Jalak Budo

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Ganja, let's get this straight:-

I have not at any time said that the keris could not be traced to a point of origin that coincides with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa.

In fact, I have demonstrated in my "Origin" paper that the Early Classical Period of Jawa, which coincided with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa, was the beginning point for the keris.

However, the keris does not owe its origin to the Buddhist culture fostered by the Syailendras, but rather to the Hindu culture evidenced by the erection of Prambanan.

The weapon held by the Durga statue at Prambanan is more a sword, or pedang, than a form which can be likened to a keris. Yes, in Old Javanese the word "kadga" can be taken as either "pedang", or "keris", but in this specific instance the weapon concerned is not able to be considered as a keris. If it could be so considered, is it not logical that I would have used this as evidence in my "Origin" argument?

I repeat:- there is no evidence linking the origin of the keris to the Syailendras, nor to Buddhist culture.

In respect of the word "kres".
In Zoetmulder the word "kres" is not to be found.
However the words "keris" and "kris" are to be found.
Mr. Haryono Guritno mentions the word "kris" in the Rukam inscription, and "kres" in the Poh inscription, in all liklihood these are different renditions of the same word.
However, although these words occur in Old Javanese there can be no certainty that the implement to which they refer would be recognised as a keris in today's world. Possibly it would, however equally possibly, it would not. Do not lose sight of the fact that other words occur in Old Javanese which could also refer to an implement which we would recognise as keris. The meaning of words can change over time, and what was known as a "kris" 1000 or so years ago, may not have been what we recognise as a keris today.

In any case, when we refer to any "keris" of this period, it is to a weapon bearing proportions of the keris buda form, the modern keris did not evolve until much later.

I am on record as supporting the initial appearance of a keris-like dagger in Central Jawa during the Early Classical Period, a period which coincides with the presence of the Syailendras in Jawa, however, the Syailendras were foriegners:- they came, they held power for a while, they brought Buddhism with them, and then they went.

The indigenous kings of early Jawa were Hindu. They were there before the Syailendras, and they remained after the Syailendras left.

There is no evidence at all that can link the Syailendras, nor Buddhist culture, to the keris.

I am not at variance to Mr. Haryono Guritno in that the roots of the Javanese keris go back a very long way, at least to around 900AD, certainly to the Early Classical Period, and perhaps even before that. Personally, I see no point of disagreement between Mr. Haryono Guritno and myself.

My disagreement is with those who would wish to attach origin of the keris to Javanese-Buddhist culture, rather than to Javanese-Hindu culture. Those who may wish to promote this position need to produce evidence to support it; at the present time all evidence points to Javanese-Hindu origin.

[Raden Usman Djogja]

Pak Alan,

Valuable information.

Following your logic exploration and explanation, why do keris community call prer-Islamic keris as keris "budo/jaman kabudan"? why dont they call "hindon/jaman kahindon"?

thanks for enlightening information

best regards,
Usman

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Usman,

I have already pointed out that in common Javanese useage "jaman buda" refers to the pre-Islamic period.

A keris supposed to date from the pre-Islamic period is thus a "keris buda".

As Pak Ganja has already advised, " jaman buda" encapsulates the idea of long ago.

This terminology does not presume to be historically accurate, it is mere colloquial useage, moreover, it is not a useage that is unique to only the keris.

As long as some people continue to confuse colloquial useage with historically accurate fact an understanding of the keris will remain beyond us.

Of course, there is more than a single understanding of the keris, just as there is more than a single nature of the keris.

Keris understanding can accomodate the beliefs of the Javanese cultural sub-conscious, just as it can accomodate investigative analysis.

For those who subscribe to the school of popular belief, then of course the keris buda originated within the Buddhist culture of the Javanese Early Classical Period. The fact that there is no evidence of this matters not one whit. Who needs evidence when we have faith? Is not the name alone sufficient evidence? Why would it be called a keris buda if the Buddhists had not originated it? Obvious, is it not? Now we can all sleep well at night, knowing exactly where the keris came from. Why, we can even find a depiction of a keris on the Borobudur---well its almost a keris:- if you just close one eye, tilt your head slightly to the left, and eliminate a part of it by looking at it between the palms of your hands , you can plainly see that it is a keris. Yep---no doubt about that! The Buddhists were there first! Those damn Syailendras! In the place five minutes and they come up with something that was eventually to become the primary icon of Javanese culture.

Regretably I am a man of little faith. I do not believe most things I am told, I take pleasure in swimming against the current, and I can even see a conspiracy in the myth of the Easter Bunny.Most of all, I have a great deal of faith in what I can see and touch, and what I have seen and touched in the Borobudur reliefs does not in any way resemble any keris that I have ever seen.

