|
19th December 2007, 03:12 AM | #1 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 103
|
Yes, Pak Alan, I understand your point. We are on the same train, and if there are some minor differences, surely because we see through a different angle, as you are sitting on the different seat. You are not sitting on my lap, aren't you ?
Let's moving forward... Quote:
What style PB did adopt, therefore, debatable, as there is no clear documentation about it. But from my limited knowledge on PB blades, I always feel it has some Madura influences. I make my conclusion mainly on the 'global proportion' of the blade, mainly between the high/length of gandhik, the width of sraweyan and wadidang slope compared to the overall length of the blade. I didn't take account of the details/ricikan, as it might come in various way, and most straight Madura's blade has very limited detail. Please don't mix it up with new Madura's blade. The old one is a good blade. Well define and having bold, strong character. Madura has many famous and powerful empus, which has made keris at least since Majapahit eras, and even earlier. Even in some way, the HB I blade also has some Madura influences, among other. HB I also an admirer of Madura's bravery. He composed a dance for it, named Beksan Lawung Trunajaya. (Trunajaya was Maduras Prince, which in fact, attacked and caused the fall of Mataram under Amangkurat I) Historically, Solo has a tight connection to Madura. Some Madura's princesses were married to Solo royal families, if not the Susuhunan himself. Not to mention, the famous Empu Brajaguna came from Madura, and the family of Brajaguna worked for the court for the long time. Wasn't it possible, that there was another empus who also emigrated to Solo ? Through Bengawan Solo river, Madura was easily reached. My objection to Pak Alan conclusion is simply because the what-so-called Banten blade was very likely unknown in late 18c. in Java. Serat Centhini, which was composed in early 19c, has already described tangguh Majapahit as we would accept now, as a light and slightly small blade. But if we use only the blumbangan as the indicator, it might be true. But I think Madura's blade also has an elongated blumbangan too. Yogyakarta, in the other hand, claiming themself as an inheritor of Mataram, and in fact, located in Mataram, surely would adopt the Mataram style. But not without modification, though. HB I is some kind of the mixture between Mataram, Madura and Tuban/Pajajaran. It's unique features is a very deep and wide blumbangan. It is very rare. HB V is a mixture of Majapahit and Mataram. It has 'tight' (kenceng), but calm and confidence in appearance. Keris, in HB V eras who reign during and after Dipanegara war, was an important tool to support his legitimacy. He withdrew all pusakas which belong to old Pangerans, to suppress their influence. He made and gave pusakas to those who support him. No room for error. It's also known as Tangguh Srimanganti, as it was forge in Srimanganti hall, inside the court. The most noticeable feature is it's pamor. It is incredibly tight/lembut, without losing it's line. It also shows chatoyancy effect. In some blade, it literally look like peacock feather. It is regarded as the best Jogjakarta's blade ever made, but unfortunately, it is rare. I haven't seen the pictures of the real HB V's blade ever published. HB VII, on the other hand, made quite a lot of kerises, in some grade of qualities. The high quality blade only bestowed to the Princes, while the lower one to the lower rank servant, accordingly. It has a mixture of Tuban and Mataram style, and slightly bigger than HB V. Pamor comes in vary. HB VIII's blade was almost the same with HB VII, as the same empus was employed. The most noticeable difference are the blade is very slightly smaller and the pamor is more coarse. Here, I attached the pictures of K. Tamansari, which was published in Keris Magazine and Haryono Guritno's book. www.heritageofjava.com/keris It is a well-published keris, but regarded as Mataram. According to some in Jogja, it is HB VIII. The material, kinatah and pamor style doesn't fit the Mataram Tangguh. It is a good example of HB VIII keris. Tamansari is the Water Castle, built during the reign of HB I. Once a very beautiful garden with under water tunnel, man-made island, etc, but now only ruin. It's beauty depicted in batik's motif, and also in this keris' kinatah. Other pictures in the comparison between Madura and Surakarta keris. It can not, however, replace the real blades. |
|
19th December 2007, 04:41 AM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,738
|
Pak Boedhi, I am not proposing a linear descent to Surakarta style from Banten style.
What I am proposing is the stylistic proportion of the Majapahit blade transposed to the Surakarta blade. This does not mean that the Surakarta blade is the same in all respects to the Majapahit blade, but rather it uses the style of the Majapahit blade and fits it to the Surakarta blade. Yes, there was a long and a close relationship between Surakarta and Sumenep, and there may have been some contributing influence to the Surakarta blade, but personally I cannot see it. The old Madura blades had a totally different pawakan to the Surakarta blade, and were usually quite upright with a rotan-like cross section; the blade tip after the last luk was long; the gandik was more often than not rather acutely angled; blumbangan proportion was quite different to that of the Surakarta blade, tending to squarish, and it was typically shallow and poorly defined; the kembang kacang was rather thin and spindly, and the gandik was typically short, low, thin and small; pamor was coarse and with a sand-like texture. However, they were well made blades for the purpose of weaponry. They were not works of art. It is possible that one could get a similar feeling from an old Madura blade, and a Surakarta blade, but this different to physical appearance. Blade proportion is anchored in the blumbangan, and the blumbangan in both the Majapahit blade and the Surakarta blade establish a related proportion. I am not using only the blumbangan as an indicator, rather I am saying that by using the same blumbangan, proportion is established which must follow the blumbangan, once that happens, the overall style follows.Actual physical size is not a consideration, as Blambangan, Banten and Bali blades---all inheritors of Majapahit keris tradition--- from the period immediately following Majapahit, are all of similar size to the Surakarta blade. Although we think of the Majapahit blade as a small blade, and although it is mentioned as a light blade in Centhini, let us not forget that Majapahit was already 400 years back in history when Centhini was written.In fact, the typical Majapahit blade is not a small blade, rather it is of medium size, but it is thin and light. In one sense the Surakarta blade was "new" style, just as the HB blade was a "new" style, but where the HB style was influenced by Mataram, the Surakarta style was influenced by Majapahit. |
20th December 2007, 10:03 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 199
|
dear Kerislovers, especially Pak Budhi et Pak Alan,
I have been following this discussion. Remarkable!!! To make clearer of my understanding, would you please, if any, to upload keris pictures that you believe having tangguh: surakarta, djogjakarta, majapahit or old madura. It is easier for me, perhaps for other colleagues too, while following some explanation about typical tanggug mentioned above there are opportunities to watch keris pictures which representing those tangguhs. regrads, OeS some people can swim but are unable to dive, and, some others cannot swim then dived |
20th December 2007, 05:29 PM | #4 |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,047
|
I would also like to commend the participants in this thread, especially Alan, Boedhi and Ganja, for a most excellent and informative discussion. I think when we try this up (though there is always more! ) it should be added to our "Classic" thread sticky section.
|
13th September 2010, 06:49 PM | #5 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 235
|
Quote:
Thanks, J. |
|
14th September 2010, 10:40 AM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,203
|
I miss very this level of discussion.
|
13th December 2011, 03:14 AM | #7 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 285
|
Quote:
I found them on facebook any way. |
|
|
|