Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Keris Warung Kopi
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12th April 2013, 06:09 AM   #29
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,120
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrylaki
am I denying that history? off course I am.
am I maintaining that this original keris is from Bali? this one I have to make my sefl clear. OK then It might not from bali. but I do have to agree it was made some time around majapahit period. let's just call it tangguh majapahit.
BUT for further information about the empu who made the keris. that's a little bit too far. I will not address that pasopati as a blambangan keris. not even close.
let's make this more fun then David, this discussion off course.
You are, of course, welcome to call this blade any tangguh you wish Ferry. That is your right to opinion that all individuals have. But's you should hold off on the "Let's". There is no "us" in your opinion. Personally i prefer not to make assumptions based upon a single overall photograph of a somewhat out of stain blade that does not possibly allow a close enough examination to come to such a conclusion. You are unable to determine the weight of the blade, the color of the iron when properly stained, the nature of the pamor material or the true depth of the sogokan or height of the ada-ada from this photograph.
As for who the mpu may have been, i too would be skeptical of his identity. I am not familiar with the history of Mpu Supo, when he was supposed to have worked, etc. But the identity of the Mpu has never been a real subject of discussion here, has it. This does seem to be a well chronicled keris however. It seems to be a keris with a name (Kanjeng Kyai Seneng Pareng) and a history. Past owners are known. But the accuracy of the account of this keris is also not important to the main contention of debate here. I think that it would be irresponsible to claim the knowledge of the tangguh of this keris based upon the photograph, but one thing that seems absolutely clear about it form this image is that it is NOT a Bali keris. Other than that this debate has been rather circular. I have not seen any evidence that supports a Bali origin for this keris, period. Now you seem to be waffling on that assertion so i guess the debate is over and we agree.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.