Pics: Snake-like Curves

[Mans]

Originally Posted by kai

Hello Pak Manshur,
Wasn't the old (Dutch) transliteration kinda outlawed in Indonesia after the independence?

Regards,
Kai

Hello Kai ,
Yes right, but sSome old spelling (like U = OE) still used outside the formal writting, especially to talking about the old, antique object or past period, etc... Alan had explained regaring EYD (Ejaan Yang Diperbarui / new spelling of grammar).

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Manshur,

Yes, it is true that here we communicate in different levels of English, and this can lead to some confusion.

Because of this I will make this post as simple as I am able.

Cultural differences can cause people from different cultures to identify discussion at different levels as a "dispute". Speaking for myself, I cannot find any evidence of any dispute in any recent posts to this discussion group. All I can identify is civil discussion.

Pak Manshur, you have posed this question:-

" Did this thread had demostrated the Tosan Aji from Pengging era which has luk like a snake (sarpa lumampah), the Daleman Sumenep keris which also has luk like a Pengging keris, and keris Segaluh which has good pamor and iron work... ? "

Objective evaluation will show that neither of these things have been demonstrated.

What has been demonstrated is this:-

Pengging
In the opinion of some people, the form of luk found in tosan aji which could perhaps be classified as tangguh Pengging , does have the form shown in the photos that were posted.
This is a qualified statement.
Because of the high level of disagreement as to the exact form of a Pengging keris it is not possible to make a definitive statement in respect of the luk form.

Segaluh
Photos of a keris identified by the owner as tangguh Segaluh have been shown. Based upon what can be seen in these photos, it is probable that the pamor execution is competent, as is the execution of the iron work.
This is a qualified statement.
We cannot be positive that the keris is tangguh Segaluh, and we cannot be positive as to the quality of the material and the way in which it has been worked, because we can only see a picture of the keris. To be positive about these things we need to handle the keris.
Even if we handle the keris, and we agree that it is tangguh Segaluh, and we do determine that quality of both pamor and iron work is superior, we can only affix that opinion to the keris being examined, we cannot extend that opinion to any other keris of tangguh Segaluh.

However, in respect of the keris shown as a possible Daleman Sumenep you made the following statement:-
And regaring my keris which has luk rengkol, this can be a Daleman Sumenep keris which estimated about 18th century.
This is a qualified statement.
By use of the the word "can", an element of doubt has been introduced. It "can" be Daleman Sumenep; it can also be something else.

This demonstrates exactly the point I have been trying to make:-

in discussion of tangguh carried out in writing, and using photographs, we cannot be definite in our opinions; our opinions must be qualified, in other words, the opinion when it is based on words or pictures must leave room for doubt.

When the keris is in one's possession, it would be permissable to state the tangguh, and anything else about the keris as one's opinion:- the statement is qualified by identifying the statement as opinion.

Opinion must not be presented as a statement of fact.

Pak Manshur, please do not regard what I have written as being in the nature of a dispute. The idea of "dispute" carries an element of heat, and an element of contention.There is no heat in my writing, and I am not in contention with you. I am discussing calmly and in a relaxed fashion a matter that must be clarified prior to any sensible discussion of tangguh being able to take place.

[ganjawulung]

Dear Alan, Mans, and All,

This is my sharing of the pictures I posted, for the time being. I will complete my responsibility later, after finishing my other business. This assumption of tangguh Segaluh, based on opinion which I got from such source as: the late Mr Bambang Harsrinuksmo (once he saw this blade), and also in some occasion with Mr Haryono Guritno and even my other colleague of keris connoisseurs in Solo and Yogyakarta.

The bird eye view to recognize that the keris bears tangguh Segaluh, is the "protruding posture of the gandhik", sometimes extremely protruding. And Segaluh kerises is more protruding than any other styles of keris.

Also from bird eye view, if the segaluh keris with luks, never with "rengkol luk" (wavy luk). But with "luk kembo". Kembo means a kind of "fed up", or "lazy movement". Or say it, a snake in a lazy movement.

At this time being, I don't want to pose you the material argument. Otherwise you see it in your hand. Hopefully this 'first responsibility' will help your discussion. Believe me, I have no intention to cheat everybody. Or intent anyone to "buy this blade". Oh, no. This keris will be here for long, long, long time in the future..

Regards,
Ganjawulung (or some other spelling, Gonjawulung, or Gonjowulung. Whatever)

[A. G. Maisey]

Ganja, what you have posted here is perfect for a post on tangguh.

You have effectively said:-

in the opinion of Bambang Harsinuksmo this keris is tangguh Segaluh.

I think you have also said:-

in my opinion this keris is tangguh Segaluh and I base this opinion on information obtained from Haryono Haryoguritno and other people with more knowledge of keris than I have.

Nobody could possibly object to this.

Incidentally, from what I can see in the pic, I'd call it Segaluh too, but if we are trying to create a format for future use, we must remain consistent.

[A. G. Maisey]

I've thought long and hard about this, but I've finally decided to do it anyway.

I do not agree with the posting of photographs of keris which I identify as a part of my collection. As a general rule I will only post a photograph of something from my personal collection when I decide that I want to sell it.

The keris shown in this post is one from my personal collection, and I have no intention of offering it for sale. I have adjusted the photograph so that all you should be able to see is a silhouette of the keris.

This keris was given the tangguh of Pengging by two of the most experienced ahli keris I know, one of whom was also a very well known empu.

It also displays all the features of a Pengging keris as I have shown in my earlier post.

I am not claiming that it is Pengging, but the weight of opinion available to me seems to indicate that most experienced people would regard this keris as tangguh Pengging.

Compare this form with the form already claimed as representing Pengging. They are very dissimilar.

I do not claim that this keris is representative of Pengging, and the tombak already shown is not representative of Pengging.

What I do claim is that there can be significant disagreement as to exactly what Pengging tosan aji looks like.

This is the reason why it is always desireable to qualify opinions on tangguh.

[cahaya]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

....

The keris shown in this post is one from my personal collection, and I have no intention of offering it for sale. I have adjusted the photograph so that all you should be able to see is a silhouette of the keris.

Hai Mr Alan G M /Bapak Alan GM

can you take the close up of 'sor-soran' from your keris, so we can enjoy to see your keris collection too.

regards
cahaya

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm sorry Cahaya, no.

As I have already stated, I do not agree with the practice of showing keris in a personal collection on a public website.

I have intentionally made this keris very dark so only the outline can be seen, not the keris itself.

I am not holding an exhibition of my collection, which would be something in conflict with my personal standards and system of values,I am only showing an outline for comparative purposes.