Javanese keris titles - when and how are they bestowed?

[Neo]

I am interested in learning about history and designation of the various titles of kerises (and pusakas in general): Sang, Kanjeng Kyai Ageng, Kanjeng Kyai, Kyai, and Nyai. My perception is that the titles goes from higher to lower in the above order - feel free to correct me if you think otherwise.

A respectable collector was kind enough to show me his kerises that come from the same batch from Keraton Solo. There are a couple with "Kanjeng Kyahi" and there is one without any title. Everyone present there concured that the one without the "Kanjeng Kyai" was actually no inferior from the quality perspective. "Mr. No Title" seemed to be just as old as the other ones. I'm kind of shy to mention the word "tangguh" here, but from the tangguh perspective most of them would be Kediri, including the Mr. No-Title. It even has better iron (hurap lumer) and dapur execution. None of the kerises we evaluated had any kinatah.

Any explanation as to how titles are bestowed on keraton kerises? Merit, perceived power, quality, or design?

Also, I learn about the existence of "Sang" kerises from books that allegedly cite from old literatures. However, when reading literatures about kraton collections, they hardly mention any "Sang", mostly are "Kanjeng Kyai Ageng". Any opinion?

[A. G. Maisey]

Neo, may I enquire as to your ethnic background?

Do you speak and understand Javanese? Indonesian?

[Amuk Murugul]

Originally Posted by Neo

I am interested in learning about history and designation of the various titles of kerises (and pusakas in general): Sang, Kanjeng Kyai Ageng, Kanjeng Kyai, Kyai, and Nyai. My perception is that the titles goes from higher to lower in the above order - feel free to correct me if you think otherwise.

A respectable collector was kind enough to show me his kerises that come from the same batch from Keraton Solo. There are a couple with "Kanjeng Kyahi" and there is one without any title. Everyone present there concured that the one without the "Kanjeng Kyai" was actually no inferior from the quality perspective. "Mr. No Title" seemed to be just as old as the other ones. I'm kind of shy to mention the word "tangguh" here, but from the tangguh perspective most of them would be Kediri, including the Mr. No-Title. It even has better iron (hurap lumer) and dapur execution. None of the kerises we evaluated had any kinatah.

Any explanation as to how titles are bestowed on keraton kerises? Merit, perceived power, quality, or design?

Also, I learn about the existence of "Sang" kerises from books that allegedly cite from old literatures. However, when reading literatures about kraton collections, they hardly mention any "Sang", mostly are "Kanjeng Kyai Ageng". Any opinion?

Hullo Neo,

WRT weapons .....generally, in a nutshell:

- Sang: prefix for weapon created by an expert smith (goeroe teupa/poe/mpoe/empoe) as a mark of respect/veneration (seldom used after the advent of Islam c.1100)

- Kangdjeng Kiai Ageung: prefix for weapon (created by an expert smith) with perceived extra-special/more-auspicious origins/traits (much abused, as is/was the title:Soeltan)

- Kangdjeng Kiai: prefix for weapon created by an expert smith who has attained the title Pangeran (prince)

- Kiai: prefix for weapon created by an expert smith (more commonly used after the advent of Islam)

Ki: prefix to denote respect for age of the weapon, but has come to be interchangeable with 'Kiai'

- Si: prefix for any weapon to indicate familiarity/fondness for it (gender-neutral)

- Ni/Nji/Njai: prefix if weapon is deemed 'female'

Best,

[A. G. Maisey]

Interesting take on this matter, Amuk Murugul.

Very interesting take.

But not quite as I understand it.

I will respond to Neo's query, but it will save a great many words if I know his cultural base before I respond.

Incidentally, I have been intending to mention this, and I do hope you will accept my comment in the spirit of mutual cooperation in which it is tendered.

Over perhaps the last six months, several people have contacted me privately to request explanation of the spellings that you use. These spellings have not been in general usage in Indonesia since the early 1970's --- I think it was 1972 when they were abandoned officially --- and as a consequence when younger non-Indonesian people access a dictionary to try to understand words foreign to them, they become completely confused.

