The Size of the Keris

Jean · 6th April 2016, 02:34 PM

Hello Alan,
I attach my contribution with 3 unusually sized krisses:
. A typical large kris from Cirebon or the pesisir (blade lenght 47.5 cm).
. A relatively small balinese kris (blade lenght 36.5 cm, it has typical balinese features, however it may have been forged in Java or Madura).
. A small Minangkabau kris (blade lenght 22 cm). These krisses are often attributed to women but I saw several pics of such krisses worn by Minangkabau grooms.
Best regards

David · 6th April 2016, 03:21 PM

My shortest Bali keris is about 12.5 inches (31.75 cm). I am fairly certain this blade is of Bali origin. It also seems to be a fairly old blade. While this is certainly not short enough to qualify as a patrem by Javanese standards it is quite short for what we have come to know in Balinese keris. I doubt, however, that this keris was created for either a woman or a child. It is dressed in a full size painted Bali sheath that could accommodate a blade of much larger size, i image so that it can be worn in the traditional manner of Bali up the back with the hilt rising above the shoulder.

Jean · 6th April 2016, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

My shortest Bali keris is about 12.5 inches (31.75 cm). I am fairly certain this blade is of Bali origin. It also seems to be a fairly old blade. While this is certainly not short enough to qualify as a patrem by Javanese standards it is quite short for what we have come to know in Balinese keris. I doubt, however, that this keris was created for either a woman or a child. It is dressed in a full size painted Bali sheath that could accommodate a blade of much larger size, i image so that it can be worn in the traditional manner of Bali up the back with the hilt rising above the shoulder.

Hi David,
Could we see this blade please? Otherwise we won't trust you that it is Balinese...

This subject of the origin of the short Bali/ Lombok blades (I mean less than about 15 inches), whether they are Javanese/ Madurese or not, in old Mahapahit style, etc., is a very difficult and interesting one. I have several such blades which I am unable to properly qualify.
Regards

A. G. Maisey · 6th April 2016, 11:08 PM

Thanks for your comments Jean and David.

Yes, North Coast Jawa/Tuban keris were often pretty "super-size", and Balinese keris, especially old ones, were frequently the size of Javanese keris, or even smaller.

The photo I've posted is of a display in the Den Pasar Museum. You can see a couple of Bali keris of the size that we think of when we think of Bali keris, and another very much smaller keris.

The smallest Bali keris I have is 17.5" (445mm.) overall, and with an 8.4" (212mm.) blade. 5 luk., it is definitely Balinese and definitely old, I estimate probably pre-1800.

I do have a number of other Balinese keris that are about the size of Javanese keris, and I have a few big Tuban keris.

I used to have two Balinese keris that were only about 8" to 10" overall.

So, I think we've established that there can be wide variation in keris size.

But does anybody have any suggestions as to why this variation in size may have occurred?

David · 7th April 2016, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

But does anybody have any suggestions as to why this variation in size may have occurred?

This is a good question Alan. With my example it does not seem to be intended for either a woman or a child. The dress, which as you can see, is also old (though probably not as old as the blade ) is full size Bali dress, made large so that the keris can be worn in the tradition manner of Bali. I doubt this dress would have been made for either a woman or a boy.
I suppose that an area that could be explored is one of iron sources or scarcity. Is it possible that at certain times in certain places the availability of good iron was less than at other times when larger blades were made?
Of course this doesn't really approach the issue of larger Javanese keris such as North Coast Tuban blades. Obviously there was no iron shortage at that time and for some reason the tastes at that time and that place were for a larger blade style. Were the Tubans trying to compensate for something?

Jean · 7th April 2016, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

But does anybody have any suggestions as to why this variation in size may have occurred?

Hello Alan,
A very difficult question but few suggestions:
. Small amulet krisses worn by dukuns for convenience.
. Patrem krisses worn by women or children.
. Large warrior krisses.
. Worn-out and re-used krisses like this one.
Regards

Gustav · 7th April 2016, 12:49 PM

The questions are Where, When and Who.

Generally - big man = big Keris.

I am also interested in this question in Javanese context (1500-1600).

My idea at the moment is, that in the 1500ties there are should be some amount of very big, beefy blades, which are quite impractical as weapons. So I think, I can not agree with the "romantic" idea of big Keris as "Warriors Keris", if this idea includes the practical use of such Keris. As Alan pointed out, Keris Bugis are often normal or smaller size, and Bugis are perhaps the last people, who apparently used Keris as weapon.

During the 1600ties the size of Keris has diminished, and perhaps it could be so due to growing influence of Central Javanese court of Mataram/stratification of society.

A. G. Maisey · 8th April 2016, 12:31 AM

Thanks for your thoughts Gustav.

I agree that we need to look at this question of size whilst bearing in mind the geographic location involved, the time in history, and the people involved. In other words, whatever we might think a valid reason for size variation might be, that reason needs to related to the place, time and people involved.

This being so , and since we are at this point only floating ideas, I feel that perhaps we should not argue either in favour or against any idea at all, at this point:- just pick up the ideas and throw them onto the table. When we have the ideas we might perhaps be able to fit them into a context and perhaps begin to understand the reasons for the variations.

My own ideas about this range over availability of material, societal hierarchy, personal wealth, physical size of a wearer, dress style, societal attitudes, personal status, influence from outside the society --- these are things that come readily to mind.

Certainly there must be other factors that we have not yet mentioned.

So what other ideas can we throw onto the table to consider?

Jean · 9th April 2016, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gustav

My idea at the moment is, that in the 1500ties there are should be some amount of very big, beefy blades, which are quite impractical as weapons. So I think, I can not agree with the "romantic" idea of big Keris as "Warriors Keris", if this idea includes the practical use of such Keris. As Alan pointed out, Keris Bugis are often normal or smaller size, and Bugis are perhaps the last people, who apparently used Keris as weapon.

