Gustav's Discovery

[A. G. Maisey]

I have opened this thread in the hope that we may be able to concentrate on these very interesting images that Gustav provided in this previous thread:-

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=22932&page=1

In the foundation thread for this new thread we had a long circular discussion that seemed to me a bit counter-productive, even though I was a part of it, by opening this new thread my hope is that we can move forward without the baggage of previous discussion..

Gustav has identified an element of the greneng that is found in a small number of old Javanese and possibly Balinese keris. He tells us that this element seems to have virtually disappeared in keris made after about 1700. Initially he thought that this element did not appear in Balinese keris, but after further searching he discovered an element in a Balinese keris, that is very probably from the 1800's, that he believes is the same form as the element found in the older pre-1700 kerises.

I can verify that this element is one that I have not seen in any recent keris.I cannot do much more than that, because until Gustav directed his focus to this element and produced his images I regarded this unusual element of the greneng as just another greneng variation, of which we have an uncountable number.

But this variation is different. At least 5 of Gustav's 6 examples do show a related and clearly intentional form. The makers who put this element into the greneng did so for a reason. In my experience, when a motif is used in the same way, by a number of people, over an extended period, this is done for a reason. In the context of the keris in Jawa that reason is most likely to be because the motif has the nature of a symbol.

But what does that symbol mean?

The symbolism of some of the other elements of keris design is already clear, but this newly revealed symbol has been overlooked until now, probably because it is so seldom seen.

Symbolism in the Javanese keris can probably be divided into several categories;- indigenous Javanese, Hindu Javanese, Buddhist Javanese, Islamic Javanese.

Here below are six images of keris with the variant element indicated.

It might be a useful and interesting exercise if each of us searched relevant data bases, both online and traditional hard copy, and attempted to align the indicated greneng element with an appropriate form from one of the categories I have given above. That could be the start. If we are successful in finding something from the given categories that does align with the variant greneng element we then have the job of interpreting the intent in placing this variant element into the greneng.

This is not back-breaking research work, it does not need the ability to read foreign languages, it does not require either high intelligence or a master's degree in anthropology. All that is necessary is patience and the ability to match forms.

Have fun.

[kai]

Thanks, Alan!

At least 5 of Gustav's 6 examples do show a related and clearly intentional form.
Please specify which one you hesitate to place into this grouping and why! I assume #4 because the 3 elements exhibit some variation/inconsistencies (possibly to be explained by wear since the garap looks like quality craftsmanship?). It's certainly interesting that the same "rhythm" has survived into considerably later periods.

Gustav, can you add any additional info on this piece? (The TM does not reveal any details/provenance...)

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Kai, #4.

I have disregarded the enhancement in the nunut position, I'm only looking at the single peak between the ron dha, ri pandan & kanyut, like this, reading from left to right:- ron dha, unidentified, ri pandan, kanyut. The ri pandan forms a part of the ron dha, then we have an upright element, then there is another ri pandan, followed by the kanyut.If we read this as a three part element it means we are taking from the ron dha, maybe this is OK, there is a lot of dualism in Jawa/Bali symbolism, maybe its OK to double up on usage, also, maybe not, but in any case that single upright in the middle is probably intended to be understood in the sense of Siwa.

Bali is "the Land of Three", as Murni and Copeland put it "everything comes in threes in Bali", the use of ornamentation, symbolism, motifs as three part elements is extremely common. If we link that to the fact that this is a much younger blade than Gustav's other examples, I think that it is stretching things a bit to include this late Bali motif with these others from an earlier time. Maybe it belongs, maybe not, but right now I intend to put it in the pending tray. It might be able to be read as a three part element, but maybe not, and if not, I would assume that it is Siwa symbolism.

Since I opened this thread I've been browsing books, as I write, my feeling is that we might be looking at either one of two things:- Siwa symbolism, or an obscure way of writing om. I emphasise "feeling", no solid evidence, only shape similarities in a lot of different places.

[rasdan]

Hi everybody,

I am actually quite busy right now, but the attraction is too strong for me not to participate, so just a quick one. I am unsure if this makes sense or not. This is just a quick observation, so most likely it wont stand to close scrutiny.

I see the greneng on the kerises presented here in a slightly different way. To start with, IMHO earlier greneng started with a notched ri pandan. This notch was then eroded away and later pandai keris copied the eroded version creating a Dha with a “bump” version Ri Pandan. And to the extreme version, the Dha no longer have a Ri Pandan and it looks like the letter C.

Usually, Dha is placed after a thingil and is cut slightly lower than the thingil. What we are seeing on the keris posted here are probably the Dha with “bump” Ri pandan but were cut at the same level of the thingil and this makes it looks like it is an extra and wide thingil. This is probably a style used by the north coast keris makers. (Figure 1, 2 & 3)

There’s another variant that were normally on much later Javanese keris is that an extra dha were cut on top of the thingil. (Figure 3.1) And on much later Balinese keris the dha is at normal position and the “NorthCoast” higher Dha position gets modified into another thingil (Figure 5) or into another element (Figure 4) making it three elements.