Would it be possible for you to use current spellings when you write your posts?

[Amuk Murugul]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

..... Would it be possible for you to use current spellings when you write your posts?

Hullo Alan,

No offence taken.

If it makes things easier, I'm only too glad to oblige ( just requires a bit of effort rather than reflex).
BTW ..... JFYI ..... I have to say that I'm VERY Old School. I was not born Indonesian nor am I one now. So Ejaan Baru Bhs Indo means nothing to me.
You are wizened enough to perhaps remember when one was answered with " ..... dampal sampean kaulaan ..... ".

Best,

[David]

Originally Posted by Amuk Murugul

- Sang: prefix for weapon created by an expert smith (goeroe teupa/poe/mpoe/empoe) as a mark of respect/veneration (seldom used after the advent of Islam c.1100)

This seems just a wee bit early for Islam taking hold in Jawa.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you Amuk Murugul.

Yes, I am somewhat wizened, I was born in 1941, but I learnt both Indonesian and Javanese as an adult, and this exercise began in the 1960's. I regret to advise that in the circles in which I move, I do not very often hear Javanese as it was, and I guess still is, spoken to people of standing, more often I get rough colloquial ngoko thrown at me.

[Neo]

Thanks for the replies, everyone.
Mr. Maisey: I am an Indonesian who is more familiar with the EYD (newer) spelling, though I can definitely discern the older spelling when I see it. My Javanese is marginal (if any) and I am new to the keris world.
Amuk Murugul:

Kangdjeng Kiai: prefix for weapon created by an expert smith who has attained the title Pangeran (prince)

Interesting. This may explain why Mr No Title had no Kanjeng Kiai despite the overall comparable physical look.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for your response to my enquiry, Neo.

Yes, as an Indonesian I have no doubt that you would have no difficulty with the old spellings, however, for a European, or for a native English speaker, who only has access to dictionaries using the current spellings, words spelt in the old way can appear totally incomprehensible.

In the 14th century Javanese work Nawanatya there is a passage that reads:-

“The criss, a token of manfulness, has its place at the front”

the writer is telling of the progress of a king.

At that time and in that place the keris was regarded as a token of the male, and this has continued until the present day. Thus, when we think of the keris it is a useful, and a valid exercise, to think of the keris in terms of it being male. Some people will take this one step further and think of it as being a male entity, rather than a male token.

Within Karaton society, when a man is to be honoured, he is very often given a title.

It is exactly the same with a keris or other revered pusaka, and the same titles are used.

The title Kyai is the most commonly used, and it appears to be acceptable for this title to be given by any person to a keris of which he has custody, and for which, for one reason or another, he has great respect.
This word occurs in Old Javanese as "kyayi" and in Old Javanese it is an indicator of respect.

The title Kangjeng is held by many people to be one that can only be given to a keris, if the person who gives the title has the authority to give the same title to a man. However, this now seems to be a tradition of the past, as I know a number of people who lack the authority to give the title "Kangjeng" to a man, but who have not hesitated to give this title to one or more of their keris. Perhaps this is evidence that the dictum of "every man's home is his castle" has taken root in modern Jawa --- in spite of the powers of the local Pak R.T., R.K., and Lurah.

Where "Kangjeng" is used, it is most often used in conjunction with "Kyai", thus "Kangjeng Kyai ------ ".

The word "kangjeng" is a royal title, or part of a royal title, thus you could have " kandjeng gusti", or "kandjeng ratu".

The word "ageng" simply means "big", it is krama, and by application can indicate importance or dominance. It is a descriptor, rather than an honorific. I cannot recall it as a part of any Javanese royal title, but it does occur within personal naming conventions.

