Bitten by the Keris Bug

[A. G. Maisey]

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]

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

[A. G. Maisey]

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]

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]

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

[kai]

Hello Alan,

So your "pekaka" in Post #20 was just a typo, Kai? It was that typo that roused my curiosity.

Not exactly a typo - Adni is still using pekaka which seems to be the accepted Malay spelling. I have not tried to research whether perkaka is a northern Malay spelling/pronunciation variant.

I've just had a look at "Spirit of Wood" --- great book. It seems that the authors consistently refer to the entire keris as "Keris Tajong", P120:-

<snip>

The word "tajong" is actually the name of a kind of fishing boat, and the form of a keris tajong scabbard is very similar to this boat, so I think we will find that the keris gains its name from the scabbard:- it is a tajong scabbard, and a tajong keris --- just like Jawa terminology:- a ladrangan wrongko, thus a ladrangan keris.

But what sort of hilt is it?

Regrettably the authors of this wonderful book do not give the hilt a name, they refer to it as "hilt, keris tajong" or "hulu keris tajong", in other words the hilt of a keris tajong, so the name tajong hilt is actually a descriptor rather than a name.

It is my understanding that the tajong hilt and name-giving tajong scabbard have to go with each other - neither the hilt nor the scabbard is complete/correct without the other.

Prior to 1936 Gardner wrote this about the hilt now known as the hilt for a keris tajong:-

"The hilt developed a big head with such a long nose that it has been mistaken for a kingfisher; but it is really intended to be human, and there will often be found tiny arms clasped around the body"

It is clear that Gardner knew exactly what he was writing about, and that people in Malaya prior to 1936 did refer to this hilt as a pekakak. It is equally clear that he was familiar with the hilt now known as a perkaka but he had no name for this, he just referred to it as the Northern Type Jawa Demam.

Very clear indeed that Gardner wrote exactly what he intended to write and simply reported what he heard from people living in Malaya at that time. The Two Niks seem to think he was confused, I'm sorry , but I see no confusion.

I agree we need to dig into this a bit more, especially since Stone also seems to go in the same direction even before Gardner - so the name seems to have been around in colonial circles.

Gardner was based in Johore which is pretty much the opposite end of Malaya as far as things Pattani/Kelantan are concerned. There might be a slim chance that his sources where local Malay who possibly mixed things up...

There is also the chance that the whole kingfisher thing is a late development/invention to cover-up the pre-Islamic origin of either hilt type.

Let's see if we can get some more input from within the culture (and also possibly more period sources).

About Bugis and Malay hilt form terms.

Again my thanks Kai, Bugis term : Malay term, yes, or course, I did not even consider this, I was thinking in strictly Bugis terms, for, as we are aware, when we speak of the Bugis people we speak of a culture , rather than a geographical location.

What you say about the "perkaka" form being absent from Bugis usage, might well be true, even though it would seem that Bugis keris do exist that use this form of hilt. I was coming to the same opinion as yourself, but there are a couple of pics of hilts in the Bugis book that look like pekaka type to me, but I'm probably wrong, because the camera angle doesn't show enough of the hilt for certainty.

None of the hilts in this book is of the northern Malay type (with its characteristic shark fin but also characteristic proportions/details).

While this JD variant is most commonly seen with northern Malay blades (especially but not limited to pandai saras blades) and the taller northern Malay scabbard variant, it also does show up with more typical keris Bugis-Melayu. I can't remember seeing it combined with fittings that seem to suggest a Bone/Gowa origin though - if you can come up with pics, this would be certainly interesting.

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, the only thing that aroused my interest in this thread was your use of the word "pekaka".

You then gave as your source "Spirit of Wood".

I checked this and found that the authors do not use "pekaka", but rather a word that is unknown in formal Malay:- "perkaka"

Here we have two completely different spellings:- two completely different words

Possibly Adni does use "pekaka" , but if so, then goodness me --- Adni is at variance with the recognised authorities:- The Two Niks.