I am unsure if keris in Figure 6 has an notched Dha in the middle or a gap. If it is a notched dha, then what I had said above is probably wrong assuming that the type of Dha used on a keris should be consistently shaped and unless keris in Figure 6 a slightly later Balinese keris.

Sorry if what I write doesn’t make sense.

p/s: Sorry, I have uploaded figures according to the sequence, but somehow it comes out in random order.

[rasdan]

By the way, probably this formation in front of the gandik is also a dha? If this is so, then we might have an explanation on the purpose of the lambe gajah.

[kai]

By the way, probably this formation in front of the gandik is also a dha? If this is so, then we might have an explanation on the purpose of the lambe gajah.
Interesting thought, Rasdan. However, its contours are usually different from the real ron dha. Thus, I don't think it is the intended meaning.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Sorry, I have uploaded figures according to the sequence, but somehow it comes out in random order.
After selecting the first pic, hit upload. Then the next, etc.

If uploaded separately, pics stay in sequence.

Regards,
Kai

[drdavid]

Dear experts
for those of us with less knowledge it would help greatly when you introduce a less common keris term if you can identify on a picture that element or at least give a brief description. For example in this discussion ri pandan is a new term to me and it is not on the illustration http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/kerisdiagram.html that I use most frequently
thanks
Dr D

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasdan, I like your ideas. I'm sorry, but I need to think through the propositions you have put forward, this will take me a few days, so I cannot express any opinion right now. I'll get back to this in a few days.

David, here is an image that gives a bit more detail on the greneng. If you look at an assortment of other charts of the greneng, or of the full keris for that matter, you will probably see some terms used that differ, or are applied to different elements. This sort of confusion is not really all that uncommon in Javanese related contexts. My feeling on the matter is that Javanese language is essentially intended for personal communication, speech, face to face, when the language is used in a written form the ideas and expression seem not to be so tightly held together as in, say, English. We need to adjust.

The words "gunun" & "buntu mimi" have been clipped in reproduction, they should be :- "gunungan" & "buntut mimi".

This image is a crop from the drawing in the front of the Surakarta dhapur pakem.

EDIT, SECOND IMAGE

second image taken from KJ --- Haryoguritno.
Notice some variation?
If we look at a wide selection of these charts we will find a number of differences.
Try to be tolerant, this is the way Jawa works:- you think you understand something?
Forget it, things move and change all the time.Nothing is carved in stone except the ancient monumental works.

[rasdan]

For example in this discussion ri pandan is a new term to me and it is not on the illustration http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/kerisdiagram.html that I use most frequently
thanks
Dr D

Sorry DrD, I am no expert, but ri pandan is the notch in the middle of the ron dha. In some cases, this notch becomes a bump. I have marked the ri pandan on Alm. Empu Suparman's diagram from Alan below.

However, its contours are usually different from the real ron dha

Hi Kai, in my eyes, I think this Dha actually resembles Pajajaran Ron Dha. The image below.



After selecting the first pic, hit upload. Then the next, etc.

Thanks Kai, I'll try that next time.

[drdavid]

Alan, Rasdan
thanks for your input, however you don't seem to agree which bit is the ri pandan
cheers
DrD

[rasdan]

Hi DrD, Alan,

It seems that I made a mistake here. I was using the diagram from Keris Jawa book below. Probably the label in that book was switched between the thingil and Ri pandan. I will address the notch/bump in the middle of the dha as thingil from now on. Sorry for the mistake.

I'll get back to this in a few days.
Ok Alan.

Edit:
Just saw Alan had attached the same image after I posted this, but I think I'll just leave the image here for reference of my post.

[rasdan]

Just to add a bit. If we look closely, at the keris diagram in Keris Jawa book, we can see a small Dha formation on top of the thingil (term used in that book) as I mentioned in my first post above.

This reminds me of the greneng for a Tilam Sari keris which probably includes a dha formation on the thingil followed with a wide and long dha. Image below.

[A. G. Maisey]

We crossed posts David.

My understanding is in accordance with what I was taught by Empu Suparman and agreed by Empu Pauzan Pusposukadgo, and understood by several of the Anak-Anak ASKI, it is also in agreement with descriptions of keris elements given in individual descriptions in the Surakarta Pakem.


My understanding is that the ri pandan is the substantial hooked part of the rondha, this is also the ri pandan when it appears as a single isolated element. The thingil is the small raised peak that is seen in the centre of the rondha.

The meaning of 'ri pandan' is "pandan thorn", the pandan is a plant that has thorns on the leaves of some varieties, those thorns frequently have a small hook. There are many varieties of pandan, the one that is used as a flavouring in food does not normally have hooks.

