The Keris in Early Javanese Literature

[A. G. Maisey]

In a recent thread in the Forum, that has now been locked, a very interesting question was raised.

A question that should be of interest to all serious keris researchers.

I have opened this question here not because I wish to revisit that closed thread, but rather because this is a most important question and I believe something that needs to be clarified.

The question was this:- when did the word "keris" first appear in Javanese literature.

Zoetmulder tells us that the word "keris" ( or kris, or any other variation of the romanised spelling) appears spread throughout Old Javanese manuscripts back to 919 CE.

He names some of these:-

Arjunawiwaha--composed Mpu Kanwa, patron--Airlangga, circa 1035

Sumanasantaka--composed Mpu Monaguna, patron--Warsajaya, circa 1204

Sutasoma--composed Mpu Tantular, patron--Ranamanggala, circa 1367

Kidung Harsa Wijaya--assumed 13th century

Then we have:-

Krsnantaka, Rangga Lawe, the Malat (Panji) tales, Wanban Wideha, Polenan--- some of these works in Old Javanese are late, some early, but in all cases dates are indefinite.

From this it can be seen that the word "keris" has been around for almost as long as the keris itself. Of course, it is very difficult for us to know exactly the form of the keris that was being referred to in these early texts, but it is probably reasonable to assume that these early references were to an object that bore at least some of the salient features of the modern keris.

I hope that this information will be of use to those amongst us who are involved in serious research into the early keris.

[David]

Hi Alan. Thanks for bringing this up on this side of the curtain.
In that now lock thread you also presented this information:
In Old Javanese there are a number of words that are associated with the keris:-

akris:- to wear or use a keris
anris and kinris:- to use a keris

then we have:- iris, hiris, aniris, iniris and kahiris, all of which can be understood as to cut or to slice.

taking account of the grammatic structure of Old Javanese there is a clear relationship between the word "iris":- to cut, and keris, a cutting weapon.
To me this all makes a lot of sense, though it is not, by far, the only etymology that i have seen presented for the word "keris". I am curious if you or other forumites have any viable alternative etymologies for the word.
It might also be interesting to discuss other terms used for keris throughout the area such as dhuwung, kedutan, etc. How do these terms relate within their specific cultures and levels of society?
Also you mention that it seems the word keris has been around almost as long as the keris itself. Is there any evidence of an even early terminology then?

[A. G. Maisey]

David, this business of keris etymologies has been going on for years, both in the early western keris writings, and especially in Javanese writings and discussions. If you plod through all of it, you feel as if you are drowning in rubbish.

There seems to be a relationship between "iris", and "keris", but whether there is or not, and how it developed , I don't know, and no recognised authority on Old Javanese has ever written on this, to my knowledge. All you can do is go to the works of Zoetmulder, Pigeaud, and a few other notables, and glean what you can from their writings. My preference is for the iris root, simply because none of the suggested alternatives seem to make any sense.

There is a problem with Old Javanese and that is that by the time academics got around to working with it, it was already a dead language. Much of the lexicon of Old Javanese flowed into Modern Javanese, but Modern Javanese became a hierarchical language, which the authorities seem to think, Old Javanese was not, or at least not to the extent that the House of Mataram forced Modern Javanese to become.So, when the academics began to compile a lexicon of Old Javanese, sometimes the word meanings came down to logical analysis. They could not always say with certainty exactly what was being referred to. Similarly, Old Javanese was undoubtedly an "non-standard" language, as is Modern Javanese, which means that the same word can take different forms that depend on varying factors. This means that we don't necessarily know if we are looking at a different word, or the same word with a different pronunciation.

It also needs to be understood that there was not just one "Old Javanese" language. There was the spoken language of Old Javanese, but early inscriptions were in Sanscrit, the earliest inscription in Old Javanese is the Sukabumi inscription from about 805. Then we have Kawi, which is a literary language and that uses a script that developed from the Indian Pallava script, and Kawi also has an old form.About 20-25% of all Javanese words, Modern and Old Javanese, derive from Sanscrit, however, when they have come into Javanese they do not necessarily retain the same forms and meanings as they do in Sanscrit. To understand all of this well is the domain of a specialist linguist, and I do not pretend for one moment to be such.

