Bitten by the Keris Bug

David · 2nd January 2017, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I note that The Two Niks have used "perkaka". Although Indonesian is a form of Malay, and the two languages are mutually intelligible, I do not speak or write formal Malay, so I needed to go to several Malay dictionaries to check "perkaka". I could not find the word, so either we are looking at a printing error, or an error in the original text, or local dialect, or perhaps a newly invented word constructed to apply to this Jawa Demam hilt form.

Well, the Google translator (perhaps not the best source) translates "perkaka" as "the appliance" and translates "pekaka" as "kingfishers".
Well i do find all this name game stuff interesting and while i am certainly not trying to squash that conversation i will just bring it back one more time to the actual reason we began discussing these terms in the first place. That is that the hilt which is currently on this keris, which seems a form of anak ayam teleng, is in fact perfectly correct for this ensemble and that a "Northern type of Jawa Demam", which apparently may be referred to as "pekaka" today, but which it seems may once have been the more accepted name of the hilt which seems to be erroneously called a "kingfisher" hilt (though was in most probability never intended to represent a kingfisher at all), would also be considered perfectly acceptable for a Bugis keris from the Terengganu area as well. There, that wasn't confusing in the least bit...

F. de Luzon · 3rd January 2017, 12:50 AM

Thank you all for your insights!

F. de Luzon

A. G. Maisey · 3rd January 2017, 05:50 AM

Google David?

Well, google seems to be a law unto itself, so who am I to argue?

What Dr. Google has done is to omit the final letter, "s", in the word "perkakas", one of the translations of which could arguably be "appliance", but that's stretching the meaning of "appliance" a bit, the idea is that perkakas is "something to do a job with", it can also translate as "square" --- or so I've been told.

However, I think it is very colloquial usage, because "perkaka" does not appear in the hardcopy dictionaries I went to first, nor the online dictionaries I went to after that.

After a discussion with a native speaker of Malay, I am slowly coming to the opinion that the word "perkakas" is a word that has, so to speak, been pulled out of the air in order to permit a regularisation of names.

And let's be fair:- by any measure the hilt is in fact an appliance:- it permits the keris to be used. Maybe The Two Niks, or somebody else, just removed the "s" to make the word more suitable for a keris --- too many "sssss" are uncomfortable on the ear, and "keris" already has one "s".

However, be that as it may, its only in line with what happens with keris terminology all the time. I'll never forget when Empu Pauzan Pusposukadgo finished reading the second edition of Ensiklopedi --- "Where did he get all these names and words from? I've never heard of them! There is a big question here!" (Ensiklopedi was first published as "Ensiklopedi Budaya Nasional" in 1988, our "Ensiklopedi is the enlarged, expanded, questionable edition of the 1988 edition)

In respect of the "kingfisher" hilt, it actually was called a "pekakak" hilt according to Gardner, he reported what people around him in Malaya called it, because to those people it looked like a pekakak, however, when this difficult foreign word moved to Britain, the British did what they did best at that time, and they made it their own by translating it to a word they could remember:- kingfisher.

I have no argument at all as to what hilt should or should not go onto this keris. I don't know what is correct, and judging by the hilts I have seen fitted to this type of keris, its my guess that in the past, before collectors told them what was and what was not correct, most people who carried this type of keris didn't really know what was correct either, especially if they lived away from a major settlement.

The reason I posted something in the first place was because of Kai's use of the word "pekaka", which he has clarified by reference to his source where the word is "perkaka", so what piqued my interest was simply an old fashioned typo.

David · 3rd January 2017, 05:56 AM

Well Alan, i did suggest that Google Translator could be dubious at best...

A. G. Maisey · 3rd January 2017, 07:00 AM

Yep, it sure is. I've seen it do some pretty funny things. I think its probably pretty OK to give a general sense of what a passage of text might be about, provided the text is written in a standard form. I used it for something recently, I forget what, I think it was German > English, and what it gave me made sense.

Jean · 3rd January 2017, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

Well i do find all this name game stuff interesting and while i am certainly not trying to squash that conversation i will just bring it back one more time to the actual reason we began discussing these terms in the first place. That is that the hilt which is currently on this keris, which seems a form of anak ayam teleng, is in fact perfectly correct for this ensemble and that a "Northern type of Jawa Demam", which apparently may be referred to as "pekaka" today, but which it seems may once have been the more accepted name of the hilt which seems to be erroneously called a "kingfisher" hilt (though was in most probability never intended to represent a kingfisher at all), would also be considered perfectly acceptable for a Bugis keris from the Terengganu area as well. There, that wasn't confusing in the least bit...

