[A. G. Maisey]

There have been a number of attempts over the years to provide a clear, valid, and usable definition for the physical form of the keris. However, there is a major problem, in that there are keris types which do not conform to the broadly accepted definitions which call for an asymmetric base, a gandik, and a ganja.

The definition that any of us could use, could vary from time to time, place to place and in accordance with the degree of formality that we wished to apply. Such definitions could encompass the relaxed layman's attitude that if it looks like a keris, it is a keris, the hard-core connoisseur's attitude that it is not a keris unless made in accordance with correctly carried out due ceremony, and in strict accordance with the guidelines of dhapur and pamor, and every variation of these two extremes.

Richard Burton is recognised as one of the great historical authorities on the sword---yes, I know it is currently fashionable to decry his knowledge and attitudes, but although the world has moved on from Burton's time, he does remain as one of the founders of weapons study. In Burton's "Book of the Sword": he devotes a chapter to trying to provide a definition of the sword. Finally he throws his hands up in the air and essentially says:- "When you see one, you'll recognise it".

Probably much the same is true of the keris.