The meaning of "thingil" is "a small thing that stands above its surroundings". Actually, "thingil" is normally used in the form "thingil-thingil".

I believe my understanding is correct, as I have sometimes said:- in respect of keris books, especially Javanese keris books, people who write books are very good at writing books -----

[drdavid]

Alan, thank you for the clarification
This leads me to ask if I should consider the ron dha as containing the ri pandan and what ever name we give to the hook at the other end or just the curving edges (as in the script used to write aum) or possibly just the space with the thingil in the middle. Or all of the above.
cheers
DrDavid

[Jean]

Alan, thank you for the clarification
This leads me to ask if I should consider the ron dha as containing the ri pandan and what ever name we give to the hook at the other end or just the curving edges (as in the script used to write aum) or possibly just the space with the thingil in the middle. Or all of the above.
cheers
DrDavid

Good question David, what a confusion! And I would add:
. What is the difference between the ron dha nunut and ron dha besides their different location? (wadidang and ganja).
. What is the name of the hook/ thorn on top of the ron dha nunut, is it included in the ron dha nunut or not?
. Whenever the greneng is limited to a single protrusion like for dhapur Tilam Sari, it is called thingil.
Regards :)

[A. G. Maisey]

Jean:-
What is the difference between the ron dha nunut and ron dha besides their different location? (wadidang and ganja).

nunut means to follow along, the ron dha in the wadidang"follows along" with the other ron dha in the gonjo, so this wadidang ron dha is the ron dha nunut


. What is the name of the hook/ thorn on top of the ron dha nunut, is it included in the ron dha nunut or not?

according to what I have been taught this is a ri pandan, and it forms part of the ron dha


. Whenever the greneng is limited to a single protrusion like for dhapur Tilam Sari, it is called thingil.

sorry Jean, not according to the Surakarta Pakem, here it is called a ri pandan

I'm in the process right now of putting up some posts that I do not expect will lessen this confusion, but will at least help you to understand what you are facing when you try to understand the keris from a Javanese perspective.

[A. G. Maisey]

Here are some images that might help to demonstrate the bog that we try to wade through when we begin to use Javanese and Indonesian books as reliable sources of information.
The important thing to remember is this:- keris knowledge is in fact knowledge of keris belief.

The "facts" of anything are only facts for the people who accept any particular source of knowledge, be it a text, or a person, as a reliable source.

There is no "standard".

Books and other printed or written sources can be useful to somebody who already has a foundation gained from personal, face to face instruction by an acknowledged authority, but without this foundation it becomes more than a little bit difficult to know if something can be accepted or not, and if it is accepted, that acceptance depends upon the belief in the person who provided the foundation.

With things Javanese and Indonesian, it is probably not the wisest position to take to accept anything as the ultimate truth.


I've posted a lot of images here, the numbers indicate the sources:-

1-- Koesni, 'Pakem Pengetahuan Tentang Keris'
2-- Ki Darmosoegito, 'Bab Dhuwung'
3-- Rt. Waluyodipuro, 'Dhuwung'
4-- S.Lumintu, 'Ilmu Keris'
5-- B. Harsrinuksmo, 'Ensiklopedi Keris'
6-- as for 5
7--as for 5
8-- B. Harsrinuksmo, 'Dapur Keris'
9-- as for 8
10-- as for 8
11-- as for 8


My personal position is that my "keris knowledge" in the sense of present day Central Javanese "knowledge" is based upon what I have personally gained from the people I know and have known in Central Jawa. I do not take much notice of what is printed in books about keris. I have seen very well known and respected authors come to my own teachers seeking information, I have seen and heard what they were given, I have heard my teachers' remarks when they left, I have seen what these respected authors did to the information they were given.

I am not recommending that any of the information in the accompanying images be regarded as "correct", whatever that may mean, my purpose in providing these images is try to provide some sort of understanding of exactly what Javanese "knowledge" of keris is like.

The text is in Javanese and Indonesian, if you can't work out what it means, ask me. I don't feel inclined to translate everything on all pages.

What I've posted is just a sample. I've got a lot, I mean a real lot of books, manuscripts, articles & etc & etc & etc about this sort of stuff, several big bookcases, more than one shoulder high filing cabinet. The more you read the more confused and contradictory it becomes.

[A. G. Maisey]

In respect of the ri pandan and the thingil.

Before you can understand what anybody is saying, you need to understand the language they are using.

Here the language is Javanese.

Ri pandan means "pandan thorn", some pandan plants have thorns along the sides of the leaves, those thorns are hooked, so if you are told that something is like a pandan thorn, you need to look for a hooked thorn.

In the context of a keris, that hooked thorn can either stand alone, or it can be a part of the ron dha, but wherever it is, it is thorn-like and it is hooked.

"Thingil" means "something small that stands above its surroundings".

In the context of the keris, this can be something that is an isolated element, or it can be the small central spike in the cup of the ron dha. Both uses are correct, because in both cases we are talking about something small that projects above the surroundings.