This character defect does not prevent me from understanding that some people may wish to accept logically insupportable beliefs. The demands of society, peer group pressure, the wish to conform , all these things and more can create an environment where it is much more pleasant to go with the flow, than it is to take a stance that is at variance with popular, or community,beliefs.

However, as much as I may understand this attitude, I regret that I am unable to subscribe to it.

The earliest depiction of a keris-like dagger is to be found in the relief carvings of Candi Prambanan; this dagger is held by Laksmana and is a part of the Ramayana reliefs. It should be noted that even in his 2004 edition of Ensiklopedi, Bambang Harsrinuksmo still had not correctly identified this relief, as he seemed to be labouring under the misconception that Laksmana was a "raksasa" (Relief di Candi Prambanan juga memperhatikan raksasa memegang senjata tikam pendek---").

Candi Prambanan is a Hindu building.The Ramayana is a Hindu epic.Laksmana is a Hindu character.

Following the appearance of a keris-like dagger in the Prambanan reliefs, all further development of the keris in pre-Islamic Jawa is inextricably tied to societal structures where the dominant faith was Javanese-Hindu.Within these societies the Buddhist faith also had its place, as did Islam in the later days of Majapahit, but the overwhelming influence was that of the Hindu system of belief.

In light of these facts it is illogical to attempt to associate the keris with the Buddhist culture of the Javanese Early Classical Period, most especially so as there is currently no evidence to support such an association.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Regretably I am a man of little faith. I do not believe most things I am told, I take pleasure in swimming against the current, and I can even see a conspiracy in the myth of the Easter Bunny.

I think we are much alike on this front Alan. I am a seeing is believing kinda guy myself.You will have to share this bunny conspiracy theory with me some day.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The earliest depiction of a keris-like dagger is to be found in the relief carvings of Candi Prambanan; this dagger is held by Laksmana and is a part of the Ramayana reliefs. It should be noted that even in his 2004 edition of Ensiklopedi, Bambang Harsrinuksmo still had not correctly identified this relief, as he seemed to be labouring under the misconception that Laksmana was a "raksasa" (Relief di Candi Prambanan juga memperhatikan raksasa memegang senjata tikam pendek---").

Small correction,
The article and photos mentioned in the Bambang's Ensiklopedi, was written and contributed by Suwarsono Lumintu (a Yogyakartanese writher) as printed in the page 27. (Five pages).

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you Pak Ganja for this advice.

Yes, I am aware that Suwarsono Lumintu is credited with authorship of this entry in the Ensiklopedi, however, Bambang Harsinuksmo is the author/composer of the book, not editor of the book, as such, Bambang Harsinuksmo must accept responsibility for all material published in that book, no matter who actually originated it.

This principle applies in any arena where any material is published under a single author's name. A published work may well be the product of a team of people, but once the work is published, and attributed to a single author, the benefits and defects of that published work accrue to the nominated author. In fact, Ensiklopedi contains the work of a number of contributors, not only Suwarsono Lumintu, however, Bambang Harsrinuksmo is nominated as the author, not the editor. This implies that Bambang Harsinuksmo used information supplied by the various contributors to complete the writing of his book.This being the case, he was responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the published material, the people who supplied the material can be viewed as assistants over whom he had control.Regretably, his control procedures were inadequate, and any inaccuracies were his responsibility.

I will make this point:- I have been aware of the error in the 1988 edition for almost 20 years; I have been aware of the error in the 2004 edition since I first obtained a copy of this edition; I am aware of other errors --- and I do not mean differences of opinion--- in both these books, and in other publications on the keris. I take no pleasure in bruiting these errors abroad nor in denigrating the work of these authors. One does not advance one's own reputation by attempting to lessen the reputation of others. I would have made no mention of this fault in Bambang Harsinuksmo's work were it not for the fact that we seem to have entered into what I consider to be a rather fatuous discussion in respect of keris origin, and I considered it necessary to shine a little light on the scholarship of writings which have generated this time wasting discussion.

I sincerely hope that we can leave this nonsense of a Buddhist origin for the Javanese keris well and truly buried.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by Raden Usman Djogja

Following your logic exploration and explanation, why do keris community call prer-Islamic keris as keris "budo/jaman kabudan"? why dont they call "hindon/jaman kahindon"?

Dear Usmen,

This time I’m not talking about keris, but on “javaneseness” that probably you may relate to javanese habitude on naming something. (Once I stayed in a French family in Rheims for a couple months. The Madame of the family – she’s Lyonnaise – smiled when I said to her one day “Je suis javanais…,” I meant, I’m Javanese. She said: Javanais? The term “javanais” according to her was a mockery for person that was stupid, illogical, archaic, stubborn.. or something like that)

My father and mother (they was working in Central Hospital in Solo, speaking dutch and a little bit Japanese) used to say “zaman londo” everytime they told stories of their past time, their life in the war-time of mid 30’s and end of 40’s. Or “zaman perang” to say on “war time”. And always said, “he’s londo” to mention European people. No matter what nationality the European, they used to say “he is londo”, including to an Italian doctor in the Solo hospital – I remember the first name, Roberto – as “londo Itali..”