However, we do need to have some grasp of this background to be able to understand the limits of dealing with the Old Javanese language.With this in mind, the words found in the various languages that can be considered as "Old Javanese" languages, and that can refer to the implement that we would regard as a keris include, but are not necessarily limited to:-

tewek, twek, panewek, tuhuk, curigo, curik, duhun, and of course, kris.

there are many words that come from, or are associated with these nouns, but I'm not going to go there.

Equally, there are many variant spellings in the romanised representation of these words.

In modern Javanese, keris is ngoko (low level), dhuwung is krama (usually referred to as "high" level, but in fact a ceremonial variation of ngoko), wangkingan is krama inggil (high level krama), curiga is a literary usage, and can also refer to a dagger.

The formality of using the Javanese language is that the person of higher status "talks down" to those under him, thus as an example, on a scale of one to ten, with the King at ten, #6 uses krama to #8, but #8 uses ngoko to #6.

[Montino Bourbon]

From what I understand, the Yahi of Northern California had four languages; one for men, one for women, one for women talking to men, and one for men talking to women.

Four different words for hat; man talking of men's hat, woman talking of women's hat, man talking of women's hat, woman talking of man's hat.

None of the different languages were 'higher' or 'lower'. It was considered a form of politeness to use the right language.

[baganing_balyan]

In Malay languages, a root word remains the same even if you add a prefix, an infix or a sufix. "Iris" should be "kiniris" not "kinris," which has an incomplete root word. It would have been good if there is a word "kinris". That would mean that its root word is kris. Unfortunately, the later is an Anglicized word.

If iris is related to keris, I assume that there was a linguistic evolution that happened-- eris became iris. But it needs to be studies if in Javanese language, e can be i. In other Malay languages, it is not the case. In the Philippines, "ibon" and "ebon" are two different things. The former is bird and the latter is egg.

Malay languages are very sensitive with their vowel change. You change the vowel, the meaning changes. It is not also common to omit a vowel because that would be confusing. Imagine if you use kinris, and you know that "aris" (edge) and iris (cut), can you really say which is which?

If the word eris existed befored and meant the same as iris, then it is related to keris. But I doubt if eris is existed. The vowel "e' is a commonly used vowel in malay. If "e" usualy becomes "i", we would have kiris not keris.

A relationship between two words is not rare in Malay languages, but the root word is not altered when two meanings are connected. "Urus" (thin) is related to "kurus" (nurse), "ilig" (interest), "kilig" (shiver), and "alat" (basket), "kalat" mess.

Keris, for instance, if added with an infix -in-, it should have been kineris not kinris. In malay languages, vowels are important. In the philippines for instance kamot (scratch) becomes "kinamot" not "kinmot." "kurus" could be "kinurus" not "kinrus"-- that kind of spelling malay words is just to modern and too lingua Franca.

[baganing_balyan]

Mr. Maisey, I know you are an expert of Javanese language and culture, but what really made me laugh-- inside though-- is your stubborn insistence that "kinris" appeared in early javanese text.

I refrain from questioning peoples knowledge of logic, but since you really want me to resort to it, this is my logical explanation that will hopefully open your mind and close the issue.

How could "kinris" appear in early javanese text when the javanese people that time period used a sanskrit-like script? If you ask me it's the fault of the translator not yours.

Maybe the original javanese word means cut or "gorok"-- Filipino gulok (bolo) comes from that word. Instead of using "gorok", the tranlator used keris. That's already problematic right there. Why would a verb be tranlated into a noun? I think the translator thought of gorok as a blade like gulok. The appropriate translation would have been "ginorok" not "kinris." By the way "gorok" is still widely used in relation to slaughtering animals. "kinris" is never used according to my indonesian friend.

If you read the javanese prose you posted, it is definitely about hunting, spearing, and cutting animals. I think you are lost in translation.

[A. G. Maisey]

Ms. Baganing, let me make this as clear as I possibly can:-

I am not a linguist.

Yes, Indonesian is my second language. Yes, I use Indonesian and Javanese daily. Yes, I can read romanised Old Javanese.

But I am not a linguist.

I rely on the work of Pigeaud and Zoetmulder for my understanding of Old Javanese.

Zoetmulder produced the Old Javanese dictionary that is regarded as the definitive lexicon of this language, and he is regarded as perhaps the most respected of authorities on this language.

Pigeaud also produced a Javanese dictionary, and this was used by the respected Javanese academic Purwadarminto as the base for his Baoesastra Djawa. However, what Pigeaud is really renowned for is his work in Javanese literature, and his voluminous work on the Nagarakertagama.

