Once again Johan, good and relevant questions, and Kai & David have given you good and relevant answers, as far as they were prepared to go.
You have asked several questions and I will try to answer those questions independently.
1) " --- one of these two might be older than the other? ---"
It is very difficult to put an age on any keris. There is a system in Javanese Keris Culture that purports to offer a method that can assess origin in terms of time and place (tangguh) but as its name implies, it is a system based in opinion, not in fact.
I have handled a great many keris that were taken out of S.E.Asia several hundred years ago, these keris were for the most part in "as new" condition. Considering only the blades it would be close to impossible for me to date these blades were they to be presented to me without any prior knowledge of the specific keris.
Only the blade is regarded as the essential component in the complete keris, only the blade is the keris, all dress items are just that:- dress, thus it is only the blade that we seek to date.
2) " Would collectors as a group be more inclined to collect or specialise in kerisses of Javanese origin? Or would more collectors be inclined to go for the more ornate hilts of the Bugis-type kerisses?"
Collectors in any field are as diverse as the things they collect.
With keris, personal preference varies from "everything" to, in some cases, something as narrow as only one type, style, or maker.
With the pure collector of keris, even though his preferences may vary, his basic philosophy is completely analogous with any other collector, say for example a collector of stamps, or coins, or sea shells.
However, some people who may collect, are not necessarily collectors as such:- the act of collecting is only supportive of some other objective. Using myself as an example, I started out as a non-collector, simply a custodian of a collection, I became a collector, then after I began to acquire some core understanding of what it was that I was collecting, my active collecting tapered off to an almost invisible involvement and became only one factor in a sociological/ anthropological quest for understanding.
It is probable that all of the people who are truly knowledgeable in the field of the keris have followed a similar route.
But of course, this extreme involvement is not required to simply collect, most people derive their pleasure from the object itself, and just as Kai and David have pointed out, some of us like oranges, some like apples, and some cannot get enough of either.
3) " Would the fact that one of my kerisses has a wavy blade, make it more desirable in the eyes of the average keris collector? And in the eyes of the people of keris culture?"
I don't think we can define desirability in terms of wavy blades and straight blades, this is simply not relevant either for people within a keris bearing culture or outside one.
For the pure collector there are probably two basic things that regulate desirability:-
A) difference, as in a style, form, age or whatever that is different to what that individual collector may already have
B) quality, this is something that we can learn and quantify, and it has nothing at all to do with either rarity or wavy blades
However, since the keris is above all else a socio-cultural icon, other factors can determine desirability for some people.
As an example only, I had a relative in Jawa who had a collection of keris, all of which contained the spirit of either a Pangeran (prince) or a Kyai (a respected or eminent man).
How did he know this?
If he bought a keris that he thought might contain a spirit he slept with it and the spirit came to him in a dream. No visit? Get rid of the keris.
So desirability is very much a matter of perspective.
|