Quote:
|
Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey
(...)there is nothing like the constant presence of one's personal shrine to remind a man who he is and what his position is. The necessity was to control the man who wore the keris, not to indicate that man's status to others. By inclusion of religious iconography the keris became a personal shrine.
|
Alan, that is what the very first sentence of my previous post is about.
Please accept my apologies for not properly understanding the places in your paper, where you speak about Keris as a "societal status indicator".
I also never suggested, your theory, which, I repeat, seems generally to be very plausible to me, would come as revelation out of a clear blue sky.