Gustav, in respect of geographic location of origin of the keris in post 11.
When relative certainty is lacking, we can hypothesise with relative freedom. I can only be relatively certain about a very limited number of things, & I try not to hypothesise about things where I lack sufficient data.
My opinion of place of origin of the post #11 keris is based on very limited certainty: the presence of a limited number of indicators that match with a limited number of keris from a known location.
However, what I do know with absolute certainty from Jawa is that the overall form of keris and the characteristics of keris detail do change from period to period, geographic location to geographic location, and maker to maker, but these changes occur within defined parameters. I believe it is reasonable to assume that a similar pattern of change can occur in other types of keris.
In respect of the number of luk in post #11. My initial professional training was in accountancy, one of the skills I learnt quite early in life was to add 2 + 2 and make 5 --- or 3 --- or in fact any number that might fill the need.
It is not such a big jump to turn a 5 into 7.
|