And you yourself are quite happy to use "pekaka" because Adni uses "pekaka" ?

So, Adni is now the recognised authority?

Any way I look at this question it seems that it is full of uncertainty:- nobody seems to know just exactly what is correct --- least of all me.

There is absolutely no similarity in the pronunciation of these two different words. It might appear that they are similar to a non-native speaker of Malay, but in Malay the "r" is rolled, which makes the sound of these two words completely different when spoken.

In respect of the tajong hilt and scabbard belonging together, I have never disputed that, this is something I haven't even mentioned, what I said was that the name "tajong" comes from a type of fishing boat and the form of the scabbard resembles that boat, thus the scabbard gives its name to the complete keris, I then drew attention to the indisputable fact that The Two Niks do not give a name to the hilt of the keris tajong, they merely describe it as the hilt of the keris tajong:- there is a difference between naming something and describing something.

I've gone on record more times than once in stating my position when it comes to playing the name game, a game that has always been very popular with collectors.

If we need an example of just how puerile this game can be, I think we have just provided one.

[Green]

I am new to Kerisology and my info may be disputed. But as a malay myself and come from Kelantan Malaysia (which is basically culturally and linguistically the same as the people from Patani/southern Thailand, the word 'pekaka' (correct spelling is pekaka and NOT pekakak) refers locally to the bird which in standard malayis called 'raja udang' and in english the king fisher.

In Kelantan/Patani the hilt of keris tajong is usually referred to as 'hulu tajong' these days, but previously as far as I know are refered interchangeably as pekaka also.

It is only lately as far as I know even the keris 'experts' in Kelantan think that hulu pekaka is a wrong term for the typical hilt of keris tajung which is now universally called hulu tajong.

Currently hulu pekaka is referred to the type as shown below.

[David]

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]

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.

[Jean]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[A. G. Maisey]

I went to Jawa for the first time in the late 1960's. One of my objectives was to try to learn a little about keris, and of course to add to my collection. I found keris everywhere, in markets, used as trade marks, in museums, used in dress by virtually every man when he dressed formally.

In the mid 1970's I decided that I really wanted to get involved in intensive keris study, but I was undecided as to whether I should go to the Malay Peninsula for this, or whether I should continue with my visits to Jawa.

I investigated the keris situation in the area of Malaysia that was comprised of Old Malaya, and what I discovered was that a combination of the British presence, very aggressive Islam, and a national character that was pushing to modernise had reduced the conscious presence of a keris culture to virtually nil.

I decided that it would simply be too hard to try to learn anything at all about the keris in Malaysia, so I concentrated my attention on Jawa and to a slightly lesser extent on Bali. In retrospect it was very fortunate that I did so.

During the 1970's keris culture in Jawa got a shot in the arm, when the efforts of several people:- Deitrich Drescher, Garrett & Bronwen Solyom, Panembahan Harjonegoro ( he was not a Panembahan at that time) Djeno Harumbrojo and his brothers, Empu Suparman Supowijoyo, Empu Pauzan Pusposukadgo, saw a revival in keris culture in Jawa.

This revival was accelerated by economic and societal conditions in Jawa, right up until the present time. The Javanese keris culture has now returned to a vibrant part of the overall societal structure.

In Bali the revival was not so aggressive, and probably did not start to really move until about 20 years ago.

However, in Malaysia it is very difficult to identify exactly when there was a revival of interest in the keris, and just what the extent of this is, even today. Yes, there is an awareness, but the impression I gain from the people I correspond with in Malaysia is that the keris movement there is still feeling its way, and that if there ever was a deep cultural knowledge of keris in the past, this has pretty much been lost because of the social conditions I referred to earlier.

It has even been said to me by more than one person living in Malaysia that the keris culture in present day Malaysia has very little to do with keris and more to do with social climbing. It has also been remarked that people raise their own societal position by pretending to have "secret knowledge" when in fact they themselves are inventing this knowledge.

