Keris identification

[David]

Originally Posted by rasdan

I think people in the past do not really care too much if their keris reflects their birthplace/nationality; they just want quality keris /parts for their keris. The practice of having a geographical identity for keris probably develops in later times where the beliefs surrounding a keris has evolved and spread to different areas, and people tend to have more “tribal pride” (rather than just a sense for quality) and/or when royal houses started to have standardised dress codes for their courts.

I don't know how true that is Rasdan. My point about how modern keris are becoming more generic with time i don't think really applies to the past. Keris styles, especially of dress, which is the outward appearance of the keris that was presented to society, i believe were rather formalized, at least when we are discussing keris on a court level. As for people within that specific culture on the village level, those folks probably didn't have a level of income that would permit them to seek high end craftspeople in different parts of the archipelago to create their keris parts. When we see elements in village keris that don't quite meet the standards set by the keraton or puri it is not due to workmanship done outside if the culture, but rather the common folks doing the best they can to emulate what the higher classes are doing.
When i look at this keris, yes, it presents itself as a Bali keris, but for many it is really easy to see that certain aspects of it just don't seem quite right for a true Balinese keris. I think that is fine for a modern "art" keris like this, however, for the social functioning of a keris as element of formal dress in cultural situations i am not so sure this was something that would have been embraced by members a specific keris culture back in the day.