The honorific "sang" can be understood in exactly the same way as if the word were being applied to a person, rather than a keris, in other words as an indicator of respect. This word appears in Old Javanese, where it seems to have been used exclusively in relation to people as an indicator of respect. Its use in relation to pusakas appears to have occurred during the period of development of Modern Javanese. "Sang" is not a title, it is an indicator of respect, an honorific that can be used for respected people or things. As you would understand, "sang" can also be used in a sarcastic fashion, and it is not unknown for this to also occur when used in relation to a keris.

The honorific "Nyai" can be understood as it would be for a woman, that is, as a token of respect for an older woman, thus, as a token of respect for an older keris. One would only expect this to be used in relation to a keris that definitely had a female presence, for instance, with a patrem.

The giving of the title "Kangjeng", and "Kyai" is not necessarily rooted in the making of the keris by any maker, noted, or otherwise.

The title is given because the custodian has respect for the keris and wishes to honour it. He may possibly have respect for it because it is unquestionably attributable to Kinom or some other noted maker, but he may also have respect for it because he holds a belief that it has brought him good fortune in one way or another, or has protected him or his property.

What I have written above about the reason for giving a title to a keris is directly from Empu Suparman Supowijoyo. All this explanation came from him. It is not my opinion, nor is it the result of diverse research, it is all from the same source.

Regarding Islam in Jawa.

In the mid-15th century, Sunan Ampel, who was a nephew of the ruler of Majapahit, began to spread Islam in the area of Surabaya.This was tolerated by Kertawijaya, but he was murdered by Rajasawardhana who opposed Islam. In 1478 the Kingdom of Demak (Islam) was founded by a son of Kertawijaya, from one of his wives who was Chinese, this son was Raden Patah. Cirebon was also founded around this time.

Fast forward to 1527, and Demak takes advantage of the implosion of Majapahit and wipes out the remainders of the old Majapahit kingdom at Kediri. With this, and the subsequent taking of Pajajaran, Demak becomes the dominant power in Jawa.

We can date the beginnings of Islamic dominance in Jawa from the 1420's.

[Neo]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

What I have written above about the reason for giving a title to a keris is directly from Empu Suparman Supowijoyo. All this explanation came from him. It is not my opinion, nor is it the result of diverse research, it is all from the same source.

Very nice, it is as if we could ask the question to Empu Suparman Supowijoyo himself. Glad that his opinion could be recorded in this thread. Thanks for sharing.

[Amuk Murugul]

Hullo everybody,

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

..... At that time and in that place the keris was regarded as a token of the male, and this has continued until the present day. ..... Thus, when we think of the keris it is a useful, and a valid exercise, to think of the keris in terms of it being male. .....

I agree; for instance, as I was unable to attend my own engagement ceremony, I was forced to send my keris instead.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

..... if the person who gives the title has the authority to give the same title to a man.

I take this as a general rule.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

..... Empu Suparman Supowijoyo. All this explanation came from him. It is not my opinion, nor is it the result of diverse research, it is all from the same source.

Ah yes, Suparman, the Los Indios Tabajaras, of the keris world. A man of good fortune!
BTW ..... I regret to say that I am too lazy to do much research. I only research something I don't know or when I question something I do know. Most of what I know was already there for me, accumulated by successive generations. So some things I can trace as far back as the flooding of Jenggala or even the time of Pu Samarawikranta.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

..... Regarding Islam in Jawa. ..... We can date the beginnings of Islamic dominance in Jawa from the 1420's. .....

I agree, not forgetting that Islam entered the Archipelago from the Middle-East, India and China.
Islamic kingdoms of significance can be traced as far back as c.700-800CE (e.g. Kerajaan Syiah). On the island of Java, there were many Chinese Muslim residents and scholars/visitors (China had a long-established relationship).

I apologize for any digression. 'nuff said.

Best,

[A. G. Maisey]

You are very fortunate that you know so much instinctively, Amuk Murugul.

Regrettably, I do not.

Much of what I have learnt came from books in English, and from personal experience, and I did not have personal, first hand exposure to Javanese culture until I was into my 20's.