“Londo” was actually related to Holland, or Belanda – the Eruropean nation which colonialized Java back for quite a long time. Even the javanese don’t bother, whether in the past there was “another londo” from England (British colonialization in a short time between 1811-1816 under Lord Minto in India and Lieutenant Governor Thomas Stamford Raffles, and only about one year of Lieutenant Governor John Fendall. No wonder if the javanese call them “londo Inggris” or “londo from England”). Or “londo Ustrali” to mention people from Australia…

And so many Javanense naming that related to foreign names, but they localized the spelling in whatever meaning they like. For instance, they say “krekop” for “church cemetery” or “kerk hoff” in dutch language. Then the area around the cemetery they call as krekop. Or “sekensoro” for place around Central Hospital in Solo around 1960-s (derived from dutch word “ziekenzorg”). And quite many “javanese-dutch” word that often has quite different meaning from the original meaning…

Keris budo? Besi Budo? Zaman Budo? Maybe the same “fate” as “zaman londo” I told you. No matter whether the real reality was “hindu era” nor “hindu keris”. We know, that the foreign Syailendra dynasty had once reigned Java for couple decades. (Suryavarman of the Syailendra dynasty even once reigned Malay and Cambodge. This Syailendra built the Angkor Wat in Cambodge too. No wonder if the “foreign colonialization era” of Syailendra in Java we called it as “zaman kabudan”, no matter that the Hindu dynasty of Sanjaya was existing too. Maybe the same fate as “zaman londo”). Thus, the most important is not what the javanese said what, but why did they say that…

Ganjawulung

[VVV]

Thanks for all the explanations!

Michael

[lemmythesmith]

Hi everyone, here's my "jalak budo" The horseshoes are from Germany, Majapahit/Mataram period, the bars are the first stage in forming the pamor, so far, so good....... Used about half of them to get to this stage, there's a medieval axe fragment in there too.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by lemmythesmith

Hi everyone, here's my "jalak budo" The horseshoes are from Germany, Majapahit/Mataram period, the bars are the first stage in forming the pamor, so far, so good....... Used about half of them to get to this stage, there's a medieval axe fragment in there too.

Dear Lemmy,
On the "tangguh" of the horseshoes. How could you convince us that these materials were from Majapahit (13-15the century) and Mataram Islam (16th-18th century) period?

Ganjawulung

[lemmythesmith]

Hi Ganja, I attributed the "tangguh" of the horseshoes by the shape and size of them-there's one shoe which has (had!) a wavy edge and very large nails, this is characteristic of very early shoes of the 12th to 13th century CE, the other shoes are wide and thin with six holes-typical of the 15th and 16th century CE. Later shoes tend to be much thicker. It's a bit like keris tangguh-differant periods have differant characteristics. Works much nicer than more modern iron too!! Probably smelted with charcoal so there may not be as many impurities. There's a wee bit of Roman iron in there too....

[Raden Usman Djogja]

Originally Posted by ganjawulung

Dear Usmen,

This time I’m not talking about keris, but on “javaneseness” that probably you may relate to javanese habitude on naming something.....

“Londo” was actually related to Holland, or Belanda – the Eruropean nation which colonialized Java back for quite a long time. Even the javanese don’t bother, whether in the past there was “another londo” from England (British colonialization in a short time between 1811-1816 under Lord Minto in India and Lieutenant Governor Thomas Stamford Raffles, and only about one year of Lieutenant Governor John Fendall. No wonder if the javanese call them “londo Inggris” or “londo from England”). Or “londo Ustrali” to mention people from Australia…

Keris budo? Besi Budo? Zaman Budo? Maybe the same “fate” as “zaman londo” I told you. No matter whether the real reality was “hindu era” nor “hindu keris”.... Thus, the most important is not what the javanese said what, but why did they say that…

Ganjawulung

Dear Ganja,

Perhaps, the European who came first in Jawa led by either Magelhaens or Vasco da Gama (both werent Dutch/Londo). However, the Europeans who became the first ever popular were Londo. According to the habitual in language, Jawanese refers to the first popular or wellknown word. So everybody comes from European will be called Londo: ranging from londo Inggris to londo nge-Rum/Turk. Even, some people are called as Londo Ireng. Londo Ireng is for labelling/mockering an indegenous person who act unaccepted manner based on society surrounding.

Then other case is about monosodium glutamat (MSG). The first popular MSG was ajino-MOTO. Perhaps, Jawanese has tasted other MSG long before ajino-MOTO. Now, if you ask traders in traditional market MSG or "mitchin", they dont know at all. But, soon after you change a word from MSG to MOTO, everyone will smile and know what you want. They will ask you what brand you want: Moto SASA or ajinoMOTO (the original).