Once you have even a basic understanding of Javanese it is really not so difficult to understand what is being said insofar as keris terminology is concerned.

I think I might have answered your query David?

[kai]

Hello Alan,

. What is the name of the hook/ thorn on top of the ron dha nunut, is it included in the ron dha nunut or not?

according to what I have been taught this is a ri pandan, and it forms part of the ron dha
It also was my understanding that the uppermost hook of the ron dha nunut is called ri pandan and apparently forms an integral part. However, in strict sense it does not "participate" in building the ron dha nunut while the second ri pandan forms the right hand side of ron dha nunut (as well as in the ron dha following on the gonjo).

At least from a pattern recognition approach it does make sense to call the right hand element of the ron dha motif ri pandan.

Thingil certainly suits the middle "thorn" of the ron dha motif.

Thus, the question remains what do we call the left hand structure of the ron dha motif? With its more erect and often slender structure without much curvature and those notches on its top, it seems to deserve a name of its own! Early versions seem to exhibit a bit more curvature but it seems like a stretch to me to also call this element ri pandan, too...


. Whenever the greneng is limited to a single protrusion like for dhapur Tilam Sari, it is called thingil.

sorry Jean, not according to the Surakarta Pakem, here it is called a ri pandan
I also just stumbled over this paradox and am glad there is another approach. While this isolated element certainly protrudes from the general outline of the blade/gonjo, it certainly has the shape of a ri pandan!


I'm in the process right now of putting up some posts that I do not expect will lessen this confusion, but will at least help you to understand what you are facing when you try to understand the keris from a Javanese perspective.
Great, I'm looking forward to more insights!

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Here's a good little extra one for you, this is also from Waluyodipuro, 'Dhuwung'. This is an old text published 1959.

Compare with previous.

tengil --- this means 'a bulge or a swelling', I cannot remember hearing it used as a keris term, except to describe an obvious bulge, usually one that looks a bit out of place, but here it seems as if Waluyodipuro knew it as a keris term

lanjarngirim --- I do not know if this is a word or a description, I don't know it as a keris term, but I understand the sense in Javanese as "something extra that has been sent", in Indonesian, it might be "something long and tapering that has been sent". Frankly, to me, it just doesn't make sense. I just ran it past two native speakers of Javanese,both from Solo, both asked me to put it in a sentence, out of context, even as a descriptor, they had no idea what it meant.

Fun, isn't it?

EDIT

OK, it took a bit of effort, but I found some handwritten Javanese notes that translate as:-

"The thingil or lanjarngirim is placed below the eri-pandan'

So Waluyodipuro understood 'lanjarngirim' as an alternate name for 'thingil', and 'tengil' is simply dialect for 'thingil'.

Really great fun working with Javanese.

Wonderland language.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, there might well be a distinct name for the element that begins a ron dha, reading from the left, but I do not know it, and in my experience this break down of terminology is almost never used , mostly we just refer to the ron dha as an integral unit.

Frankly I see all this name business as total, absolute useless info, its not knowledge, it doesn't demonstrate one single thing except that some person, or group of people have stuck a name on something.

I did not put in a couple of hours finding, preparing and posting those images to provide information in respect of names, I did it because I wanted people to see how bl**dy pointless this stupid name game is.

The names used for various things, in this case keris elements, or really, composition of a keris element in this case, vary from place to place, time to time, person to person, group to group. The same people at different times will use the same word to refer to different features. The whole exercise of trying to get an encyclopedic knowledge of ever changing names is pointless.

If we speak Javanese and use these words face to face as descriptors of something, the names can make sense, but used as solid, written in stone names that are universally understandable in text forever, the whole thing is just a waste of time. Forget the names, concentrate on the meaning of the symbol, the names mean nothing, they are all euphemisms given at the lowest level of knowledge in any case.

[Jean]

Kai, there might well be a distinct name for the element that begins a ron dha, reading from the left, but I do not know it, and in my experience this break down of terminology is almost never used , mostly we just refer to the ron dha as an integral unit.

Frankly I see all this name business as total, absolute useless info, its not knowledge, it doesn't demonstrate one single thing except that some person, or group of people have stuck a name on something.

I did not put in a couple of hours finding, preparing and posting those images to provide information in respect of names, I did it because I wanted people to see how bl**dy pointless this stupid name game is.

The names used for various things, in this case keris elements, or really, composition of a keris element in this case, vary from place to place, time to time, person to person, group to group. The same people at different times will use the same word to refer to different features. The whole exercise of trying to get an encyclopedic knowledge of ever changing names is pointless.

If we speak Javanese and use these words face to face as descriptors of something, the names can make sense, but used as solid, written in stone names that are universally understandable in text forever, the whole thing is just a waste of time. Forget the names, concentrate on the meaning of the symbol, the names mean nothing, they are all euphemisms given at the lowest level of knowledge in any case.