There can be not the smallest doubt that the core of keris culture is to be found in Jawa, and since Jawa is where the keris originated, and where the culture has never died, this is as it should be. However, although I do focus my attention on Jawa, I would be more than willing to gather information from some other areas if I were to be convinced that the information I was able to gather was genuine, old, grassroots information.

Regrettably my efforts to gather information of this quality have invariably failed and investigation has indicated that the information I have gathered from, amongst other places, Malaysia, has almost invariably been of quite recent origin.

This is one of the reasons for my disinterest in keris from outside the Heartland of Keris Culture :- Jawa/Bali.

Personally I look askance at any information in relation to keris that has originated in present-day Malaysia. Possibly some things might be accurate, but then how can that be verified? If some things are modern inventions how many of these modern inventions are there? How do we differentiate between the true and the false?

Perhaps 30 or 40 years of continuing investigation, using the audit approach might be able to give us some answers, but at the present time there are too many unanswered questions for any certainty to be attached to any information coming out of Malaysia.

[Laowang]

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

[F. de Luzon]

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

[F. de Luzon]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I went to Jawa for the first time in the late 1960's. One of my objectives was to try to learn a little about keris, and of course to add to my collection. I found keris everywhere, in markets, used as trade marks, in museums, used in dress by virtually every man when he dressed formally.

In the mid 1970's I decided that I really wanted to get involved in intensive keris study, but I was undecided as to whether I should go to the Malay Peninsula for this, or whether I should continue with my visits to Jawa.

I investigated the keris situation in the area of Malaysia that was comprised of Old Malaya, and what I discovered was that a combination of the British presence, very aggressive Islam, and a national character that was pushing to modernise had reduced the conscious presence of a keris culture to virtually nil.

I decided that it would simply be too hard to try to learn anything at all about the keris in Malaysia, so I concentrated my attention on Jawa and to a slightly lesser extent on Bali. In retrospect it was very fortunate that I did so.

During the 1970's keris culture in Jawa got a shot in the arm, when the efforts of several people:- Deitrich Drescher, Garrett & Bronwen Solyom, Panembahan Harjonegoro ( he was not a Panembahan at that time) Djeno Harumbrojo and his brothers, Empu Suparman Supowijoyo, Empu Pauzan Pusposukadgo, saw a revival in keris culture in Jawa.

This revival was accelerated by economic and societal conditions in Jawa, right up until the present time. The Javanese keris culture has now returned to a vibrant part of the overall societal structure.

In Bali the revival was not so aggressive, and probably did not start to really move until about 20 years ago.

However, in Malaysia it is very difficult to identify exactly when there was a revival of interest in the keris, and just what the extent of this is, even today. Yes, there is an awareness, but the impression I gain from the people I correspond with in Malaysia is that the keris movement there is still feeling its way, and that if there ever was a deep cultural knowledge of keris in the past, this has pretty much been lost because of the social conditions I referred to earlier.

It has even been said to me by more than one person living in Malaysia that the keris culture in present day Malaysia has very little to do with keris and more to do with social climbing. It has also been remarked that people raise their own societal position by pretending to have "secret knowledge" when in fact they themselves are inventing this knowledge.

There can be not the smallest doubt that the core of keris culture is to be found in Jawa, and since Jawa is where the keris originated, and where the culture has never died, this is as it should be. However, although I do focus my attention on Jawa, I would be more than willing to gather information from some other areas if I were to be convinced that the information I was able to gather was genuine, old, grassroots information.

Regrettably my efforts to gather information of this quality have invariably failed and investigation has indicated that the information I have gathered from, amongst other places, Malaysia, has almost invariably been of quite recent origin.

This is one of the reasons for my disinterest in keris from outside the Heartland of Keris Culture :- Jawa/Bali.

Personally I look askance at any information in relation to keris that has originated in present-day Malaysia. Possibly some things might be accurate, but then how can that be verified? If some things are modern inventions how many of these modern inventions are there? How do we differentiate between the true and the false?