The translation I provided of Canto 54 in the Nag. was not my translation, it was Pigeaud's. It is great pity that Theodore Pigeaud passed away in 1988 at the age of 89, were it not so you could assist him to a better understanding of the Old Javanese language.

Petrus Zoetmulder passed away in 1995, so you will equally be unable to correct his misunderstandings, which is a great pity, as his work on the Old Javanese language is used as texts in Indonesian universities, and must be responsible for spreading misinformation far and wide throughout the academic community.

However, all is not lost. Dr. Stuart Robson,who taught Javanese in Holland, and was a professor--well, associate professor---at Sydney University collaborated with Prof. Zoetmulder in the Indonesian edition of his dictionary. Dr. Robson is now retired, but I am certain he would welcome tuition from you to help him achieve a better understanding of the languages he spent most of his life researching and teaching.

To repeat:- the translations and word meanings are not my work, I have only passed on the work of Zoetmulder and Pigeaud.

It is not I who became lost in any translations, but Theodore Pigeaud and Petrus Zoetmulder.

Similarly, I am not stubbornly insisting that the word "kinris" appears in Old Javanese texts. This stubborn insistence is all Petrus Zoetmulder's. It seems he managed to locate kinris and anris a number of times in Old Javanese works.

Oh, by the way, may I suggest that you reread my posts? After rereading and understanding what I have written, you may wish to delete your post #6.

Ms. Baganing, I feel that you really should make your theories and discoveries in respect of Old Javanese, Modern Javanese, and the Malay languages in general , available to the academic world. For too long have we all laboured under this burden of ignorance.

You are clearly wasting your time here. Here we are but poor, benighted students of weaponry, with a little bit of ethnographic and anthropological study thrown in---not too much, mind, just sufficient to allow us to come to terms with our subject.

Your erudition is wasted upon us. I urge you to make the results of your valuable research available to those who research and teach in the field of Javanese and Old Javanese literature. I am certain they will be most grateful to learn that for so many years have they been misled by those in whom they placed trust.Perhaps you could begin by placing your work before Dr. Stuart Robson.

Ms. Baganing, there is no point in you continuing to display your great wealth of knowledge here. As I have said, we are simply not equipped to assess the value of your work. You have made your points, you have demonstrated more than adequately the depth and quality of your knowledge, now, if I may most humbly suggest, go thee forth and place your ideas before those who may have a greater appreciation of them.

[Rick]

Baganing , you are in my sandbox now .
Goodbye .

[David]

Ahhh ....yeah. My sandbox as well and i second Rick's thinking here. Goodbye. Please don't hit yourself with the door on your way out.

[sukuh]

...

[Rick]

Here's why Sukuh :

http://fmatalk.com/showthread.php?t=4395

[sukuh]

I got the message...

[PenangsangII]

I think it's just too bad that the moderators decided to put Mr Baganing in the sandbox What the fma ppl did to him is quite unfair. I believe he has at least the right to be heard.

Yes, most of the things he said in his blog are "quite controversial" but at least he is offering a new perspective, as far as keris or kris is concerned. Actually I enjoy him for having been here......

[Rick]

Thank you for your opinion Penangsang .

[fearn]

Hi All,

I'm delurking for a second, and while I'm nothing but a newbie, I'd like to make sure I'm following the thread here, and at least refine my ignorance, if nothing else.

I'm assuming that we use the low-level term "keris" because it's the common term that all of us can use as equals, without having to know the rank of those who read our posts?

Treading on thin ice, am I correct that the kalis/keris "thing" is due to our (mistaken) assumption that an l to r transition (kalis to keris) makes linguistic sense as a Sanskrit to Javanese borrowing. According to Mr. Maisey, this is NOT the case, because keris is based on the Javanese root "-iris," and is an indigenous Javanese term. I'd thought that kalis is a Sanskrit term for sword, and I'm certainly not a Sanskrit scholar, or even a linguist.

Finally, I'd point out that while English doesn't have too much in the way of rank-based formalisms (at least current English), we do have segregation based on usage, which is even stranger in its own way. After all, all civilizations have to deal with social hierarchies, but we tend to ignore that. English peculiarites? Consider legalese, which is a very peculiar dialect, as are the various academic lexicons. We use different terms when we're discussing contracts (pursuant, anyone?) or research (wherein data are plural, whereas data is singular in popular usage) means that English is quite odd. I pity the scholars who try to decipher our current documents, once English becomes a dead language.

