M a j a p a h i t R e v i s i t e d

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

But that is only one of the factors. As I wrote above, oral traditions are tools, and those tools get altered to do different jobs, depending on the needs to the community---or sometimes the needs to the "bigmen" in the community---the power elite.

The traditions, stories, myths, legends, and the belief systems that surround the keris are all a part of understanding the keris, so we do need to be aware of these. But we also need to be aware of the nature of man and his societies.

Very enlighting...

Actually, the keris world does need -- not only a "keris writer", but also a "contextual keris writer" (correct me if I'm wrong with this term). I am very impressed with people like the Australian Indonesianist historian, MC Ricklefs. His books on Indonesian history are fantastic...

Look at his book, "War, Culture and Economy in Java (1677-1726)". Also, "History of Modern Indonesia Since C 1200". If HJ de Graaf and Th G Pigeaud had provided accounts for the period from the fifteenth to late seventeenth centuries, Ricklefs' doctoral research concerned the latter half of the eighteenth century.

According to Ricklefs, The Kartasura period (1680-1745) seemed to have attracted no one's attention. So he decided upon a study of what he expected to be a relatively limited amount of material in order to write a brief narrative account of that period, "emphasising European-Javanese relations"
Ricklefs soon discovered that the sources for Kartasura were voluminous..

In my opinion, this keris world "attracted no one's attention". No serious study (academic study) was made on this keris world. I mean, not as spectacular as de Graaf, Pigeaud, PBR Carey and Ricklefs in writing on Indonesian history.. Am I wrong?

Ganjawulung