Thank you Alan and I agree with your conclusion!

[drdavid]

Thanks Alan
I certainly understand your comments on the 'name game'. The reason I asked what actually composes the ron dha was that if it were the space as opposed to the surrounds, that would conceptually match some of the meanings given to OM (or AUM), such as 'the beginning of everything'
cheers
DrDavid

[rasdan]

I have drawn this diagram to help with our discussion in this thread, but I have left out the gunungan and buntut mimi part.

I think originally the top and bottom ri pandan have the same shape (hence the similar name) - hooked thorn; with the top one facing up, the bottom one facing down. In time, the bottom one gets modified with a notch on top of it.

Please correct me if there are any mistakes/disagreements. I could miss some things discussed above as I browsed through it rather quickly.

[Gustav]

Very interesting.

Just an observating remark - Rasdan, you got something wrong regarding the Keris 5.

Keris 5 isn't the "latest version for Balinese Keris". It is in fact quite early.

Regarding the Balinese cutting unintentional "North Coast Dha's" besides a normal one on it, I will leave it to Balinese.

Also Keris 6 isn't "a slightly later Balinese keris".

But that's not so important.

[rasdan]

Thanks Gustav. Yes keris 6 is probably not Balinese, I said "unless keris in Figure 6 a slightly later Balinese keris". I think I've seen keris 6 somewhere in Kris Disk, so it may be from 1600s-1700, but I think I haven't seen keris 5 before. Can you please provide us with the estimated age of keris 5? Any possibility that keris 5 is not Balinese but dressed in Balinese dress?

Yeah, what I put up is just my quick observation I didn't align it with the estimated age (which will probably show that I am wrong) as I am quite occupied right now.

The reason I think the north coast people used the "bump Dha" is because of the influence of the shallow and wide Pajajaran type dha shown in the diagram in post #10 above.

BTW, if the gap in keris 6 is actually a Dha, then we can probably conclude that the "north coast" dha theory to rest. Unless we can justify having two types of dha on a set of greneng- which i think is unlikely.

[Gustav]

Rasdan, I see, now I got some questions from you.

Before making questions, I would suggest you to do some home work. I have done mine, and that quite meticulously - please do yours.

Actually instead of "I didn't align it with the estimated age" as you described it now, you simply declared the Keris 5 as "much later Balinese Keris", in picture "latest version for Balinese Keris", to fit in your theory. That is a not so fine difference.

Regarding the whole "Bump Dha" thing, I think, at first we must be able to differentiate between external and internal details, which should be not so complicated, because on all Kerisses in question, as distinguished from most Nem-Neman Keris, the Greneng itself is external.

Ron Dha is an indentation, your "Bump Dha" on these Kerisses is an protrusion. You are searching for Ron Dha in wrong place.

[Gustav]

For people lowing questions, finally a couple from me:

If you look at Kembang Kacang on Keris 2, 4 and 6, and compare it proportionally to its Gandhik, what do you see?

Do we associate such proportion on Keris with full Ricikan with North Coast Java (except for Keris 4. Or perhaps it's also a NCJ dressed as Balinese?)?

Or do we associate it perhaps with an other region?

Is the proportion of KK compared to Gandhik (and Greneg/Jenggot) the only conspicuous thing we notice on Keris 4, not associated with common 19th cent. Bali Keris?

Where have we seen something similar?

[A. G. Maisey]

Rasdan, I do appreciate the thought you have put into your posts, and you have raised a couple of interesting points.I'm still thinking about what you have put up, and I'll get back to what you propose later.

Gustav has not given full length images of the keris he has posted, and speaking for myself, if these truly did come into Europe several hundred years ago, I would not know if they were old or new from a photo. In fact, even in the hand I probably could not guess age.

Again, speaking only of the keris, that is the blade, for early keris, keris from the period immediately following the Mojo era, that narrow little strip of water between Jawa and Bali meant nothing in terms of contact:- water was/is a highway, not a barrier. Other things were barriers, but not the water.

Sure, we can look at the dress and we can say the handle or the scabbard demonstrates style that is attributable to a particular area, but we cannot do that with early blades, it is not until Islamic influence got a good strong foothold in Jawa that blade style of Javanese and Balinese keris began to vary.

So lets not try to categorise any of these very small parts of keris, that have no provenance, into "Jawa" or "Bali" or anywhere else. Even if they did have provenance, any provenance is always open to question in the final analysis, and trying to draw too many conclusions from images of keris is perhaps the ultimate folly:- it simply cannot be done, in fact most of the people I learnt from in Solo would not give more than a cursory comment to an image of a keris, they needed it in their hand to form any supportable opinion, and to a large degree, I'm pretty much the same.

All this is a diversion from focus on this newly revealed feature that Gustav has given us.

Might it be possible to return our attention to the difficult matter of identification of this design element?