Perhaps 30 or 40 years of continuing investigation, using the audit approach might be able to give us some answers, but at the present time there are too many unanswered questions for any certainty to be attached to any information coming out of Malaysia.

A.G. Maisey,

Your passion for research is truly admirable. I am inspired to study the Moro kris in the same manner as you've studied the Jawa/Bali keris. I doubt however if I will have the same opportunities as you've had. I will nonetheless try my best. Hopefully, one day I can publish a book on the Moro kris.

Your knowledge is very impressive. Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the keris Melayu!

F. de Luzon

[David]

Just curious...does no one care to comment on my observation that according to Spirit of Wood "anak ayam teleng" and "pipit teleng" are two completely different hilt forms, with "pipit teleng" being the form present on the keris in question.

[Laowang]

Originally Posted by David

Just curious...does no one care to comment on my observation that according to Spirit of Wood "anak ayam teleng" and "pipit teleng" are two completely different hilt forms, with "pipit teleng" being the form present on the keris in question.

David, I agree that the photos and accompanying captions in Spirit of Wood appear to contradict what Kai & I have written in previous posts. I admit I have no particular knowledge of peninsular Malaysian hulu names other than what I have read in posts from Kai Wee and Alam Shah, and from Adni on his website, which formed the basis of my own comments. I would love to hear from either Kai Wee or Alam Shah, but they haven't posted much as of recent.

It does make me reflect a little on the importance of the name. One could argue that it's important to know the correct name, in order to classify the keris, and understand what it is known as in its region of origin. One might also acknowledge, as Alan has suggested, that knowledge, names, and terms have changed over time, due to evolution within and/or disruption to the original culture. Perhaps there simply isn't consensus within the peninsular Malaysian community regarding the proper name for the forms given that loss of knowledge, or lack of continuity.

If the importance of the name is to define a set of commonly shared formal attributes, so that when one refers to a hulu pekaka everyone understands what that hilt looks like in the absence of a photograph, one could also resort to more generic terms. E.g. "jawa demam, northern Malay variant" for the pekaka, or "jawa demam, Terengganu variant" for the anak ayam teleng and/or pipit teleng form.

I'm not sure I personally see the need to have all questions answered with absolute certitude. For me, the beauty of a hulu pekaka or hulu tajong lies within the grace of the form, the power of the carving, and the resonance of the original cultural belief system that created the piece and imbued it with power. It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Laowang

It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

Very well said!

[A. G. Maisey]

Its not just a matter of "nice" to know the correct name, its a matter of extremely difficult to know the correct name.

Where keris are concerned, the names change all the time, depending on situation, period, geographic location, social group, and so on. In Central Jawa the name for something can change from one town to another, and those towns might only be 30 miles apart.

Sometimes one particular group of people can be led by the opinions of a single person, who is recognised within that group as the most senior within the hierarchy of the group, and he might decide that something should be named as something other than it is currently named. Often the reasons for that decision will be known only to the senior person.

But then we have the situation where it is essential to know a correct name, within a defined context, because interpretations associated with that name follow. I'm thinking here of dhapur in accord with a particular kraton's understandings.

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

[kai]

Hello David,

Sorry for not noticing right away that we crossed posts. I'm a bit slow to respond these days, too...

Thanks for bringing this up: Indeed, in PoW pipit teleng and anak ayam teleng refer to different hilt types; I haven't seen this reflected by usage within the Malay keris community though and would love to have more input here!

Originally Posted by Laowang

I'm not sure I personally see the need to have all questions answered with absolute certitude. For me, the beauty of a hulu pekaka or hulu tajong lies within the grace of the form, the power of the carving, and the resonance of the original cultural belief system that created the piece and imbued it with power. It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

I agree that the name game is not really important except for convenience in communication. Thus, I've usually been trying to go with the flow and follow usage of the local communities. Sometimes new info can be brought to light if one tries to dig deeper and David and Alan bring up valid points, especially regarding seemingly inconsistent usage. I'll try to follow this up and get back with any updates.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Alan,

I'm not questioning your general line of reasoning (and certainly not the choices you made). I hope you bear with me for the fun of it.

