Bugis or Sumatran?

A. G. Maisey · Today, 08:17 PM

David, what I was taught is that the keris is the blade, the other components, the hilt, mendak, wrongko are just dress items. Javanese people get around the problem of referring to the complete dressed blade as the keris by having different words to refer to that complete dressed blade, words such as "dhuwung", "wangkingan" & so forth. Or they might refer to a "complete keris", or again if referring only to the keris blade they will name it as the blade, ie "bilah" or "wilah".

When the blade itself is classified the Javanese people use the tangguh system, and the classifications within that system can refer to historic point of origin, or geographic point of origin, or to the maker.

When I try to classify a Bugis blade I will usually refer to it in terms of "culturally Bugis", meaning that it is a keris blade that has been made in the style favoured by the Bugis people, or I will refer to it as "Bugis" & if at all possible name the attributed geographic point of origin. I see this as the rational way to approach the matter, simply because of the Bugis diaspora.

However, my knowledge of Bugis keris blades & keris dress is slight, & I often need to ask somebody whose knowledge of the Bugis keris is vastly more than my own. This in itself is a bit of a problem, because the only book that I know of that deals specifically with the Bugis keris is "Senjata Pusaka Bugis", and that lists virtually every keris in it as "South Sulawesi", even though there are keris blades shown, and perhaps dress styles as well, that vary widely from the styles accepted by knowledgeable collectors & students of the keris as having a South Sulawesi origin.

Bugis keris are a bit of a problem when it comes to giving a supportable geographic point of origin.

Today, 08:17 PM	#8
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,889	David, what I was taught is that the keris is the blade, the other components, the hilt, mendak, wrongko are just dress items. Javanese people get around the problem of referring to the complete dressed blade as the keris by having different words to refer to that complete dressed blade, words such as "dhuwung", "wangkingan" & so forth. Or they might refer to a "complete keris", or again if referring only to the keris blade they will name it as the blade, ie "bilah" or "wilah". When the blade itself is classified the Javanese people use the tangguh system, and the classifications within that system can refer to historic point of origin, or geographic point of origin, or to the maker. When I try to classify a Bugis blade I will usually refer to it in terms of "culturally Bugis", meaning that it is a keris blade that has been made in the style favoured by the Bugis people, or I will refer to it as "Bugis" & if at all possible name the attributed geographic point of origin. I see this as the rational way to approach the matter, simply because of the Bugis diaspora. However, my knowledge of Bugis keris blades & keris dress is slight, & I often need to ask somebody whose knowledge of the Bugis keris is vastly more than my own. This in itself is a bit of a problem, because the only book that I know of that deals specifically with the Bugis keris is "Senjata Pusaka Bugis", and that lists virtually every keris in it as "South Sulawesi", even though there are keris blades shown, and perhaps dress styles as well, that vary widely from the styles accepted by knowledgeable collectors & students of the keris as having a South Sulawesi origin. Bugis keris are a bit of a problem when it comes to giving a supportable geographic point of origin.