Origins of the Keris?

[Orang Lama]

I'd be interested to hear if anyone has any opinions on the shape of these bronze Hoko spearheads from the Kyoto National Museum. This particular form seems to be a local variant on the Chinese ge dagger-axe and so would have been mounted perpendicular to the haft.

[David]

Hi Orang Lama. We don't generally discuss non-keris items on the keris page and my inclination is to transfer this to the Ethnographic Forum. But if i understand you correctly from how you titled this thread you seem to be enquiring if these blades could be a forerunner to the keris??? I do see the similarity in form, but don't personally feel fully qualified to give a substantiated answer here. So i will allow the discussion to continue as long as it stays focussed on keris, though i suspect it will end up in the Ethno Forum soon enough.
My gut response is no, these are not related to keris, and any similarities are merely coincidental, but perhaps some of our more knowledgable members have a different opinion on than. I have never heard or read of anyome relating the origin of keris to Japanese edged weapons.
It would be helpful to know to what era the Kyoto National Museum dated these. Also they appear different from what i am seeing as Hoko spearheads when i search.

[A. G. Maisey]

The question of keris origin has been addressed by many people, and when we examine this matter closely we find that it is something that is inextricably tied to the socio-cultural development of Jawa prior to 10th century, CE.

Across the world there are a number of weapon forms that can resemble the keris in one way or another, and a simple physical resemblance is not sufficient upon which to build an idea of origin.

However, if we can show trade, cultural & political links between the Central Javanese society during the early Classical Period & Japan, that might be a place to start investigation.

But then we are immediately faced with the fact that the keris is culturally tied to the Javanese/Balinese Hindu belief system. It might be quite difficult to introduce an idea of Japanese influence.

[Orang Lama]

Well, I'm not really suggesting anything at all, especially not some sort of influence from Japan. What I did find interesting is how some features of the overall blade shape could be interpreted as making sense when one views the blade as being a very distant and derived descendant of a blade that was originally mounted perpendicularly to a haft. Whether or not that ancestral blade was a Chinese 戈 dagger-axe or an entirely indigenous Javanese weapon is neither here nor there.

And of course this could all be a completely coincidental resemblance. And yes, none of this proves anything.

But just for fun, I'll just list some of the features that I find interesting.

[Orang Lama]

a) The relatively short tang found on keris corresponds to the short tang one sees on dagger-axes and which is essential to the way in which dagger-axes are mounted are attached to the haft.

b) The blumbangan corresponds to the holes which were used for attaching dagger-axe blades to the haft. Once the ancestral blade shape started being used as a dagger rather than a polearm, these holes no longer served any purpose. However, retaining at least one hollow at the base of the blade provided both a connection to the revered ancestral form as well as a secure anchor point for the thumb when holding blade in a pinch grip.

c) The blades on dagger-axes tend to cant to one side because they are used with an arcing downward pecking motion. While the offset tip on the keris might help with thrusting, it is arguably not necessary for a stabbing weapon.

d) Likewise, the base of the blade is asymmetric on dagger-axes in order to deal with the stress from the arcing strike. This gives the blade a distinctive flaring profile.

e) Moreover in order in order to reinforce the blade mounting, the very base of the blade has been thickened and asymmetrically lengthened. It does not take much imagination to picture this reinforced section becoming an independent section, which would greatly resemble the ganja. At the same time, picturing the ganja as being derived from a hand guard would require one to explain both why it is made from the same material as the blade and is attached as if it forms an intrinsic extension of the blade.

f) Indonesian cultures have an established practice of dismounting pole arm heads to use them as daggers.

I've attached a picture of a Zhou era Chinese ge (戈) dagger-axe and the Knaud keris for comparison.

[David]

Hi Orang Lama.
Please note that you are still a member under moderation so you posts do not automatically appear on this page. We try to check for new posts daily so please be patient and do not repost because you did not see post immediately appear on the forum. Thanks!

[Orang Lama]

Sure! Sorry about that! The site just kept logging me out while I was typing. So I wasn't sure if my posts were actually getting through.