[rasdan]

So lets not try to categorise any of these very small parts of keris, that have no provenance, into "Jawa" or "Bali" or anywhere else.

Thanks for your reply Alan. Yes, it is very difficult to come up with a hypothesis about keris that does not have exact provenance and age.

The problem about the keris that have the element that you showed above is that it seems that it was put together very quickly to be sold. The warangka is Palembang, pendok probably Solo, Minangkabau hilt cup, hilt is probably Palembang and ganja from a Bugis keris. It comes from Pennsylvania University Museum collection. It was a gift probably from 1942. I think the website was now updated with larger pictures as the images that I looked before were smaller in size. (Image below) and the link:

https://www.penn.museum/collections/object/244340

Even the ones in KrisDisk, in my opinion we can only use the date it came into the collection. The geographical origin can be diverse as those keris can be brought to the place of collection from anywhere.

About the particular design you mentioned above, an issue that probably may raise is the legitimacy to use a design. Does the design really have a meaning or it simply come from a creative mind that does not need authority to create new designs on a keris?

Actually a greneng somewhat similar to this appeared in Malay kerises where the "gap" is actually a dha (or it becomes a dha) - as far as I am concerned, I think Malay pandai keris does not need authority to introduce new designs.

Then, if the design does has a meaning or it was a Dha copied from Pajajaran, does it have to be in a specific style/location?

To answer/hypothesize these questions, we need something solid to tie it to. and at the moment I have none. I look forward on your insights about this Alan. Thank you.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you very much Rasdan, we now have some idea of the background of the keris that appears to be the best presented example of this variant element.

An excellent contribution to this investigation. Again I thank you.

My inclination is to disregard the hilt and scabbard, and even the gonjo, and just focus on the body of the keris. We still have no usable provenance, but at least we now know that there is no usable provenance.

My current opinion is that we have a North Coast Jawa blade, possibly able to be categorised as Banten. I may be wrong, but for the moment that is where my thoughts will start.

Anything in a European collection can only be dated as before the date that it was first catalogued. There can be assumed provenance for a period before this, such as we have with the kerises in the Bargello that came from the Medicis, but prior to a catalogue date, we're really only guessing.

You have raised the question as to whether we have an artistic contribution to keris design, or whether we have a socio-religious contribution to design, that is to say, do we have art, or do we have symbolism that can be tied to belief?

Certainly, after Islam much of the Hindu-Buddhist symbolism was corrupted and often interpreted in a different way to the way in which it was understood as a Hindu-Buddhist icon. Of course, this probably occurred even before Islamic domination also, so the question is always there:- art or symbol?

Then again, as in Western artistic traditions we can have art and symbol:- elements of a work of art that are most certainly artistic elements can very often be interpreted also as symbols, and carry a message that can only be read by those people who have been educated in this symbolism.

At the moment we have a few keris with examples of a design element that has not previously been commented upon by people who are qualified to do so.

Actually, that's all we have.

But from my perspective this is more than enough to commence a determined effort to try to align this new element --- for the sake of convenience, let's call it Gustav's Element --- yes, let's try to align Gustav's Element with known forms from old Jawa, say, pre-1700 Jawa.

I at least intend to follow this route. A few months, or years of keeping this form as a template in my mind may some day result in a match with something. There is no hurry, we have a form, let's see if we can find out what that form is.

The last thing we need is to get bogged down with non-productive quibbling.

[Gustav]

Alan, I checked my outgoing mails, and see, that I actually have sent you a mail about that Keris with the link to Penn Museum back in 06.11.2012. We had a correspondence about it and spoke about "three prong Ron Dha".

[A. G. Maisey]

Please accept my most sincere apologies for my lapse in memory Gustav.Its only 5 years ago, and I really should have remembered. I guess it slipped my mind because of all that has happened since that time. In fact, in view of the fact that I average around 20 emails each day, and some of those emails generate multiple exchanges as well as phone conversations about keris, the forum discussions, catalogues, appraisals & etc, I might not even remember a discussion about this unusual feature if it had only happened last month.

It is possible that in 2012 I was using yahoo, and for the last few years I've been using AOL, in any case, I need to clean out my old emails every 12 months or so, so I would not have a copy either in yahoo or AOL.

But that doesn't matter, it seems you have a copy, so if we came up with anything worthwhile back in 2012, throw it into the mix.

[Gustav]

Alan, here it is:

Yes, I also immediately thought about this different Ron Dha. A kris in Sweden, collected before 1676 (Jensen, page 85) also has a similar RD, and also one of the Keris in Munich, which is not depicted at Jensen.

Would you see some similarity between the (third) element of this RD, the nearest one to Gonjo, and the feature, much bigger of course, yet at the same place on some Megantoro's (the best one depicted at Bezemer)?

Regards,
Gustav



Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 10:52:27 -0800
From: alanmaisey@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Kinatah
To: gustavfriedrich@hotmail.com

Thank you very much for that Gustav. No, not eye candy, but a very nice old keris. Possibly back into the 1500's. Do you remember the keris that had a three prong "ron dha"? Not like a normal ron dha, but a different type of embellishment. This one has something similar.

