A Balinese Keris for Analysis

A. G. Maisey · 28th September 2020, 01:07 AM

Kai, I most sincerely apologise for taking an approach in my post #38 that was not limited only to you.

The discussion relating to this hilt form has drawn a number of factors into consideration, and although my response was addressed to you, the way in which I phrased that response was intended to cover the field of discussion.

I acknowledge that this was an error on my part, and I have now corrected that error, as well another error that gave EK as the source for the "tusk" differentiation.

I'm sorry, but I am not able to assume that the point of differentiation made in BBK is either correct or incorrect, I only wish to comment that this point of differentiation has been put forward.

As to "tusks" having any cultural significance in this context I cannot say. The word used that is translated as "tusk" is not a tusk as a native English speaker might consider a tusk to be. As I noted, the use of "tusk" (ie, "taring") is Neka's, not mine.

Perhaps, as with many concepts that relate to the keris, and indeed, to many cultural or religious matters in other cultures, it might be necessary to adopt a way of thinking that permits some sort of understanding of exactly what a particular representation of something might represent. Insofar as Javanese & Balinese societies are concerned, the interpretation can easily encompass more than a single one.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

28th September 2020, 01:07 AM	#37
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,991	Kai, I most sincerely apologise for taking an approach in my post #38 that was not limited only to you. The discussion relating to this hilt form has drawn a number of factors into consideration, and although my response was addressed to you, the way in which I phrased that response was intended to cover the field of discussion. I acknowledge that this was an error on my part, and I have now corrected that error, as well another error that gave EK as the source for the "tusk" differentiation. I'm sorry, but I am not able to assume that the point of differentiation made in BBK is either correct or incorrect, I only wish to comment that this point of differentiation has been put forward. As to "tusks" having any cultural significance in this context I cannot say. The word used that is translated as "tusk" is not a tusk as a native English speaker might consider a tusk to be. As I noted, the use of "tusk" (ie, "taring") is Neka's, not mine. Perhaps, as with many concepts that relate to the keris, and indeed, to many cultural or religious matters in other cultures, it might be necessary to adopt a way of thinking that permits some sort of understanding of exactly what a particular representation of something might represent. Insofar as Javanese & Balinese societies are concerned, the interpretation can easily encompass more than a single one.