[A. G. Maisey]

Orang Lama, please accept my apologies for my delayed response to your further explanation. I have been away from home & have not had the opportunity to give your posts the time that they deserve.

I do appreciate your detailed explanation of your observations & I shall try to respond in kind.

Firstly I feel that I should comment on the overarching concept of Keris Origin.

This has been a very vexed question for a long time. Various people, some of them notable academics have considered this question over many years. Origins have been attributed to the Dongson culture of Northern Vietnam (1000BCE > 100CE) through to primitive bone daggers of the indigenous peoples of the Malay Peninsula, the weaponry of the Indian sub-continent & stretching back to the roots of the Indo-Aryan peoples, & of course to China & the Zhou era (C. 1000>200BCE).

During the first half of the 20th century there were some very heated debates between European & British academics & collectors, & this propensity of the keris to generate heated debate continued between Indonesian & Malaysian collectors until quite recently. Things seem to have quietened down a lot over the last twenty years or so.

But the thing is this:- when we mention “Origin” & “Keris” in the same breath we are unavoidably treading upon very thin ice.

You have noted some physical similarities between the form of the early keris and the form of a bronze Japanese spear head, this spear head appears to be a Japanese interpretation of the Chinese ge. It is my understanding that the ge was in use in China from about 1600BCE through to about 200CE.

I am not aware of any trade or cultural links nor exchanges between Japan & Jawa in the period prior to about 200CE, this seems to be the time when the blade that began this discussion might have been produced.

However, there is solid evidence of Java having sent a tribute to the court of Emperor Shun in 131CE.

So, although we cannot relate the keris origin to Japanese sources, we can certainly relate Chinese cultural & trade contacts to both Japan & Jawa.
However, nobody has yet been able to relate keris origin to any Chinese influences, even though there are some later developmental influences upon Javanese culture that can certainly be related to Chinese trade & cultural contacts.

In respect of the specific points that you have raised to support the idea of a relationship between the ge form & the keris form:-

a) the tang of the Javanese keris after about 1400CE normally measures about 6cm. to 7cm., keris from other areas can have longer or shorter tangs, but it is the Javanese keris that must be used as the reference point. The tang of the Knaud keris is only a stub of what it would have been originally. The Knaud is another rather problematic item, & perhaps not a good example to use for anything, it is in fact much younger than the date commonly attributed to it & was inspired by a keris with a damaged blade, that is part of a stone carved statue, & that can be found in the Trowulan Museum of Majapahit in East Jawa. It is likely that the form of keris that the Knaud echoes did in fact have a considerably longer tang than the +/- 7cm tang of the Modern keris form.

b) the earliest form of the keris is known as the Keris Buda, it has this name because it existed during the pre-Islamic period of Jawa, which is known in Jawa as the “Buda Era”. This early form of the keris did not have a blumbangan, the keris in this early form was used in a hammer stroke, as can be seen in the Prambanan (Loro Jonggrang) bas reliefs, used in this way, no blumbangan was required. When the keris began to be used as a thrusting weapon, the blumbangan developed to assist in the thrust by anchoring the required pinch-grip on the blade.

c) the offset of the keris blade provides a degree of compensation for a thrust delivered against a facing opponent.

d) very true, the blade of the ge is well designed for its purpose, & the asymmetric base of the keris is well designed for a different purpose.

f) true, various blades can be put to various uses, and with the disappearance for the need of spears as weapons many of the blades attached to pole arms were remounted onto shorter shafts and single hand grips. This accelerated in the 20th century when the necessary space for long polearms was no longer available for many people.

e) the design of the gonjo element of the keris blade has been discussed by perhaps as many people as those who have discussed keris origin, but when the ways in which the keris was used in its pre-modern form & in its later form are understood the need for the gonjo becomes obvious, briefly it assists in the prevention of damage to the hand of the user. The gonjo is not, & never was intended as a handguard, it was & is intended as a hand support.

Orang Lama, I very much appreciate your observations that you have posted here, it is thoughtful enquiry such as yours that can contribute to a better understanding of the keris, & that is something that all of us who hold a keris interest do value.