I did not meet Pak Parman until I was into my 40's, however, the instruction that followed from that meeting was like a book being opened that I had previously only suspected the existence of. To receive personal instruction from somebody who had been a part of the keris world for most of his adult life, and who had held the position of Penangguh in the Boworoso Tosanaji was an opportunity not afforded to many people.

The research that I have been forced to carry out since my 20's has mostly been through personal contact with a number of Javanese people, and by accessing various literature and monumental works. Had I not been able to do this, I'm quite certain that what little I do have some knowledge of, would be even less. I often regret that I have no access to devine inspiration.

My life would have been much easier if I had had your good fortune to be able to access all this information in an instinctive fashion.

I envy you.

[A. G. Maisey]

Amuk Murugal, some hours ago I responded to your post # 11.

I had read your post, given it very little thought, simply accepted it as your honest statement of how you saw the matter, and responded as I felt, which was that you had a tremendous advantage over myself because of your great gift for being able to access in an instinctive way, knowledge that is not freely available. As you have told us, you have not needed to carry out any research, you simply know things, and can access that knowledge "accumulated by successive generations" without any effort on your part.

This does not surprise me, I accept that there are some people who have the gift of communion with those who have passed away in previous times, and who can access knowledge both exoteric and esoteric, more or less at the drop of a hat.This gift you have is indeed a great and wondrous one, as the knowledge which you can so freely access is the heritage of a culture that is neither your own, since you were not born in Indonesia, nor of the culture of which you seem to be a part, that of Sunda. I do not doubt for a moment your gift, as I am well aware that there are people who are gifted in this manner.

However, and here is my problem, since I wrote my post # 12 I have received several emails which have expressed disappointment in my response to you because of my failure to raise with you your , and I quote :-

"--- insulting remarks directed at both you and your highly respected teacher, Empu Suparman Supawijaya (alm.) ---".

The "you" in this quote is of course directed at me.

Amuk Murugal, I took no umbrage at your remarks, if anything, I interpreted those remarks as slightly complimentary, however, it does seem that your remarks have upset some people. The specific remark to which these people took exception is:-

"Ah yes, Suparman, the Los Indios Tabajaras, of the keris world. A man of good fortune!"

I cannot detect insult in this, except perhaps for the regrettable lack of title, which a person of Empu Suparman's stature surely does deserve, but as you say, you were not born an Indonesian, and you are not now Indonesian, so I was more than prepared to overlook this lapse of respect on your part, which I am certain was absolutely unintentional.

I must admit, I do not really understand this remark, so even in the absence of an insult perceived by others, I probably should have asked you to clarify your intent --- but then, I am often a little too relaxed.

However, I would greatly appreciate it if you would be so kind as to explain exactly what you meant by this remark of yours that I have quoted above.

It disturbs me that a post which I took to be non-confrontational and mildly complimentary could be interpreted by others to be grossly disrespectful and insulting.

Could you please assist by dispelling this misconception?

Thank you for your cooperation.

[David]

Amuk Murugul, i am likewise concerned about your statements. While i am having a hard time seeing any intended disrespect in your comparison to Empu Suparman to Los Indios Tabarjaras, i am having a hard time making sense of it. Firstly because THEY were a Brazil duo and they played guitars. What possible comparison are you making here?

[Amuk Murugul]

Hullo everybody,

I apologise for my tardiness.
I thought that I had finished with this thread.
But, as was just recently pointed out to me, apparently not.

WRT ..... my throw-away comment re: Los Indios:
I viewed THE GROUP, rather than the individuals in it, as the 'entity'.
Similarity?
From obscure/humble beginnings and the lack of formal training in the area where they eventually became renowned.

Alan,
May I remind you that Sunda is not a subset of Indonesia (while geographically, at the moment, that may be so). Sunda and Indonesia are two 'groups' which have an area of 'intersection'; thus they share the same subset.

On the matter of 'insult':
Experience has taught me that, generally, the people who regard the most microscopic of slights as the most monumental of insults are the 'Hyacinth Bucket's of this world (but who may also lack the courage of their conviction).(I'd be surprised if any of your complainants were 'Wong Dalem').
Viz. Back in your neighbourhood: When incidents like the one dubbed 'The Lizard Of Oz' occurred, who bleated the loudest?