Well, I would just like to say that the hilts shown in posts #17 & 18 look recent and poorly made specimens IMO.

Regards

kai · 3rd January 2017, 09:46 AM

I agree, Jean. (The copious use of lacquer doesn't help either.)

I guess you wanted to include the hilt from post #19, too...

Regards,
Kai

Jean · 4th January 2017, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

I agree, Jean. (The copious use of lacquer doesn't help either.)

I guess you wanted to include the hilt from post #19, too...

Regards,
Kai

Hello Kai and David,
Yes, I meant the hilts from posts #17, 18, and 19 indeed!
Regards

F. de Luzon · 5th January 2017, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Hello Kai and David,
Yes, I meant the hilts from posts #17, 18, and 19 indeed!
Regards

Hello Kai, David and Jean! May I request for more photos of better quality versions of this hilt for reference? I would like to learn the standards. I'm also very tempted to go shopping for a hilt as a results of this discussion. Cheers!

F. de Luzon

David · 5th January 2017, 06:03 PM

Well, i don't really mean to throw any gasoline on the name game fire, but if we are to accept Spirit of Wood as any kind of authoritative source, the hilt on this keris in question as well as the examples supplied by Kai and Laowang are much closer in form to what Noor & Khoo refer to as "Pipit Teling", shown at the top of page 134. This hilt has the longer neck we are seeing in the examples presented here. It is specifically described as originating in Terengganu. What they call "Anak Ayam" is shown of page 136, a shorter neck with a much more pronounce protruding top fin. Since the name "Pipit" refers to a sparrow and the name "Anak Ayam" refers to a baby chicken (chick) this visually makes a whole lot more sense to me as the one they describe as "Pipit Teling" has much more of a sparrow form and what they describe as "Anak Ayam" looks much more like a baby chick.

Of course, if you google "Anak Ayam Teleng" you will find that there is great confusion out there in the market place as to the proper names for these hilts. I find numerous examples of sellers who describe the Northern Jawa Demam, which apparently is now known to many as "pekaka", as "Anak Ayam". Now, we do know that at one time "pekaka" (or possibly "perkaka") once referred to the tajong hilts due to their similarity with the kingfisher bird. How long will it be before all these names morph once again? If sellers persistently refer to hilts by names that once meant something else, how long before that becomes the norm and these designations shift? This is the crux of the problem with this name game IMHO.

kai · 5th January 2017, 06:05 PM

The example shown in post #9 is the only one of this type in my collection. If you use the forum search function, "anak ayam teleng" or "pipit teleng" should yield some more hits.

Apart from the characteristic proportions in Terengganu style (of antique hilts), you also can utilize your experience with Moro pieces regarding carving workmanship and choice of wood.

Before you embark on a shopping spree, please post a close-up of the scabbard crosspiece (full frontal view)!

BTW, the mentioned book "Spirit of Wood" is a must-have reference that nicely translates to other cultures within the Malayan realm. Out of print though - it's really worth to keep searching online bookstores and to wait for an affordable offer.

Regards,
Kai

David · 5th January 2017, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

The example shown in post #9 is the only one of this type in my collection. If you use the forum search function, "anak ayam teleng" or "pipit teleng" should yield some more hits.

Kai, you seem to be alluding to the notion that "anak ayam teleng" and "pipit teleng" are the same hilt form. I have encountered this belief before and in fact the one example i have in my collection of what "Spirit of Wood" calls "pipit teleng" was actually called by both of these names in the sales description. However, if you follow through on what i stated in my last post, Noor & Khoo clearly distinguish these two names as completely different hilt forms in Spirit of Wood.

F. de Luzon · 6th January 2017, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

The example shown in post #9 is the only one of this type in my collection. If you use the forum search function, "anak ayam teleng" or "pipit teleng" should yield some more hits.

Apart from the characteristic proportions in Terengganu style (of antique hilts), you also can utilize your experience with Moro pieces regarding carving workmanship and choice of wood.

Before you embark on a shopping spree, please post a close-up of the scabbard crosspiece (full frontal view)!

BTW, the mentioned book "Spirit of Wood" is a must-have reference that nicely translates to other cultures within the Malayan realm. Out of print though - it's really worth to keep searching online bookstores and to wait for an affordable offer.

Regards,
Kai

Thanks for your advise Kai! I checked using forum search and I now understand what you mean. The hilt attached to this keris does indeed look less refined than some of the examples. Aside from the carving, the quality of the varnish also makes a big difference.