I investigated the keris situation in the area of Malaysia that was comprised of Old Malaya, and what I discovered was that a combination of the British presence, very aggressive Islam, and a national character that was pushing to modernise had reduced the conscious presence of a keris culture to virtually nil.

Ignoring the different time points, would it be really be that much off to state the following for the current situation in Indonesia and most of Java?
"I investigated the keris situation in the area of Indonesia that was comprised of Netherland's East India, and what I discovered was that a combination of the Dutch [and Japanese] presence, very aggressive Islam (maybe let's call this increasing Wahabite influence), and a national character that was pushing to modernise had reduced the conscious presence of a keris culture to virtually nil."

Sure, there are some very knowlegeable people from the heart of Jawa still extant. But how much do they really relate to the keris culture(s) as seen/practised by (major sections of) the general public?

It has even been said to me by more than one person living in Malaysia that the keris culture in present day Malaysia has very little to do with keris and more to do with social climbing. It has also been remarked that people raise their own societal position by pretending to have "secret knowledge" when in fact they themselves are inventing this knowledge.

Considering how the tangguh system got pretty much corrupted, etc. pp., not really unheard of on Java, too, isn't it? In an urban setting, is Kuala Lumpur so much different from, say, Jakarta these days? It's usually more the backwaters where traditions are kept alive in a post-colonial setting.

I'm not contesting that the conditions in Malaya have been more problematic for traditional knowledge to survive (no long-standing center of gravity for keris culture with many smaller sultanates; earlier loss of their importance; considerable proportion of the population of Tamil and Chinese descent; traditionally high mobility of the populations; increasing Thai influence in Pattani; and political turmoil in northern Malaysia).

Regards,
Kai

[Laowang]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Its not just a matter of "nice" to know the correct name, its a matter of extremely difficult to know the correct name.

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

Alan, I am in complete agreement with your point of view, in this regard.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

Laowang, if you have been following my method of posting on this thread and what i have been trying to bring to light you will understand that i do indeed share your opinion of the name game. i have brought these conflicts of opinions on correct names not to attempt to support one over the other, but rather to point out the futility of it on many levels. But ultimately what is important is that we can use words and understand what the other is describing. Unfortunately in the case of a word like "pekaka" we are now in a situation where some people still consider this a word for the tajong or "kingfisher" variety of hilt while other consider it a proper term for the peninsula version of Jawa Demam (Northern Jawa Demam). This does create some problems for communication showing the importance of the "sometimes it is essential" part of Alan's above statement.

[F. de Luzon]

To provide context to the complex issue being discussed, what follows is a footnote of Farish A. Noor’s article “From Majapahit to Putrajaya,”

“With the spread of Islamic influence in the Malay world a number of kris hilt designs were renamed by the newly-converted Malay peoples. Thus the Garuda-hilt that was prominent in Vishnuite regions was not only redesigned to appear as a man crouching, it was also renamed the Jawa Demam (fevered Javanese) hilt. A revised and Islamised account of the origin of the Jawa Deman hilt (which is an adaptation of the Garuda hilt) is explained in the Hikayat Sejarah Melayu. The Sejarah contains an account of the visit to Java by the two warriors of Melacca, Hang Tuah and Hang Jebat. In the course of their travels there, they encountered a Javanese who was squatting by the roadside. Hang Jebat noticed that the Javanese has his sarong wrapped all around him, and suspected that they were about to be attacked. The assailant leaps at both of them, kris in hand, but is killed by Jebat. The incident inspires them to design a particular hilt called the ‘fevered Javanese’ (Jawa Demam). Note that all references to the Hindu origins and traces found in the hilt form have been erased in the narrative. (Abdul Halim Nasir, pp. 6-7). The hilt is also known by other names like hulu Anak Ayam sejuk, hulu Pipit Teleng, hulu Telunjuk, etc. The hulu Tajung from Lankasuka (Patani, Kelantan and Trengganu) was subsequently called the hulu Pekaka- a serious mistake which endures till this day. While the hulu Krishna was renamed the hulu Tapak Kuda or hulu Ekor Itek.”

