Majapahit Keris

[kai]

Hello Alan,

This is one of my favourite Majapahit keris representations.

These representations are not rare, nor are they singular Kai, they're all over the place. True, they need to be searched for, but if you're prepared to put the time in, they can be found.

Yes, this is a gem! I‘ve also spent considerable time at temples from the classical period in Asia (as well as musea). It’s a shame that many sites were heavily looted with many pieces ending up in inaccessible private collections.

I agree that a number of representations of the keris buda are extant (I realize that this modern term is a bit unfortunate in the light of its not unexpected absence at Borobudur). Even more common are representations of its ancestor and in quite a few cases it is not really possible to verify whether the blade may already conform with our current definition of a keris blade (which at that period likely was not a distinct style but rather variations of a theme).

What really is extremely scant are representations of any modern keris though! The famous forge scene at Candi Sukuh may well show one example; its details are not really clear though (maybe an issue of craftsmanship?) and in my humble opinion it is not possible to utilize this as a proof of a fully developed modern keris. It’s very important evidence but may also show an intermediate style rather than a full-blown modern keris.

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, the term "Keris Buda" has very little to do with Buddhism, it refers to the period:- Javanese people use the term "Buda" to mean the old times, before Islam. In fact, although we talk about Jawa Hindu, the fact is that Agama Jawa Hindu is actually Agama Hindu-Buda.

At Candi Sukuh there are two keris in the famous Sukuh Stele, one on the wall, one on the anvil, both are a Keris Buda form, not Modern Keris. In fact, the forge scene has nothing at all to do with forging, it needs to be understood in the broader context of Sukuh itself.

You mention the "ancestor" of the Keris Buda Kai, and that it is even more common than the KB. I must be missing something here, because although I do have a small collection of KB's, and I have sold others, I have never had the opportunity to purchase the type of early dagger that does not have the gandhik.In fact, I have never seen this style of dagger in Jawa.

Yes, you will not find any representations of what we can call a "Modern Keris" in any Hindu-Buda period bas-reliefs or statuary. None. We can find longer examples of keris-like weapons, and maybe I could be convinced that these belong in the keris basket, but in fact they are more like Balinese ligan or Keris-Pedang.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes, you will not find any representations of what we can call a "Modern Keris" in any Hindu-Buda period bas-reliefs or statuary. None. We can find longer examples of keris-like weapons, and maybe I could be convinced that these belong in the keris basket, but in fact they are more like Balinese ligan or Keris-Pedang.

This question puzzles me since I started developing my interest for the Kris. Does it mean that the well-accepted assertion that the modern kris developped during the Majapahit period is wrong in the same way as the link between the kris Sajen and the Majapahit period, and the concept of tangguh Majapahit? Then it would mean that the modern kris was actually developped during the early Islamic period in Java as modern krisses were brought to Europe during the late 16th century.
Regards

[A. G. Maisey]

Jean, a few years ago I published an article titled "An Interpretation of the Pre-Islamic Javanese Keris". It received a lot of favourable comment, especially in respect of the photographs. In fact it received some very unexpected favourable comment from people whom I would not have thought would ever read something with "keris" in the title. However, I most sincerely doubt if many people truly understood what I wrote --- except perhaps the very few , maybe no more than 2 or 3, who are totally outside the area of keris interest. This lack of understanding does not really surprise me, it took me more than 30 years to understand information contained in this article, information I had possessed since about 1980.

In this article I have put forward an hypothesis that addresses your question.

If I can ever get around to putting my notes in order, another article will be written that addresses what happened after Islam gained domination of the political structure of Jawa. It seems very unlikely that this future article will be understood any better than my previous one.

In fact Jean, the answers to almost everything that we wish to understand about keris are already available, its just that people try to learn about the keris by "researching" the keris. They are going in the wrong direction.

[kai]

Here's the link to the online version of Alan's paper:
http://kerisattosanaji.com/INTERPRETATIONPAGE1.html

And an earlier paper also pertinent to the current topic:
http://www.vikingsword.com/ethsword/maisey/index.html

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Kai.

The "Origin" paper is out of date and needs to be re-written. I no longer hold all opinions expressed in this paper. I probably will not re-write it, but incorporate the core of this paper into a much expanded new paper.

"Interpretation" I think I can still 99% agree with.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In this article I have put forward an hypothesis that addresses your question.

Thank you Alan. In this article you consider the krisses shown at the Candi Sukuh as "modern keris" (I personally question it) so it contradicts a bit your post # 20 in which you say that "there are no representation of what we call a "modern keris" in any Hindu-Buda bas reliefs or statuary"?
Regards

[A. G. Maisey]

No Jean, I do not consider the kerises (plural) at Sukuh to be "Modern Kerises", I consider one, or perhaps two of the keris at, or associated with Sukuh to be "Modern Keris". The two keris in the stele are certainly not Modern Keris. In the wayang bas reliefs there are another couple of keris that may or may not be "Modern Keris", however the keris shown on the penis at Image 14 in "Interpretation" together with the text :-

"Consecration of the Holy Gangga Sudhi --- the sign of masculinity is the essence of the world"

does perhaps qualify as a modern form.

There is a similar elongated keris in a rather concealed position at Sukuh, I'll see if I can find an photo.

I think I must refer to these as "Modern Keris", they are certainly not KB's, nor are they swords, but they do not closely resemble a keris from the last couple of hundred years. So if we were to go looking for a "Modern Keris" that would fit neatly into an early 20th century pakem, well, we will not find one, nor anything like one, but if we were to go looking for a keris form that was elongated, we would find one.

As I wrote in an earlier post, maybe I could be convinced that these longer keris-like weapons were keris, but in fact they are more like Balinese ligan or keris pedang.

Now, if we were be able to take one of these Sukuh elongated keris and ask a Balinese gentleman exactly what it was, I am certain that he would call it a "keris pedang". But when I wrote that these were Modern Keris at Candi Sukuh, it seems I was convinced at that time that they were indeed "Modern Keris" --- but perhaps "Pre-Modern Keris" might be more accurate,or maybe "Transitional Modern Keris" --- I could play with words all day and eventually I'd come up with something that would make most people happy.

In any case, it seems that if I ever do a re-write of "Interpretation" I'd better be more careful with my choice of words, and twist things around a bit.

But if we get away from pedantic interpretations, something I tend to overly given to, and I just say something like this:-

"Yes, you will not find any representations of what we are accustomed to regard as a keris today in any Hindu-Buda period bas-reliefs or statuary. None."

I think I might have been the first to coin the term "Modern Keris", but I was certainly derelict in failing to define exactly what I personally regard as a "Modern Keris". Please forgive my failure in this respect.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

But when I wrote that these were Modern Keris at Candi Sukuh, it seems I was convinced at that time that they were indeed "Modern Keris" --- but perhaps "Pre-Modern Keris" might be more accurate,or maybe "Transitional Modern Keris" --- I could play with words all day and eventually I'd come up with something that would make most people happy.
I think I might have been the first to coin the term "Modern Keris", but I was certainly derelict in failing to define exactly what I personally regard as a "Modern Keris".

Thank you Alan. To me and probably many other kris collectors, the modern kris is a generally assymetrical dagger (with exceptions like dapur sepang), generally with a pamor pattern (with exceptions like pamor kelengan), and a slender shape (straight or wavy) unlike the early krisses shown on the 14th century carvings and bas-reliefs.
Regards