While I try to apply what I know about the Moro kris in assessing kerises, I find that it is quite difficult to find similarities. There are shared terms and motifs but I'm beginning to agree with the observation of others that the Moro Kris is a "different animal."

Moro kris hilts are "defined" by the hilt wrapping (cord, silver, brass, gold, etc.) and it's pommel shape/material (Kakatua, horse hoof, bulb etc./wood, ivory, horn, etc) unlike the keris melayu hilt that is shaped out of a solid piece of wood. Moro kris hilts are also distinct from that of the keris and Malay Sundang, with the absence of the mendak in Moro pieces.

I have attached the photos of the scabbard crosspiece as you requested. I will also keep my eyes open for "Spirit of Wood." Again, thanks for your advise. I value you comments.

Warm regards,

F. de Luzon

Laowang · 6th January 2017, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F. de Luzon

Hello Kai, David and Jean! May I request for more photos of better quality versions of this hilt for reference? I would like to learn the standards. I'm also very tempted to go shopping for a hilt as a results of this discussion. Cheers!

F. de Luzon

A version of this hilt form that was discussed on the forum previously here:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3055

David · 3rd January 2017, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

Well, I would just like to say that the hilts shown in posts #17 & 18 look recent and poorly made specimens IMO.

Regards

I believe that the low quality of this particular hilt has already been remarked upon Jean. The question which raise this whole conversation however was not about the quality of the hilt, but rather whether it was a proper form for a Bugis keris of Terengganu origin. I believe we may have established that indeed it is.

A. G. Maisey · 3rd January 2017, 08:13 PM

Thank you very much for that clarification Green, you have confirmed one of my suspicions.

In respect of the correct spelling of the Malay word for the bird known as a "kingfisher" in English.

Wilkinson's dictionary of 1901 is the dictionary that is apparently regarded by linguists as the most authoritative dictionary of Classical Malay, it appears to have a similar status in respect of the Malay Language as does the Oxford Dictionary for English.

This dictionary lists both "pekaka" and "pekakak".

A number of hard-copy dictionaries also list both words, as do a number of online dictionaries.

All language changes in use and in spelling, this is particularly the case in English but it also applies in other languages.

I accept that at the present time, in the area of Malaysia where you live, the currently popular spelling for the word under discussion is "pekaka", which of course means that the pronunciation also differs from "pekakak", but this difference would be almost imperceptible.

However, at the time that Gardner was writing there can be no question that "pekakak" was a legitimate spelling, as also was "pekaka".

Bahasa Indonesia is founded upon Malay as it is spoken in a part of Sumatra. The reason that this particular form of Malay was chosen as the foundation stone for the national language is that this form of Malay was the form that was most generally in use as the lingua franca of trade in Maritime South East Asia. In this form of the Malay Language the word "pekaka" is unknown, the spelling "pekakak" is the spelling used.

3rd January 2017, 12:50 AM	#2
F. de Luzon Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 184	Thank you all for your insights! F. de Luzon

3rd January 2017, 05:50 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Google David? Well, google seems to be a law unto itself, so who am I to argue? What Dr. Google has done is to omit the final letter, "s", in the word "perkakas", one of the translations of which could arguably be "appliance", but that's stretching the meaning of "appliance" a bit, the idea is that perkakas is "something to do a job with", it can also translate as "square" --- or so I've been told. However, I think it is very colloquial usage, because "perkaka" does not appear in the hardcopy dictionaries I went to first, nor the online dictionaries I went to after that. After a discussion with a native speaker of Malay, I am slowly coming to the opinion that the word "perkakas" is a word that has, so to speak, been pulled out of the air in order to permit a regularisation of names. And let's be fair:- by any measure the hilt is in fact an appliance:- it permits the keris to be used. Maybe The Two Niks, or somebody else, just removed the "s" to make the word more suitable for a keris --- too many "sssss" are uncomfortable on the ear, and "keris" already has one "s". However, be that as it may, its only in line with what happens with keris terminology all the time. I'll never forget when Empu Pauzan Pusposukadgo finished reading the second edition of Ensiklopedi --- "Where did he get all these names and words from? I've never heard of them! There is a big question here!" (Ensiklopedi was first published as "Ensiklopedi Budaya Nasional" in 1988, our "Ensiklopedi is the enlarged, expanded, questionable edition of the 1988 edition) In respect of the "kingfisher" hilt, it actually was called a "pekakak" hilt according to Gardner, he reported what people around him in Malaya called it, because to those people it looked like a pekakak, however, when this difficult foreign word moved to Britain, the British did what they did best at that time, and they made it their own by translating it to a word they could remember:- kingfisher. I have no argument at all as to what hilt should or should not go onto this keris. I don't know what is correct, and judging by the hilts I have seen fitted to this type of keris, its my guess that in the past, before collectors told them what was and what was not correct, most people who carried this type of keris didn't really know what was correct either, especially if they lived away from a major settlement. The reason I posted something in the first place was because of Kai's use of the word "pekaka", which he has clarified by reference to his source where the word is "perkaka", so what piqued my interest was simply an old fashioned typo.

