![]() |
![]() |
#9 | ||
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 103
|
![]() Quote:
I believe it was Harsrinuksmo who attributed Si Ginje to Ki Nom. I neither approve nor disapprove this claim, as I haven't handled the keris myself (while I have seen it, behind the vitrine). Even if I handled it myself, I'm not sure would be able to put a definite attribution on it, especially to Ki Nom. Firstly, there are several versions of Ki Nom's works characteristics. Secondly, and most importantly, Si Ginje is in such condition that some considerations must be taken, very carefully, to apply the tangguh system. In my opinion, the sor-soran is too thick to fit any today's Javanese tangguh system, signifying that it is in near pristine condition. Years of etching has worn-out most of the old blades in Java as such, that its original condition/size is unrecognized today. Any keris lover in Java would think Si Ginje as 'small Balinese keris' at the first glance. The awak-awakan is slightly too slim compared to the sor-soran, suggesting some resharpen, perhaps, has been done. The luks remind me of Majapahit luks, but Mataram also possible. The forging technique employed in both Mataram and Majapahit. Regarding Ki Nom, as I recall, there is a grave attributed to 'Empu Supo' in Demak, in the same graveyard/shrine of famous Sunan Kalijaga. Unfortunately, it is unclear which 'Supo' it is. I'm very sorry for adding more problems than solutions on this topic. Other documentation regarding Si Ginje's legend, as I recall, written in Jasper&Pirngadie's work. I believe Harsrinuksmo was quoting some from it. Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
|