![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,289
|
Quote:
Though i personally enjoy a wrongko that has been well adapted with inserted wood to fit a smaller blade profile. It generally shows that the owner valued that sheath for some reason. I have a couple of nice wrongko like that which were refitted because they are well made from desirable wood. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,717
|
Thanks to all for your generous comments. Attached is a picture of the keris in its sheath, taken from above to show the fit. Best I can tell, it fits perfectly. There is no sign of any alteration, to accommodate it.
. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,289
|
Thanks for the added photo Ian. Though it is indeed possible that this sheath once belong to a smaller blade and was sized up for this one i would say it is unlikely. The sheath is obviously newer than the blade and appears to have been made specifically for it. I don't think it is at all unusual to find a Madurese blade in Javanese dress or vice versa. It is a nice keris over all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,717
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,717
|
I dug out the old sales docket for this keris in my files. It was purchased in 1999, and the docket simply says "Madurese keris and wooden sheath" and quotes information from the tag pasted to the back of the sheath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,289
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 295
|
Thank you for the additional photo, Ian.
I believe that this is a pretty clear cut example of a Tuban gonjo. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,217
|
Yes Jaga, stylistically this gonjo is a good example of a Tuban keris that retains the original gonjo form.
This form is often presented as nguceng mati (dead fish) which from above is straight sided with the buntut urang being sharply pointed, this sharp point has been caused by erosion over time, the original shape is still straight sided, but the buntut urang is cutoff short, resulting in a gonjo shorter than most other gonjos, and a very narrow buntut urang. From the side, a Tuban gonjo should be rather thick, and the gonjo on this keris is rather thick. Where this keris appears to fail a Tuban classification is in the nature of the pamor, I say "appears" because I cannot feel texture from a photo. If a Tuban keris has ngulit semongko pamor, that pamor should be smooth to the touch, the pamor on this keris appears to have a rough texture, and that, plus the other things we can see in a photo, puts it into the Madura box. But I guess we could still consider a Tuban classification. It is as I think we all understand:- there are limitations to what we can do with a photo, anything relatively positive can only come with the keris in hand. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|