Thanks,

Alan.

From: gustav friedrichsohn <gustavfriedrich@hotmail.com>
To: "alanmaisey@yahoo.com" <alanmaisey@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 7, 2012 1:06 AM
Subject: Kinatah

Goodday Alan,

I hope you are going well with your article.

Whilst searching the web I found this somewhat mutilated kris, shortened, the Gonjo could be replacement or not. Interesting is the almost perfectly preserved flat Kinatah, which in my eyes strongly resembles the Kinatah of one of the Kerisses in Vienna, collected before 1618.

Do you see some Persian influence in this Kinatah?

Possibly it could be originally intended as 3 Luk blade, which is rare.

I know, you would call this an eye-candy, yet perhaps it could be somewhat interesting for you.

http://www.penn.museum/collections/object/244340

Regards,
Gustav

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks Gustav.

That exchange looks like it went nowhere, however the subject has emerged again, it looks like a few people might be interested, and at the moment this thing fits in well with what I'm thinking about, so maybe we might trawl up an idea or two. Be good if we do.

[Gustav]

Regarding the age determination of Kerisses: the Keris 1 is donated to the Penn Museum in 1942 - nevertheless it has a blade, which most probably was made in the 1500'ties. Keris 5 came into VKM (then Natural History Museum) at the end of 19th. cent. It has a blade much older then that, we can see that.

Of course is the first mentioning of a Keris in a catalogue of a collection the first graspable point (often very uncertain) in "biography" of that Keris, and it is a very important fact. But it would be quite shortsighted to equate that date to the date of manufacture of Keris. There are a lot of funny descriptions around in Museums on different objects exactly because of that - and because of lacking research.

[rasdan]

Thank you very much Rasdan, we now have some idea of the background of the keris that appears to be the best presented example of this variant element.

Thanks Alan. It was just internet "research". :) Yes, I agree we don't have much to say at the moment about this element.

[Gustav]

Yes, I agree we don't have much to say at the moment about this element.


Perhaps, because we lack the right understanding of it at the moment?

[A. G. Maisey]

Agreed, not much to say right now, and that is the reason I started this thread, to encourage investigation so that we can say something.

[Johan van Zyl]

So, looking once more at the beautiful old Penn Museum keris in post #31 above, and reading up on all that has been said, I am starting to wonder if that three-pronged Gustav-element maybe still is around, but has been corrupted to such an extent through time that it is not easily recogniseable anymore? Please see the greneng on my Java keris and note the element on the far end of the gonjo, next to the ron dha (to the left of it, at the very end). Recall that the two "wings" on the sides of the thingil in the Gustav-element are not mirror images of one another; they are different. On my keris I think I see the same element: there's the thingil in the centre, and what remains of two side-prongs which slant differently.

I probably am "seeing things" because it is what I WANT to see, but I mention this for any comment you might want to make, even if it is "Whoa, boy!"

Johan

[kai]

Hello Johan,

I probably am "seeing things" because it is what I WANT to see
No worries, at this brainstorming stage all comments may help to spur our thinking. I have been trying to look into this in more detail but still need more time to come up with something reasonable, hopefully.

I guess the part you're highlighting is not an offspring of Gustav's element: The main difference seems to be the wide, rounded gaps (compared to the narrow and acute gaps with GE). I don't think that there's a missing link that will bridge this gap... ;)

We have several clues that may help to verify any working hypothesis:
1. Similar shape of the parts of the element? (Including evolutionary links for any changes.)
2. Positional information - is placement/function basically the same?
3. Rhythm (or language) - does the order of the greneng appear to be correct (or does the hypothesized meaning make any sense)?

It is very possible that the elements (or their parts) do change over time - we should be able to trace them back to the original element though to make a compelling case IMHO.

Regards,
Kai

[Johan van Zyl]

Thank you Kai!

One last uncertainty which is still in my mind while we are on this topic of the greneng, is: how do we differentiate between a greneng element and PART of a greneng element? (You will recall the Gustav element actually consists of three parts - it was described as the "three-pronged element").

While the pic of the Java keris is still directly above, may I use it as an example? As far as I can make out, that greneng has only three elements. Reading from right to left (top to bottom), I see a ron dha on the blade, then another ron dha on the gonjo, and then ONE last element. I am asking if any of you in the know agree with me, or do you discern more than these three elements on this keris?

Johan

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, there are a number of earlier posts in this thread that identify elements of a greneng. I think I probably posted most of them, and I did this to try to make the point that the entire subject is confused and full of contradiction.

The keris you are now inquiring about is probably classifiable as Pajajaran, this places it as west Jawa, into Sunda. The greneng is not the typical Javanese greneng we are accustomed to, and the element that takes the place of the kanyut is not nameable under present convention.

