![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]() Quote:
A very difficult question but few suggestions: . Small amulet krisses worn by dukuns for convenience. . Patrem krisses worn by women or children. . Large warrior krisses. . Worn-out and re-used krisses like this one. Regards |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,273
|
![]()
The questions are Where, When and Who.
Generally - big man = big Keris. I am also interested in this question in Javanese context (1500-1600). My idea at the moment is, that in the 1500ties there are should be some amount of very big, beefy blades, which are quite impractical as weapons. So I think, I can not agree with the "romantic" idea of big Keris as "Warriors Keris", if this idea includes the practical use of such Keris. As Alan pointed out, Keris Bugis are often normal or smaller size, and Bugis are perhaps the last people, who apparently used Keris as weapon. During the 1600ties the size of Keris has diminished, and perhaps it could be so due to growing influence of Central Javanese court of Mataram/stratification of society. Last edited by Gustav; 7th April 2016 at 01:04 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,992
|
![]()
Thanks for your thoughts Gustav.
I agree that we need to look at this question of size whilst bearing in mind the geographic location involved, the time in history, and the people involved. In other words, whatever we might think a valid reason for size variation might be, that reason needs to related to the place, time and people involved. This being so , and since we are at this point only floating ideas, I feel that perhaps we should not argue either in favour or against any idea at all, at this point:- just pick up the ideas and throw them onto the table. When we have the ideas we might perhaps be able to fit them into a context and perhaps begin to understand the reasons for the variations. My own ideas about this range over availability of material, societal hierarchy, personal wealth, physical size of a wearer, dress style, societal attitudes, personal status, influence from outside the society --- these are things that come readily to mind. Certainly there must be other factors that we have not yet mentioned. So what other ideas can we throw onto the table to consider? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]() Quote:
Is this big, beefy blade (attributed to Blambangan or Banten?) as old as the 1500ties (16th century) in your opinion? Regards |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,273
|
![]()
Good to see such blade posted on forum. Thank you Jean.
Could you perhaps also post the dimensions of it? If the blade has been shortened, the length of Gonjo ? From pictures I would say more probably 1600ties and it has something, which let me think of Sumatra (I am speaking about blade only). yet this isn't even speculation, just fully unsupported feeling. There are more substantial specimens, and the most prominent one is the Keris from MVK in Vienna. The blade is 44 cm long, Gonjo 9 cm long. It is mentioned 1607 for the first time. The blade almost don't taper till the last Luk, if you see or handle it, you have a feel of a Moro blade. I own a very similar blade, also 44 cm long, Gonjo 10,5 cm long, width just before last Luk 3,4 cm, last luk 3 cm. Comparing to it the blade you posted looks slender. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]()
Hello Gustav,
Unfortunately this blade had been shortened, it is only 31.5 cm long with 9 luks but I estimate the original size at about 38 cm long with 13 luks. The ganja is 9.5 cm long and the width at mid-lenght (luk 5) is 2.6 cm. The hilt depicts a man-eating raksasa similar to one piece shown by Jensen and attributed to Blambangan. Regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,165
|
![]()
Here my shortest Bali blade, 331 mm long (without pesi), in comparison with a Central Java blade (370 mm) and a normal sized Bali blade (460 mm).
Have some thoughts about blade size but need to think about. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]()
Very interesting topic, and as I am an absolute begginer, I can't help you with any valuable input but with some analogy you may find interesting.
I am currently in INARI, way North from the Polar Circle, in the heart of Lapland (the land of the Saami people). The Saami have a whole culture for knives, culture that developed and evolved during their whole existence in this harsh environment where a good knife at hand could make the diference between life and death. So, it is no surprise that for them, the knife has become almost a cult object. To cut it short is that here every Saami has a knife. Men have bigger knives, women and children smaller knives... maybe not unlike the Malay? Please feel free to remove my posting if you think is unrelated to this subject. ![]() PS: Could it be that the size of the keris is related also to the status of the owner?! The higher the status, the bigger the keris? Last edited by mariusgmioc; 9th April 2016 at 08:34 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,740
|
![]() Quote:
Besides the twin lambe gajah (also found in Java), which indicators make you believe that this blade is Balinese? Regards |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 9,165
|
![]() Quote:
everthing by this blade let me think that it is a Balinese blade, starting by all features, the pamor, the feel and also the pamorless gonjo. At last I found it once on Bali, offered with many other Bali/Lombok keris. The wrangka is original and as well Balines, the gandar is a replacement but again Balinese. But can be wrong like always. Regards, Detlef |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|