Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nechesh
Mans, why would the snout have to protrude more to be hanuman. It still looks like a monkey to me.  We often see Ganesha, Siva and other deities and demons depicted in a variety of forms. I don't see how you can say this could not possibly be a hauman because it's snout isn't long enough.  |
Indeed, very difficult to identified about the Abstract hilt. So many arguments and interpretations which came out from our mind...
I just thought that the Hanuman smiles not like this one
But, what ever it was, This hilt is very impressive, isn't it ?
---
Kai, I agree that the Old Balinese keris resemble with Javanese. But I think the Balinese has the histories it self although any the Javanese touch
So, the Balinese keris still has characteristic it self.
Here the link for example the old Javanese Keris (before Majapahit Era):
http://keris.fotopic.net/c684298.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c450928.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c618304.html
Majapahit Era (1300-1500s):
http://keris.fotopic.net/c645331.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c669644.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c785067.html
Mataram Era (1600-1700s) :
http://keris.fotopic.net/c451023.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c710134.html
http://keris.fotopic.net/c461570.html
We can see that the Javanese keris still different with Balinese, specifically at some Ricikans on Sorsoran.
I think the 1st keris which you posted is an impressive old Balinese keris on Early Mataram period 1500-1600s). Very beautiful workmanship. Same with your Balinese kris which you collected