During the 1600ties the size of Keris has diminished, and perhaps it could be so due to growing influence of Central Javanese court of Mataram/stratification of society.

Hello Gustav,
Is this big, beefy blade (attributed to Blambangan or Banten?) as old as the 1500ties (16th century) in your opinion?
Regards

David · 7th April 2016, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Hi David,
Could we see this blade please? Otherwise we won't trust you that it is Balinese...

This subject of the origin of the short Bali/ Lombok blades (I mean less than about 15 inches), whether they are Javanese/ Madurese or not, in old Mahapahit style, etc., is a very difficult and interesting one. I have several such blades which I am unable to properly qualify.
Regards

My deepest regrets Jean, but i am afraid you're just going to have to trust me on this one.

The vast majority of my keris blades i choose not to post in public forums on as a matter of principle. While that sometimes causes me a twinge of guilt when others are so free with their postings, it is still my personal stance on the matter and not one i wish to change at this point. Whenever i have broken this rule i have always had regrets on that decision afterwards. So my humble apologies.
I can show you one image that shows the top of the blade in the sheath, but i am not sure it will satisfy your curiosity. However you might be able to at least see that it is not the meaty Bali keris we are most used to.
If this blade was not made in Bali it is probably from Lombok. It does not look like anything i have ever seen from Jawa or Madura and has clear Balinese indicators.

Jean · 7th April 2016, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

My deepest regrets Jean, but i am afraid you're just going to have to trust me on this one.

The vast majority of my keris blades i choose not to post in public forums on as a matter of principle. While that sometimes causes me a twinge of guilt when others are so free with their postings, it is still my personal stance on the matter and not one i wish to change at this point. Whenever i have broken this rule i have always had regrets on that decision afterwards. So my humble apologies.
I can show you one image that shows the top of the blade in the sheath, but i am not sure it will satisfy your curiosity. However you might be able to at least see that it is not the meaty Bali keris we are most used to.
If this blade was not made in Bali it is probably from Lombok. It does not look like anything i have ever seen from Jawa or Madura and has clear Balinese indicators.

Hi David,
Thank you for your picture and it tells quite a lot actually.

Regards

6th April 2016, 02:34 PM	#1
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Hello Alan, I attach my contribution with 3 unusually sized krisses: . A typical large kris from Cirebon or the pesisir (blade lenght 47.5 cm). . A relatively small balinese kris (blade lenght 36.5 cm, it has typical balinese features, however it may have been forged in Java or Madura). . A small Minangkabau kris (blade lenght 22 cm). These krisses are often attributed to women but I saw several pics of such krisses worn by Minangkabau grooms. Best regards Attached Images

6th April 2016, 11:08 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,047	Thanks for your comments Jean and David. Yes, North Coast Jawa/Tuban keris were often pretty "super-size", and Balinese keris, especially old ones, were frequently the size of Javanese keris, or even smaller. The photo I've posted is of a display in the Den Pasar Museum. You can see a couple of Bali keris of the size that we think of when we think of Bali keris, and another very much smaller keris. The smallest Bali keris I have is 17.5" (445mm.) overall, and with an 8.4" (212mm.) blade. 5 luk., it is definitely Balinese and definitely old, I estimate probably pre-1800. I do have a number of other Balinese keris that are about the size of Javanese keris, and I have a few big Tuban keris. I used to have two Balinese keris that were only about 8" to 10" overall. So, I think we've established that there can be wide variation in keris size. But does anybody have any suggestions as to why this variation in size may have occurred? Attached Images

7th April 2016, 12:49 PM	#7
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,295	The questions are Where, When and Who. Generally - big man = big Keris. I am also interested in this question in Javanese context (1500-1600). My idea at the moment is, that in the 1500ties there are should be some amount of very big, beefy blades, which are quite impractical as weapons. So I think, I can not agree with the "romantic" idea of big Keris as "Warriors Keris", if this idea includes the practical use of such Keris. As Alan pointed out, Keris Bugis are often normal or smaller size, and Bugis are perhaps the last people, who apparently used Keris as weapon. During the 1600ties the size of Keris has diminished, and perhaps it could be so due to growing influence of Central Javanese court of Mataram/stratification of society. Last edited by Gustav; 7th April 2016 at 01:04 PM.

6th April 2016, 03:21 PM	#2
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,228	My shortest Bali keris is about 12.5 inches (31.75 cm). I am fairly certain this blade is of Bali origin. It also seems to be a fairly old blade. While this is certainly not short enough to qualify as a patrem by Javanese standards it is quite short for what we have come to know in Balinese keris. I doubt, however, that this keris was created for either a woman or a child. It is dressed in a full size painted Bali sheath that could accommodate a blade of much larger size, i image so that it can be worn in the traditional manner of Bali up the back with the hilt rising above the shoulder.

8th April 2016, 12:31 AM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,047	Thanks for your thoughts Gustav. I agree that we need to look at this question of size whilst bearing in mind the geographic location involved, the time in history, and the people involved. In other words, whatever we might think a valid reason for size variation might be, that reason needs to related to the place, time and people involved. This being so , and since we are at this point only floating ideas, I feel that perhaps we should not argue either in favour or against any idea at all, at this point:- just pick up the ideas and throw them onto the table. When we have the ideas we might perhaps be able to fit them into a context and perhaps begin to understand the reasons for the variations. My own ideas about this range over availability of material, societal hierarchy, personal wealth, physical size of a wearer, dress style, societal attitudes, personal status, influence from outside the society --- these are things that come readily to mind. Certainly there must be other factors that we have not yet mentioned. So what other ideas can we throw onto the table to consider?