Majapahit Keris

[A. G. Maisey]

Anthony, there is a very great difference between keris that some people might classify as Tangguh Majapahit, and the keris that evidence seems to indicate actually might have existed during the Majapahit period.

Tangguh ngak sungguh.

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, it seems to be generally agreed between those people who are supposedly expert in these matters, that where material objects exist in Javanese sculpture from these early periods, those material objects do in fact reflect what was in use in the community at that time.

As to whether or not this sculpture actually did originate during the Mojo era, it is as I have already said:-

it is in a museum that exists for no other reason than to preserve and display Majapahit artifacts

it was found in the central area of Majapahit, and noted scholars consider that it is Majapahit work.

I might be a little bit naive and perhaps too trusting, but all of that is good enough for me.

[kai]

Kai, it seems to be generally agreed between those people who are supposedly expert in these matters, that where material objects exist in Javanese sculpture from these early periods, those material objects do in fact reflect what was in use in the community at that time.

Hello Alan,

Yes, agreed. It stands to reason that when a keraton introduces any new style everyone needs to follow suit immediately. I’m less convinced we can extend such a general assumption to rare or even singular iconography though.

Anyway, I was thinking of only minor time lags like a generation or two (i.e. within the living memory of the artisan). There isn’t any evidence that the ancestral dagger much less the keris buda ever became culturally obsolete during the late Majapahit era, is it?

Regards,
Kai