F

[Marcokeris]

Originally Posted by PenangsangII

I think it's just too bad that the moderators decided to put Mr Baganing in the sandbox What the fma ppl did to him is quite unfair. I believe he has at least the right to be heard.

Yes, most of the things he said in his blog are "quite controversial" but at least he is offering a new perspective, as far as keris or kris is concerned. Actually I enjoy him for having been here......

I agree

[Rick]

As much as I am loath to discuss my actions as a Moderator of this board I will offer this to our Members who may use English as a second or third , nay even fourth or fifth language who have objected to my actions .

To a native English speaker the nuances and tone of this ex member's posts were often insulting to our members and dismissive of reality and long established facts and honest hard research backed up by citation .

In return for our questions we were offered blanket statements with absolutely nothing to back them up except the poster's assertion that they were true . All this coming from an anonymous entity who offered absolutely nothing palpable as evidence .

Every time any member tried to pin this poster down with facts the subject became somehow miraculously changed with yet more unsubstantiated claims and going in yet another direction .

Gentlemen, I have moderated for well over a dozen years on this site and I (and other members here) can smell a Troll from quite some distance .

Now, let's get back on topic please .

[David]

Sorry Rick, but just to add a bit to your thoughts, there was and certainly will not ever be any problem with any forum member posting controversial theories or new perspectives here on the forum. The problem here was in the tone and delivery and the constant refusal by Baganing to answer simple and pertinent questions in line with her theories. You do not gain any credibility simply by repeating unsubstantiated theories over and over and over again. Repetition alone does not make them true. Remember Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)?

[A. G. Maisey]

Fearn, please allow me to clarify my position in respect of these words.

In the Javanese language, the common, everyday word for a keris is "keris". In formal, or ceremonial levels of the language, other words are used, however, that does not concern us, in the English language, we use the word "keris" in all applications.

When we start to look to Sanscrit for the origin of the word "keris", we can find a number of possibilities. I will not explore them all, as any expedition into Sanscrit for the origin of "keris" automatically becomes hypothetical, however, I will mention that the word "kris" does exist in Sanscrit, where it has connections with the concept of thinness, and with a bowman. There are also other Sanscrit words that could provide a good argument for the origin of the word keris, especially when we consider the esoteric nature of the keris.

Regretably, one of these words is not "kalis". I cannot find the word "kalis" or "khalis" in Macdonell ( Sanscrit dictionary), and a search in the online Cologne Digital Sanscrit Lexicon also does not produce these words.Nor are they to be found in Capeller's Sanscrit-English Dictionary. Nor do the words occur in either Tamil or Pahlavi.

On the other hand, using Zoetmulder as my reference, the word "kris" does appear in Old Javanese, derivatives of "kris" are akris:- to use or wear a keris, and anris or kinris:- to stab with a keris. The word "iris" also appears in Old Javanese, and its derivates are aniris, iniris, kahiris:- slice or cut.

I am not a linguist, and although I can read romanised Old Javanese, I am in no way an expert on the language, however, to me there does appear to be a distinct relationship between the idea of a cutting weapon called a kris, and the idea of cutting, expressed by the word "iris". I am not claiming that "kris" is a derivative of "iris", I am saying that in the Old Javanese mind there was a relationship between the two ideas, the act of cutting, and an implement that cut, and this commonality of thought process was expressed in a commonality of sound.

[fearn]

Thank you Mr. Maisey, that clarifies it substantially for me. The "kalis" idea came from (I believe) someone talking about the martial art kali, so it is good to know that kalis doesn't exist in sanscrit (I think kali does, but that's another story).

Although this is off topic for this thread, there's a similar linguistic problem with the Wiccan athame magic dagger, which many claim was inspired by the keris (Gerald Gardner, founder of Wicca, was based in Malaysia, and I believe he collected some keris). The word "athame" has been claimed to derive from "adhdhame" (supposedly "dagger" in Arabic, with the hypothesis that Wicca is debased sufism), or alternatively from "atamer," old French for "to cut" (see Wikipedia). Since I read neither arabic nor old French, I can't comment on whether either of these words exist. The point of this ramble is that, if the linguistic origin of the term "keris" isn't crystal clear (despite Mr. Maisey's explication), it is amusing that the athame it inspired has a similarly muddled linguistic background--and it's much more recent in origin.

Thanks again for the clarification.

F