[jagabuwana]

David - thank you for your adding your thoughts on this. I should note that while my questions didn't relate to the hilt, I really do welcome any relevant discussion about this keris. Between you and Alan, you have given me much more to study and think about when it comes to Durga and the representation of other deities or otherworldly beings.

Gustav and Amuk - thank you both for adding some history and provenance to this keris. Knowing this enriches my understanding about this particular keris.

Alan - Thank you for your analysis of the linguistics and the history, and especially for the questions that you raised. It has caused me to think about what you had written for longer than I might have initially. For someone like me who is early in their keris education, focused questions like these are really helpful to help shape and steer my thinking with regards to the knowledge presented.

I will share my answers to these questions, for the sake of continuing this discussion and as a way of advancing my own learning. If you're inclined to, I would of course be grateful for your correction, or perhaps more valuably, more questions to ponder.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

So look at this "balu makabun" again.

Do we have a contraction of "balu makabunbunan" = "a widow wearing a cloth wrapping over chest and head"?

I can only agree, though maybe accept is a better word. Agreement would imply that I had preexisting views on this that matched or reconciled with yours but that is not the case.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

What class of the populace understood Durga in an incorrect way?

What class of the populace had the entitlement to wear keris and to create keris dress forms?

Well, it would seem that non-elites and particularly those populations who didn't have access to Tantric knowledge and practices are those who understood Durga in an incorrect way. But is this saying that they don't understand Durga entirely, even without consideration for Durga as represented on a keris? Or is it saying that non-elites do not and can not understand Durga when it comes to what Durga represents when selected as a figure on keris fittings, and why Durga is chosen as a deity to represent?

As for the second question in this block, it is the elites or keraton classes.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Why do native speakers of Balinese and Javanese not understand the popular "balu mekebun"?

Because the me prefix does not make sense to a native Javanese or Balinese speaker, but I don't understand why this point was made and why the question was asked. Is it because there is a popular but incorrect idea that this hilt form is called and/or pronounced balu mekebun (which is linguistically nonsensical), instead of the correct and linguistically sensical balu mekabun

Edits added 8pm AEST: critical typos corrected

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Finally, exactly what does this "balu mekabun" look like? Perhaps she looks something like a woman with a wrapping that comes up the body & covers her head?

Yes the hilt shown does resemble a woman with kabunbunan. I can see this clearly when it comes to a cloth that wraps the body, but not so much the head. I say that only to highlight my unfamiliarity with these hilt forms and thus unsure of what I am seeing, not as a refutation.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Importantly, what does this hilt form represent?

This I find most difficult to answer. But in thinking about this, then at this point I am led to believe that it is incorrect to identify the figure represented by this hilt as Durga. But this hilt form does more generally represent the feminine, and specifically a "widow left with daughters". If the keris proper, i.e. the wilah is the masculine, and specifically symbolic of Siwa and the linggam, then perhaps hilt form represents its female, fertile partner.