many knowledge about all of the keris aspects like an mPu. Not just the style of the blade. And so that why to estimating the tangguh of the keris is very very difficult although estimating by the man who learned about the keris for many years, from many book, many keris, from every keris market or from someone who called mPu. They assumption about the Tangguh still can be wrong. Moreover, actually didn't know anything about the tangguh as the meaning of TANGGUH it self.

Tangguh NOT just estimated the keris by the stylistic classification system and region. That because any keris Mataram (17th century) which made similiar with Majapahit Keris styles (14th century) or another older keris style. In Jawanese term called as Keris Putran or Yasan. From what aspects we can distinguishing the Keris Putran or Yasan with the original keris from its era if we don't know about the kind of iron and pamor material also pamor worked ? Also any keris Sumateran which made on Majapahit or Mataram period.. etc...

So, I think we can begining to distinguishing the Sumateran, Bugis or Malay Keris not just by style, but also analysis by the iron and pamor worked and material which used in order to can estimating when the period of the keris made, also to know about from where and which period the keris had influenced.

Well, sorry if any mistake on my words

Regards,

Hidayat.

20th October 2006, 10:24 AM	#33
Mans Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: East Java Posts: 137	Hello dear all, Just want to give my humble opinion relating the Tangguh. And I'm sorry not give opinion about the Bugis keris which posted first on this thread About the Tangguh, we can read about the definition of it on many keris book. The knowledge of Tangguh for Jawanese keris learned well since Mataram Sultan Agung period (17th century). To know the Tangguh of keris, we cannot used just style of blade and characteristics of ricikans form, moreover by the wrangka which used. The style of keris can be copied and the wrangka can be changed. But we must know well about the kind of iron which used, application of pamor work and material of pamor which used, also the region and geography. That because every period and region used different iron and pamor material, also tecnique of pamor worked. And we must know well about styles or forms of every ricikans like greneng, kembang kacang, pucuk, tikel alis, etc.. And to know about the deep meaning (phylosophy) of every keris (dapur and pamor), we must know well about the cultures and histories of every kingdoms were the keris was made. So, to estimating the tangguh of keris, we must have many knowledge about all of the keris aspects like an mPu. Not just the style of the blade. And so that why to estimating the tangguh of the keris is very very difficult although estimating by the man who learned about the keris for many years, from many book, many keris, from every keris market or from someone who called mPu. They assumption about the Tangguh still can be wrong. Moreover, actually didn't know anything about the tangguh as the meaning of TANGGUH it self. Tangguh NOT just estimated the keris by the stylistic classification system and region. That because any keris Mataram (17th century) which made similiar with Majapahit Keris styles (14th century) or another older keris style. In Jawanese term called as Keris Putran or Yasan. From what aspects we can distinguishing the Keris Putran or Yasan with the original keris from its era if we don't know about the kind of iron and pamor material also pamor worked ? Also any keris Sumateran which made on Majapahit or Mataram period.. etc... So, I think we can begining to distinguishing the Sumateran, Bugis or Malay Keris not just by style, but also analysis by the iron and pamor worked and material which used in order to can estimating when the period of the keris made, also to know about from where and which period the keris had influenced. Well, sorry if any mistake on my words Regards, Hidayat.