24th October 2011, 03:54 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Jalak Sangu Tumpeng
Here I have attached a shared photograph for discussion. The dapur is Jalak Sangu Tumpeng, probably the keris was made in Majapahit period (Mpu Sendang Sedayu made?). I am looking forward your opinion.
Thanking you in advance EDIT Karttikeya, I have copied your picture and uploaded it to the site . Links of any kind are strongly discouraged; you will please upload your pictures to the forum site [ NO LINKS ] if you want them to be posted . Neither I nor David have the time to do this . If you are unclear about the process please see the photo posting directions . http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13631 Thank you . Last edited by Rick; 24th October 2011 at 03:39 PM. |
27th October 2011, 05:46 PM | #2 |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,291
|
I am surprised that no one has chosen to reply to this post .
|
27th October 2011, 06:23 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
This Jalak Sangutumpeng in the picture, reminds me to the best jalak sangutumpeng picture I've seen in Musee de l'homme's book (Paris) some couple years ago. Picture below, the Musee de l'homme's jalak sangu tumpeng. I took reproduction from the museum's book some years ago...
Not so many jalak sangu tumpeng -- which has good 'garap' I've seen. Mostly, comes from supposed to be Mataram Senopaten (without pamor, but some with only very minimal pamor or "wulan-wulan" type pamor), and some of them supposed to be Majapahit tangguh, with very smooth, greyish-black blade... Here is the example for comparison, Karttikeya... GANJAWULUNG |
27th October 2011, 11:03 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,890
|
Karttikeya, based upon what I can see in the image you have posted, I feel that many people would be prepared to classify this keris as Tangguh Majapahit.
It possesses many of the features of form that align with a Majapahit classification, but the ganja is too straight and thin to conform to that which is expected in a Majapahit keris. The other indicators that I can see do echo Majapahit, but as is usually the case with questions of tangguh, I am reluctant to commit myself to an opinion based upon an image on a computer screen. When I say that the features "echo Majapahit", to my eye, these features appear to have been executed by a maker who had knowledge of the form of the indicators in a Majapahit keris, but who perhaps had never seen one. In respect of the concept of tangguh. This is a system of classification that was developed for a specific purpose. In the case of keris classified as a tangguh of the recent past, say within the last 300 to 400 years, it is possible that there could be a high level of agreement between the designated tangguh, and the era from which the tangguh name is taken. In the case of keris from the distant past this agreement between designated tangguh and era of the same name, is very, very dubious. However, as with most things to do with the keris, we are dealing with a belief system, so for anybody who believes that a keris that is classifiable as a particular tangguh, was made during the era of the same name, so be it. For that person, it was. |
28th October 2011, 05:19 AM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 401
|
With respect to Karttikeya's Jalak Sangu Tumpeng, I would opine it is a Mataram piece, most probably of Senopaten era, but with very significant Padjajaran outlook especially at the gandik...very slanting feature there (mboto rubuh)
|
28th October 2011, 06:17 AM | #6 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
28th October 2011, 06:27 AM | #7 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
28th October 2011, 06:33 AM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
28th October 2011, 07:07 AM | #9 |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,121
|
What i see is a nice old keris with a certain presence in not quite as old nice dress. It is a keris i would welcome in my own collection. Does the sheath appear to have been made specifically for this keris?
|
28th October 2011, 07:50 AM | #10 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
28th October 2011, 08:56 AM | #11 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,890
|
I'm sorry Penangsang, but that keris cannot be classified as any of the Mataram sub-divisions.Mataram Senopaten does not look even vaguely like this keris. Not in the smallest degree.
A dominant feature of a keris that may be classified as tangguh Mataram is that the blumbangan is square. The blumbangan in the keris under discussion is bata adeg. It cannot be classified as Mataram of any type. |
29th October 2011, 06:29 AM | #12 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
29th October 2011, 07:11 AM | #13 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,890
|
I'm sorry Kartikeya, but I do not provide a valuation service, most especially from photographs.
However, there is one very easy way to determine a value:- it is the maximum a serious buyer is prepared to pay, and the minimum a serious seller is prepared to accept, where the two cannot agree, its somewhere in between these two figures. My assessment of this keris was based upon what I have been taught, not only upon personal experience. |
29th October 2011, 03:44 PM | #14 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,121
|
Quote:
|
|
29th October 2011, 03:54 PM | #15 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Quote:
|
|
14th December 2011, 07:11 AM | #16 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 54
|
Hi all, I raise this thread again because I have some questions about warangka. Could anybody tell me what is warangka style of this blade? Does the warangka match its deder? If I change existing mendak to mandak kendhit Yogyakartan, whether it meets with both warangka and deder? Your advises would be appreciated.
|
|
|