![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,225
|
![]()
Alan, it doesn't wonder me at all, that people have formed an opinion about the similarity of Panataran carving to a Buginese sheath. Your picture was the first one where I clearly could discern the shape of Gandar, which is identical to Pagarruyung sheath. We also probably all have experienced the fact, that sometimes some details are much more easily noticed in a photograph then in real life.
What, I think, till now escapes many people, besides the Gandar shape, is the fact, that the front side of sheath in profile forms a straight line, like the sheath of Pagarruyung Keris. Knowing Pagarruyung Keris and its sheath we even can tell, that a Jalak Budho or Bethok blade with Gandhik, not protruding outside the blade profile, will have a corresponding sheath with no protrusion where Gandhik is placed. (As we know, sheath is sometimes mimicking the details of the blade it houses, like Kruwingan.)The Keris from Panataran carving also seems to not have a protruding Gandhik. The sheath from likely later Candi Sukuh carving shows a protruding front part, and that allows us to speculate, that Keris inside it also already would have a protruding Gandhik part. |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
ladrang, restoration, surakarta, warangka |
|
|