[A. G. Maisey]

Jean, early this morning I wrote another detailed, analytical response to your most recent post, but I have thought on this matter during today, and have decided that it would be a total waste of time to post my response.

I see these blades as having significant differences.

You see the same blades as having significant similarities.

I see with eyes that have been trained in a Javanese way of looking at keris.

You see with the eyes of a collector schooled in Euro-centric values.

And we both only have images on a screen to look at.

Nope. I've wasted enough time on this.

However, I will leave you with these thoughts:-

During the 1400's Cirebon was just a little village, mainly occupied with fishing, at this time it was under the domination of Pajajaran. It became an Islamic enclave by the 1500's , broke away from Pajajaran and became a sultanate, and the recognized father of Cirebon, Sunan Gunungjati appeared on the scene.

By about 1660 Cirebon had fragmented into 3 or 4 little principalities, and Cirebon's next door neighbour, Banten , took advantage of this fragmentation and occupied Cirebon during the 1670's.

The princes of Cirebon didn't like this much, so they tried to form an alliance with Mataram, but then Mataram sold them out, and by the late 1670's the Dutch had control of Cirebon. In the early 1680's Cirebon signed a treaty with the Dutch. By the early 1700's Cirebon had become a Dutch protectorate. The Dutch divided the administration of Cirebon between 3 of the princes, who each set up their own little court.

In fact, there was no "great kingdom of Cirebon". It was always second rate, no link to Javanese royalty , no honour.

Interestingly, the people of Cirebon identify themselves as Javanese, not Sundanese, and speak a dialect of Javanese, not a dialect of Sundanese.

The Javanese link their respect for particular Tosan Aji to respect for the associated realm. Cirebon never really was a realm.

It had links to Banten, it had links to Mataram, but it was never really an independent strong, political entity.


Consider this:-

We can probably identify various keris dress styles with Cirebon, and I would theorise that these various styles could in turn be aligned to the various royal houses of Cirebon.

However, I believe that it is extremely unlikely that we can ever identify a unique blade style as being the heritage of Cirebon. I believe that when the necessary research has been completed , and completed by independent researchers in an objective manner, we will find that the nobility of Cirebon filled their unique keris scabbards and hilts with blades from various other places, or had their own smiths copy these various other styles.

Cirebon was next door to Banten and for a time was occupied by Banten. It is very probable that the Banten style was reflected in the blades used by Cirebon people, whether those blades originated from Banten, or from Cirebon itself.

Recently there has been a commercial push to glorify Cirebon. It is perfectly understandable that the mind of the collector should be attracted to the idea of the Cirebon keris. However, I believe that eventually we will recognize that the "Cirebon Keris" is in fact a keris that uses Cirebon dress, and a blade style from other places.

Why does Cirebon not get a mention in the old references?

Easy answer:- it was regarded as a nonentity which lacked honour, and had no unique blade style. This is the reason Cirebon gets lumped in with Pajajaran.

Thus, we can most certainly have a Cirebon keris, but we cannot have a Cirebon blade, in Javanese terms, "tangguh Cirebon", or as I am wont to phrase it, "Cirebon classification."

Further, look at the dates involved:- all this happened pre-1700's. By the 1700's Cirebon was well and truly under the Dutch thumb. It had never had the opportunity to develop anything , and then the Dutch fell out of the sky and smothered Cirebon.

Consider all this and then draw your own conclusions.