Question on this keris... how many luks etc

Bejo · 29th August 2018, 08:56 AM

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 · 29th August 2018, 01:02 PM

This keris cannot be classified as Mojopahit.

David · 29th August 2018, 03:26 PM

Quote:

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 · 29th August 2018, 10:55 PM

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 · 30th August 2018, 01:15 PM

Thank you Alan and I fully share your evaluation.

Regards

Bejo · 31st August 2018, 11:07 AM

Thank you for your explanation.

Best regards,

Joe

29th August 2018, 08:56 AM	#1
Bejo Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Location: East Java, Indonesia Posts: 42	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

29th August 2018, 01:02 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	This keris cannot be classified as Mojopahit.

29th August 2018, 10:55 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,989	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.

30th August 2018, 01:15 PM	#5
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	Thank you Alan and I fully share your evaluation. Regards

31st August 2018, 11:07 AM	#6
Bejo Member Join Date: Aug 2017 Location: East Java, Indonesia Posts: 42	Thank you for your explanation. Best regards, Joe