When we ask where a keris is from, it is important in many cases to define exactly what we mean by this question.
I have had keris referred to me for identification that came with good provenance going back in some cases over 100 years that told of exactly where and how they were collected, and the various component parts of the keris were from the four directions of the compass--- with some parts being unidentifiable. So even in Indonesia and Malaysia local people were mixing and matching parts years and years ago.
Local Indonesian dealers mix and match parts, dealers all over the world mix and match parts, collectors mix and match parts. Almost everybody mixes and matches, and as far as I can see always did, even back to at least the 16th century.
Where mixing and matching was at a minimum, and sometimes did not exist at all was where keris were used in a society that was under the direct influence and/or control of a kraton.
So when we want to classify a keris we need to split it up into its component parts.
In respect of Kai Wee's keris what I can see in the photo is a blade that could be from Jawa, Bali or Lombok. If Jawa, more likely East Jawa than elsewhere on Jawa, but it could be Bali or Lombok too, and I would not be prepared to be at all definite about it unless I had it in my hand. The warangan does not appear to be Balinese warangan.
The wrongko is the kandikan or bataan style. Some people also call this ladrangan, but in my opinion that is wrong.It could be either Bali or Lombok, and I personally make no distinction, as a Lombok wrongko of this style was made and used by Balinese people living on Lombok and still associated with mainland Balinese culture.
The hilt is the bondolan style and the same remarks I have made for the wrongko apply to this hilt.
The uwer is Balinese and new.
Rob's keris is more difficult.
The blade has some stylistic features that indicate Balinese origin, notably the long blumbangan and the pawakan, but there are other features , especially the material, that do not look Balinese. I would want to see this blade stained, and depending on the result from that, then possibly polished and stained again before I would be prepared to give a solid, defensible opinion on this blade.
The atasan of the wrongko is probably East Javanese, but the pendok is totally, totally out of proportion and just plain terrible. Somebody probably thought the pendok would look good for some reason or another, but it really looks wrong.
The hilt at first appearance seems to be Balinese, but there is a Madura/East Jawa hilt that is very similar to Balinese hilts, except that it has a slightly foreshortened proportion and seems a bit more chunky than a Bali hilt. From the pics I cannot see if this hilt is that style or not, and maybe I couldn't tell if it was from any photo. The difference is so slight sometimes that it really only registers when you hold it.
The image of the uwer is unclear, but it seems to be new and Balinese.
So, what is the origin of both these keris?
I would suggest that A)-- from photographs it is impossible to provide a defensible opinion, and that B)--- the various component parts of both keris could have originated in various different locations.
|