Question on this keris... how many luks etc

[Green]

Here is a javanese (?) blade dressed in Malay(?) Sulawesi (?) dress.
The pamor has been severely eroded and I have a few questions that I hope I get some comments/answers

1) I count 8 luks but not sure if this is correct as normally keris has odd number luks.

Is the count correct? if so, is it possible that this keris has been shortened? or is it an original even number luks?

I can not see obvious shortening signs but I could be wrong. It is feasible that it is shortened because the blade look very worn out and tip may have been damaged.

2) The base of the blade has some decorations. This is usually plated with gold colored material but here it is absent except for two little kinatahs . have these been worn out or it has never been there? I think it is the latter.

So, are the kinatahs latter addition?

3) what form of blade is this?

[Henk]

I count 9 luk.
Beautiful keris. Congrats on this one. Kinatah has been worn out. Thats why you have 2 pieces left.

[drdavid]

Hi Green
I agree with Henk, I think your kinatah has worn away and I would count 9 luk. If you use the search you can find some comments on counting luk from Alan Maisey, in short by definition there are always an odd number of luks, and if you count an even number add one
cheers
DrDavid

[Bejo]

Hi Green,

A very nice keris.
I also count 9 luk. But the last luk only show little. Is it because the tip got corroded?
Is it Majapahit keris or maybe in the same era?

Regards,

Joe

[A. G. Maisey]

This keris cannot be classified as Mojopahit.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This keris cannot be classified as Mojopahit.

I would agree with you Alan, though i am certain i form my opinion from a far less informed position. Could you possibly elaborate a little on your opinion here? I think it would be beneficial to all to gain a better understanding of key elements that can lead to such an opinion. Do you find that this keris is classifiable based solely on the photos presented here?

[A. G. Maisey]

David, Bejo asked this question:-

"Is it Majapahit keris or maybe in the same era?"

This indicates to me that Bejo is thinking in the way that most keris conscious people think about keris tangguh classifications, he is equating the classification of Majapahit with the era of Majapahit, that is , pre-1525. Thus, my response to Bejo's question was related to the idea of this keris originating in the region of East Jawa that was under the control of the Majapahit court pre-1525.

However, if we take a more relaxed approach and pretend that we are a keris dealer in a market somewhere in Jawa, then perhaps we might be able to convince somebody who has insufficient experience to believe that this keris can be classified as Mojo. It does look a little bit like what a lot of people would call Mojo. But it is neither pre-1525, nor classifiable as Mojo.

There are a number of reasons for me to take this position, and to mention all of them and try to explain all of them would use more time than I am prepared to put into this answer. So I will be brief:- material, pamor distribution, blumbangan all do not support a Mojo classification. The classification cannot be supported in either the classical belief system sense, or the logical historical sense, but it might be able to be supported in the commercial pasar sense.

I am prepared to give an opinion on what it is not, my opinion on what it might be can be read as hedged with the usual qualifications. Probably East Jawa, pre-1900, post 1700.

[Jean]

Thank you Alan and I fully share your evaluation.
Regards

[Bejo]

Thank you for your explanation.

Best regards,

Joe