http://www.othermalaysia.org/2006/09...o-putrajaya/7/

[A. G. Maisey]

There are several differing approaches that could be used as a response to your proposition Kai. In fact, I've got an article half written for a journal that touches on some of the issues involved in this matter, but I'm not going to get too involved with in-depth answers, I understand that you are playing Devil's Advocate, and we can probably pretty quickly put the cap on any ideas that that Jawa today resembles Malaysia of the mid-1970's, in so far as keris culture is concerned.

I'll try to keep this as brief and to the point as I can.

Firstly, we need to define "Jawa".
This is the Land of Jawa, not the Island of Jawa, in basic terms it is that area where the Javanese Language is spoken. This excludes Sunda, and arguably some other minor areas, but most certainly Jakarta is excluded. Jakarta might just as well be a separate entity altogether, for any similarity it bears to The Land of Jawa.

So let's forget all about Jakarta, its just not relevant.

Jawa itself has been subject to changing influences for at least the last 1500 years. Each of those waves of influence have left their mark on Javanese society, and on Javanese culture. The Hindu-Buddhist wave left a multitude of influences that many people would argue are difficult to separate from Javanese indigenous society and its beliefs. One thing that it did leave was the association between mountains, ancestor worship, Mt. Meru, and the Gunungan. Over time, the Gunungan and its associated symbolism and concepts have permeated Javanese culture to the point where it has become almost symbolic of Jawa itself. The Javanese keris in one of its aspects is a symbolic representation of the Gunungan, thus the keris itself is symbolic of Jawa.

Since the symbolism of the keris is so deeply embedded in the Javanese societal values, it has become a matter of:-

"Jawa would not be Java without the keris"

I forget who coined this memorable phrase, but it is very definitely true of Javanese society, no less today than at the time the idea was first uttered.

The centre of the Land of Jawa is the Karaton Surakarta, and this Karaton's presence is re-enforced by the other "younger brother" Karaton of Jogjakarta, as well as by the minor principalities (in name only) of the Mangkunegaraan and the Pakualamanan. As a cultural unit these remnants of the Jawa of times past are guardians of Jawa's cultural heritage. With age they have weakened, but they still provide a formidable cultural presence, and as long as they exist, together with the Javanese people who regard the Susuhunan of Surakarta, and the Sultan of Ngayogyakarta as their true Lords, rather than the remote politicians in Jakarta, Javanese culture will remain strong and vibrant.

All cultures are comprised of many strands, and each of these strands supports, and is supported by, each of the other strands. Keris culture is only one strand amongst many, and although the width of that strand may vary according to the social conditions of the time, in Jawa at least, it is totally impossible that it could weaken to the point of non-relativity, should this happen, then yes, indeed, Jawa would cease to exist. Together with ancestor worship and most other foundation values of Javanese society.

It is not valid to attempt to assess the strength, nor the values of any cultural strand by reference to the depth of knowledge of people who are not conscious participants in that cultural strand. Consider:- would it be valid to assess the importance of ballet to Russian culture based upon a review of responses on a ballet questionnaire completed by Russian passers-by in Moscow? One example only, but I am certain that with minimal thought anybody could come up with multiple examples to demonstrate this disconnect between the "general public" and the culture of the society in which they live.