BTW ..... on a MUCH LIGHTER NOTE ..... I noticed that you misspelt my name in your last post. Am I to read something into that?

I now consider my input to this thread ended.

Best,

[A. G. Maisey]

I apologise for misspelling your name Amuk Murugul.

Pure error on my part. It is an unusual name, and the word misspelt is one I would only use if addressing you. There are no hidden messages in my error.

Thank you for your explanation of the Los Indios reference.

As I explained in my previous post, I did not read any insult into your comment, however, at least five other people did, two of these people were Javanese, one of whom had known Pak Parman, two were European, and one was from the USA. I must admit that these reactions did surprise me just a little, but that they should come from such a wide sample of nationalities and age groups indicates to me that possibly my own attitude towards what constitutes an insult is perhaps a little too laid back.

I hope that your explanation will satisfy those who saw insult in your previous post, and that they will understand that you were in fact complimenting Pak Parman, not slighting him in any way. Again I thank you for your response.

I have noted your resignation from further participation in this thread.

I find this to be regrettable, but under the circumstances, I can understand your action.

I do hope that you will continue to share your unique knowledge with us into the future.

[PenangsangII]

Very enlightening thread, so shall we get back to it.....

IMHO, the prefix "sang" is not a title, but rather a descriptive title of a person or a keris. Most of the prefix "sang", as far as I know is often used in Malay / Sriwijaya spheres.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Penangsang, "sang" is not a title.

It is an honorific marker that is used with those above one, especially with notables.

Sang is quite often used in sarcasm.

It goes in tandem with "si" which is a deprecatory marker that is used for people with whom one is familiar, and also for small children.

For instance, you might be talking about a neighbour's 5 year old son and you might say " Si Sigit is a naughty little boy"

Or you might use "si mbok" to refer to your mother when speaking with a sibling

But then you might be talking about Sigit's father who is self opinionated and more than a bit arrogant, so you might say "Sang Sudarmo -----". This would be sarcastic usage.

But used in its proper way it indicates respect for an exalted person. You would never say "si lurah", but you might well say "sang lurah"
( a lurah is a middle ranking area administrator)

In respect of a keris, where that keris was named as, for instance, Kyai Setya, you could use Sang Kyai Setya. (setya is faithful)

[PenangsangII]

Thank you Alan, and as usual your explanation transcends beyond what I already knew....

WRT keris names... I know its mostly up to the owner to give titles such as "Kyai" or even "Kanjeng Kyai". But what about the name itself... for example, our pusaka made by an empu, once the keris is ready, before its taken to mranggi, the keris normally has a name - and not simply a name given by the empu or owner, but rather, in my personal experience, given by the "keris / wesi aji's sukma" thru the empu. In another word, its not up to us to name the keris "kyai so and so". In this aspect, I would like to inquire whether the above holds true from your own and Mpu Suparman's experience.

[A. G. Maisey]

My experience is rooted in Central Jawa, specifically Solo, and my personal experience is experience gained during the current era.

Not all keris are equal.

The keris that has been ordered as a pusaka, and that has had the full ceremonies ordered and paid for may well have a name given to it by its maker. However, not all makers are equal, and very, very few possess the necessary qualities and qualification to make a keris with all correct ceremony. Some will say they do, but the simple unadorned fact is that they do not. I can really only think of two, perhaps three, people during the modern era whom I consider to possess this power.

No, I will not name these people.

I know a number of people who have named their own keris, and in fact even royal pusakas have been named long after the pusaka was made , and long after whomever may have made the blade has been forgotten. You can quite legitimately name a keris of your own if you consider it to be worthy of that name. A name might also be given by an appraiser at the request of the custodian of the blade.

A named blade can often be quite ordinary in appearance, the respect paid to such a blade has absolutely nothing at all to do with who made it, or whether or not some power was supposedly brought into the blade at the time it was made.