From these two examples, I just wonder if Jawaneses were/are so ignorant to choose unrelated word to labelling/specifying something. For instance in using BUDO to labelling the ancient keris. It should be any relation why Jawanese used it.


warm salam,
Usmen

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by Raden Usman Djogja

From these two examples, I just wonder if Jawaneses were/are so ignorant to choose unrelated word to labelling/specifying something. For instance in using BUDO to labelling the ancient keris. It should be any relation why Jawanese used it.

Dear Raden,
Even in "yes or no" question, according to "javanese manner" is not as simple as "yes or no" in other world. If you offer something to a "real" javanese in common village in Java (event in Sunda or West Java too), for instance: "Would you like something to eat?" or, "Please take it if you like," usually the javanese will say "Oh, no, thanks" (Mboten, mboten, sampun...) Although actually that person is hungry. Or need the thing you offer. So you must know yourself, whether the person needs something or not. Not depend on whether he or she says yes or no...
On the contrary, "gengsi" or "proudness" sometimes makes a javanese says "yes". Although actually he or she has nothing, and logically he must say no...

On the "word forming" also complicated. In "church cemetery" case, "kerk hoff" had changed as "krekop". But in Yogyakarta, there is a famous bridge that called "kreteg kewek" or "kewek" bridge. "Kewek", derived from the dutch word "kerk weg" to mention the bridge in the "church way" of Kotabaru... Kewek in Kotabaru, is different with "kewek" in javanese daily dialog. In the daily dialog, "kewek" means "speak not in a good manner, too much talk... etc". So complicated.

Event the famous street in Yogyakarta, "Malioboro". Is it original Javanese name? Does it come from the word "Marlboro", the famous fort of Marlboro? And why not "Vredeburg"? If you look at the reality that Fort of Vredeburg is in Malioboro street?

Ganjawulung

[Raden Usman Djogja]

Originally Posted by ganjawulung

Dear Raden,....

On the "word forming" also complicated. In "church cemetery" case, "kerk hoff" had changed as "krekop". But in Yogyakarta, there is a famous bridge that called "kreteg kewek" or "kewek" bridge. "Kewek", derived from the dutch word "kerk weg" to mention the bridge in the "church way"....

Event the famous street in Yogyakarta, "Malioboro". Is it original Javanese name? Does it come from the word "Marlboro", the famous fort of Marlboro? And why not "Vredeburg"? If you look at the reality that Fort of Vredeburg is in Malioboro street?

Ganjawulung

dear Gonjo,

I still believe that all "slippery" Jawa words have their roots as you elabotaed above.

In the most extrem example is "Malioboro" street. In my opinion, it should refer to Dutch language and culture rather than English ones. It should not refer to the famous fort of Malboro. Yes, even the was a short era of English occupation during Raffles expedition. In this era, "Pakualaman Castle" lost very sacred keris "Kiai Gumarang" after defeated by Raffles soldiers. Then, the Prince of Pakualaman went to Semarang to beg the keris mentioned above. After Raffles' Lieutenant gave that keris back to Prince Pakualam, the name was changed from "Kiai Gumarang" to "Kiai Wewe Putih". Litteraly, "Wewe Putih" means a white female ghost. It is very famous ghost in hilly countryside. But, Wewe Putih in this case daesnt mean what Jawa people beleive in one ghost. It reffers to "Wewehane Wong Putih" (come from the donation of white people (Englishmen)). So, once Kiai Wewe Putih was occupied by English.

Back to Malioboro
Lets make a similiar comparation of words again as you did

Zuitenborg (original) = Ontosoro (Jawa) = it is Bogor city now
..........org (original) = Malioboro (Jawa)

I still have an assumption that Malioboro came from a dutch word which represent a significant place, situation or anything else at that time. So, it was not fallen from the sky/heaven. However, I dont know from what word either. Perhaps, someone who his mother tongue is dutch may help us.

Back to keris
I hope all kerislovers dont misintepret this discussion (Ganja v. Usmen) as unrelated topic in term of keris waroeng kopi. Hope this discusion gives benefits for a background when we talk further about keris in our beloved waroeng.

warm salam,
Usmen

[Raden Usman Djogja]

for additional opinion:

Zuitenzorg [?]
Zuitenborg (original) = Ontosoro (Jawa) = it is Bogor city now
..........org (original) = Malioboro (Jawa)
M......borg = Malioboro

if I am not mistaken "Borg" refers to "Little Castle"
There are two little castle near Malioboro street. First, on the right is Dutch Residence (opposite of Vredeburg fort). Second, on the top is Sultan Castle.

warm salam,
Usmen