Green:-
When we start to talk about the age of a keris blade, or any other tosan aji for that matter, we are moving into the area of blade classification, ie, "tangguh", and this is a field that is full of misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and extreme difficulty. It is not an area that anybody with any degree of knowledge likes to get involved in when all they have to form an opinion are incomplete photographic representations of a blade.
That said, I am still prepared to make a couple of comments.
The blade you consider to be over cleaned is a relatively young blade, I'm not prepared to classify it, but it probably does come from the era you have nominated, say, later than 1850.
The other blade comes from a much older period of time.
The materials used in a blade are a major indicator in classification of a blade, and they vary from era to era. We do not expect a 17th century blade to use similar material to that which is used in a 19th century blade.
Some Javanese blades from the period after 1850 used some rather odd materials for pamor material. One such material was Dutch coinage, and blades containing this material have a smooth, greasy feel.
To understand how a keris should look takes a great many years of dedicated study, combined with the opportunity to handle literally thousands of blades. In short, a 19th century Surakarta blade will not have material that looks even remotely like a Pajajaran blade that comes from a much earlier time.
Before we can form an opinion as to whether or not a blade has been correctly cleaned, we need to know what it should look like when it has been correctly cleaned. Before we can form this opinion we need to be able to classify the blade, that is, give it a tangguh. Before we can give it a tangguh, we need to handle it.
Photos are not adequate in this instance.
|