3rd January 2017, 05:56 AM	#4
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,237	Well Alan, i did suggest that Google Translator could be dubious at best...

3rd January 2017, 07:00 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Yep, it sure is. I've seen it do some pretty funny things. I think its probably pretty OK to give a general sense of what a passage of text might be about, provided the text is written in a standard form. I used it for something recently, I forget what, I think it was German > English, and what it gave me made sense.

3rd January 2017, 09:46 AM	#7
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	I agree, Jean. (The copious use of lacquer doesn't help either.) I guess you wanted to include the hilt from post #19, too... Regards, Kai

5th January 2017, 06:03 PM	#10
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,237	Well, i don't really mean to throw any gasoline on the name game fire, but if we are to accept Spirit of Wood as any kind of authoritative source, the hilt on this keris in question as well as the examples supplied by Kai and Laowang are much closer in form to what Noor & Khoo refer to as "Pipit Teling", shown at the top of page 134. This hilt has the longer neck we are seeing in the examples presented here. It is specifically described as originating in Terengganu. What they call "Anak Ayam" is shown of page 136, a shorter neck with a much more pronounce protruding top fin. Since the name "Pipit" refers to a sparrow and the name "Anak Ayam" refers to a baby chicken (chick) this visually makes a whole lot more sense to me as the one they describe as "Pipit Teling" has much more of a sparrow form and what they describe as "Anak Ayam" looks much more like a baby chick. Of course, if you google "Anak Ayam Teleng" you will find that there is great confusion out there in the market place as to the proper names for these hilts. I find numerous examples of sellers who describe the Northern Jawa Demam, which apparently is now known to many as "pekaka", as "Anak Ayam". Now, we do know that at one time "pekaka" (or possibly "perkaka") once referred to the tajong hilts due to their similarity with the kingfisher bird. How long will it be before all these names morph once again? If sellers persistently refer to hilts by names that once meant something else, how long before that becomes the norm and these designations shift? This is the crux of the problem with this name game IMHO.

5th January 2017, 06:05 PM	#11
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	The example shown in post #9 is the only one of this type in my collection. If you use the forum search function, "anak ayam teleng" or "pipit teleng" should yield some more hits. Apart from the characteristic proportions in Terengganu style (of antique hilts), you also can utilize your experience with Moro pieces regarding carving workmanship and choice of wood. Before you embark on a shopping spree, please post a close-up of the scabbard crosspiece (full frontal view)! BTW, the mentioned book "Spirit of Wood" is a must-have reference that nicely translates to other cultures within the Malayan realm. Out of print though - it's really worth to keep searching online bookstores and to wait for an affordable offer. Regards, Kai

3rd January 2017, 08:13 PM	#16
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,056	Thank you very much for that clarification Green, you have confirmed one of my suspicions. In respect of the correct spelling of the Malay word for the bird known as a "kingfisher" in English. Wilkinson's dictionary of 1901 is the dictionary that is apparently regarded by linguists as the most authoritative dictionary of Classical Malay, it appears to have a similar status in respect of the Malay Language as does the Oxford Dictionary for English. This dictionary lists both "pekaka" and "pekakak". A number of hard-copy dictionaries also list both words, as do a number of online dictionaries. All language changes in use and in spelling, this is particularly the case in English but it also applies in other languages. I accept that at the present time, in the area of Malaysia where you live, the currently popular spelling for the word under discussion is "pekaka", which of course means that the pronunciation also differs from "pekakak", but this difference would be almost imperceptible. However, at the time that Gardner was writing there can be no question that "pekakak" was a legitimate spelling, as also was "pekaka". Bahasa Indonesia is founded upon Malay as it is spoken in a part of Sumatra. The reason that this particular form of Malay was chosen as the foundation stone for the national language is that this form of Malay was the form that was most generally in use as the lingua franca of trade in Maritime South East Asia. In this form of the Malay Language the word "pekaka" is unknown, the spelling "pekakak" is the spelling used.