We cannot deny that the factors that you mention, Kai, have had an effect on Javanese culture and society. Formal Javanese dress is to a large extent derived from European formal dress of the early colonial period. Some Javanese personal characteristics can perhaps be attributed to the brutal overlordship of indigenous rulers applying introduced principles brought from the Indian Sub-Continent, and the Middle East, followed by European lords, followed by Japanese occupation, and then the somewhat extreme policies of modern era politicians.

In fact, a number of keris conscious Javanese people whom I have known have attributed most of the "mystical/magical" qualities attributed to keris to both direct and indirect influence of Dutch colonialism. Certainly, if we compare the esoteric qualities that may be attributed to the Balinese keris, to the esoteric qualities that are frequently attributed to the Javanese keris, we find a very great difference in these qualities. In the Balinese qualities we see reflections of indigenous beliefs, in the Javanese qualities we see reflections of Sufi beliefs and European beliefs, with only a very minor recognition of indigenous beliefs.

The vast chasm that exists between Javanese/Balinese keris belief systems and keris belief systems to be found outside this core area probably has its roots in the fact that keris made their way into other parts of S.E. Asia from Jawa, as both gifts and as trade goods. The physical object was easy to export, but it would appear that the belief systems that were attached to that physical object were not able to be exported along with the object. Instead what the recipients of those original Javanese keris gained was a shattered comprehension of the true nature of the Javanese Keris.

So they developed their own belief systems, but these beliefs were grafted onto the pre-existing beliefs of those areas outside Jawa, the newly developed beliefs were not deeply woven into the warp and the weft of the fabric of the cultures that received this Javanese transplant.

The result was that my enquiries of the diplomatic representatives of Malaysia in Australia in 1973/4 resulted in responses that indicated an almost total ignorance of any remnants of a keris culture in Malaysia at that time. I made a lot of other enquiries too, of academics, museums, private people. All came up empty. Possibly the most convincing result came from a fellow collector, who had gone to Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia on a trip specifically to add to his collection. He came back with a lot of keris and other weapons, but what he had managed to buy in Malaysia were in extremely poor condition, except for one that he told me he had seen forged from a bicycle chain. This "bike" keris was a monstrosity, together with the dress it was in , altogether he had only a few keris from his time in Malaysia.

Compare this with the situation in the Heartland of the Land of Jawa of today.

Keris culture is booming.

A push to modernise in Jawa? Well, yes, but only on Javanese terms, and if the modernisation looks as if it might intefere with the The Javanese Way, then sorry , we don't really want modernisation:- "mangan nggak mangan, asal kumpul"

Aggressive Islam in the Land of Jawa?

Not a good idea. Those people in Jakarta might tolerate it, we won't.
Yes, there are good, strong Muslims in Central Jawa, and by and large there is an intolerance of any religious extremism, both from the committed practicing Muslims, and from all others. Probably the vast bulk of people in Central Jawa are Muslim in name only, they are really Abangan.

Tangguh corrupted?

Yes, but it has been given a new role, as a sales tool.

It was developed for a specific purpose, the time for that purpose has passed, and one Javanese characteristic that we cannot deny is that Javanese people waste nothing. Would they waste something as valuable as the tangguh system? Not likely, they just reshaped the rules so they could use it to sell things.

I think that I've written more than sufficient for us to put this silly idea that keris culture is dead or dying in the Land of Jawa, but if I haven't, I could be convinced to write another 2000 words or so using different arguments.

[A. G. Maisey]

I have had a hardcopy of Dr. Noor's article “From Majapahit to Putrajaya" since not long after its publication, I guess about 18 or 20 years ago. It has always caused me to wonder how a man of such meritorious reputation and undoubted scholarship could publish an article of this quality.

Dr. Noor's remarks on hilt naming seem to have come from Nik Rashiddin Nik Hussein, an undoubtedly great artist. Dr. Noor's opinions on hilt naming are not the result of original research, but rather a repetition of what can be found in "Spirit of Wood", and from the same source.

The article is now available online and can be downloaded here:-

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...00000101297280

I suggest that a very careful and inquisitive reading of this article might be quite enlightening.