Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

A. G. Maisey · 22nd March 2023, 12:42 PM

Gustav, we can find high numbers of luk in keris that originated in a number of locations, but in every case of which I am aware, these are relatively recent keris. When I say "relatively recent", I am thinking in a Javanese time frame, which places keris younger than Sultan Agung as "new keris". I am not thinking in terms of Kamardikan nor even of 19th century.

In Javanese keris tradition any keris with more than 13 luk (conventional count) is regarded as a keris that was made for somebody who was outside the norms of society, somebody with special talents or qualities, such as a dukun, or an artist, or similar people with particular characters or talents.

I do not know why a Balinese style keris might have more than the socially supportable number of luk, but my suspicion is that such a Balinese style might well have been made within the Balinese community in Lombok. I once had custody of a royal keris that had many more than the socially supportable number of luk, and based upon the old dress (19th century), which was Lombok style dress, and possibly upon the kinatah work, this might well have been of Balinese/Lombok origin.

If we play with the numerology of keris luk we can draw all sorts of conclusions from the results, for example, if we apply the game to the keris under discussion we can say that 3 + 5 = 8, now the number 8 according to the Candra Sangkala is the number of both the Naga & the Elephant, and the Elephant is the icon of Ganesha. But in my opinion, this sort of construction really has very little to support it, so it is perhaps as well not to go anywhere near it. There are a variety of numerological applications that can be applied to keris.

In summary, yes, we can find keris from Bali with more luk than socio-cultural mores can support, and at the present time we do not know why.

Just because this keris under discussion does have more luk than we might tend to expect, that by itself is perhaps not sufficient to affix any sort of age to it, but when we look at the number of rather questionable characteristics of this keris, there does seem to me to be quite a few open questions.

22nd March 2023, 12:42 PM	#24
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,725	Gustav, we can find high numbers of luk in keris that originated in a number of locations, but in every case of which I am aware, these are relatively recent keris. When I say "relatively recent", I am thinking in a Javanese time frame, which places keris younger than Sultan Agung as "new keris". I am not thinking in terms of Kamardikan nor even of 19th century. In Javanese keris tradition any keris with more than 13 luk (conventional count) is regarded as a keris that was made for somebody who was outside the norms of society, somebody with special talents or qualities, such as a dukun, or an artist, or similar people with particular characters or talents. I do not know why a Balinese style keris might have more than the socially supportable number of luk, but my suspicion is that such a Balinese style might well have been made within the Balinese community in Lombok. I once had custody of a royal keris that had many more than the socially supportable number of luk, and based upon the old dress (19th century), which was Lombok style dress, and possibly upon the kinatah work, this might well have been of Balinese/Lombok origin. If we play with the numerology of keris luk we can draw all sorts of conclusions from the results, for example, if we apply the game to the keris under discussion we can say that 3 + 5 = 8, now the number 8 according to the Candra Sangkala is the number of both the Naga & the Elephant, and the Elephant is the icon of Ganesha. But in my opinion, this sort of construction really has very little to support it, so it is perhaps as well not to go anywhere near it. There are a variety of numerological applications that can be applied to keris. In summary, yes, we can find keris from Bali with more luk than socio-cultural mores can support, and at the present time we do not know why. Just because this keris under discussion does have more luk than we might tend to expect, that by itself is perhaps not sufficient to affix any sort of age to it, but when we look at the number of rather questionable characteristics of this keris, there does seem to me to be quite a few open questions.