However, having seen the way this idiocy works, I am sure that some people would not have much difficulty in giving every pimple in the sorsoran, either accidental or intentional, a long complicated totally meaningless name --- and they still would not understand anything at all about what they were looking at.

[Paul Duffy]

Gentlemen, this is a fascinating discussion. I'll have to go somewhere quiet while I contemplate the issues raised.

[Johan van Zyl]

This goes to show how new collectors can become swept up in the enthusiasm of the old collectors: when the old collectors become engrossed in their fascinating discussions over "every pimple", we newbies get enthused and want to participate in like fashion. I, as a retired lecturer, who frequently made use of practical examples in classroom discussion, was however quick to bring in an actual keris so that what can be said about the greneng is directed to a point. (Recall our posts concerning the Penn Museum keris?)

I don't think the ENTIRE subject has become confused; what might need to be done is that the confusion where it surfaces should be addressed. We now & then tend to leave discussions hanging in the air.

I glean from what has been said about the greneng in the pic, that there ARE indeed three elements of which two are ron dhas and one cannot be interpreted. Especially appreciated is the bold statement by Alan that "the greneng is not the typical Javanese greneng we are accustomed to, and the element that takes the place of the kanyut is not nameable under present convention."

[Jean]

Personally I see a (worn) ripandan above the rondha located on the wadidang (blade side) and another ripandan or protrusion below the rondha located on the ganja but it is not really important.
Regards :)

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, when we undertake to study the keris we have a choice:- we can limit our study to the information that can be found in books, and if we live in a western country, for most people that means an even further limitation of limiting our study to books printed in a modern European language.

Alternatively we can immerse ourselves in SE Asian languages, including their archaic versions, and to do that effectively we need to learn how the people who are born into these languages as native speakers of the languages think. Just knowing the words is not sufficient, to understand the way a word is understood by a native speaker we need to adopt the native speaker's world view and terms of reference. We need to understand the content of the word, not just its sound and meaning.

If we opt to study the Javanese keris, this means that we need to learn Bahasa Indonesia, basic Javanese in at least 3 levels, and to be able to read and understand romanised Old Javanese. Nice additions would be Balinese, Madurese and Sundanese, but these are probably not essential as there is a degree of mutual intelligibility between these languages and Modern Javanese.

Now, one of the peculiarities of Modern Javanese is that it is a very socially focussed language, in matters concerning human interaction it becomes very finely tuned, for example, depending upon what part of the body bears a pimple, that pimple will in all likelihood have its own explicit name.

This overburden of definition is something that permeates the Javanese soul, and when we look at the lexicon that is attached to the keris we can clearly see this very fine focus on categorisation and detail.

Perhaps this would not be a problem, if the Javanese people as a whole thought in a similar way to Europeans, but they do not.

The Javanese language is what is known as a "non-standardised language" by linguists. Moreover, it is a language that is at its finest when it is spoken, as body language, inflection and tone can carry meanings that words alone cannot.

It is as if every Javanese person has the belief that every word he or she utters is his or her personal possession, and that word means precisely what the owner of the word wants it to mean, no more, and no less. Humpty Dumpty.

The enchanting nature of the language is coupled with a rather confusing national characteristic whereby total agreement and cooperation on all levels and in all matters is perceived, but the actions which follow very often do not relate in any way to the previous perception.

When we come to the keris, what we find is that all over Jawa there are keris study groups. The purported function of these groups is the study and better understanding of the keris. The real function is social, and as with most social groups in any society, that group becomes a vehicle for the advancement of the alphas within it.

There is propensity for these groups to either adopt a lexicon and philosophy of their own, or to adopt one from some obscure long forgotten text. Why? Because they like to be different, to differentiate themselves from others.

Sometimes these lexicons of keris terms get published, and the result is that if we pick 20 keris books published in Indonesian, or especially in Javanese, and over a span of time what we find is an amazing variation in terminology. Even very highly regarded publications are not exempt from this. For example, the foundation stone of dhapur at the present time is the Surakarta Pakem, that was issued under the aegis of the Surakarta Kraton in the 1920's. It can be quite enlightening to go through that Pakem and compare the characteristics of the listed dhapurs with what is currently accepted.

When we get to the names of the various elements of keris characteristics, the ricikan, we again find no small degree of inconsistency.

Is this important?

Well, since virtually all the names of the various features are either descriptors or euphemisms that have absolutely nothing at all to do with keris, in my opinion it really doesn't matter what words are used, except insofar as it is necessary to communicate with somebody who is within our own keris group.

What is important in the study of the keris is not the names of the various little characteristics, these names carry no information, they give no hint of any meaning, and they vary from place to place and person to person. They are close to useless.

What is important is to gain an understanding of the keris in all its dimensions.

Nothing else is worth the effort.

Now, to return to our choices in keris study.

You maintain that when confusion surfaces it should be addressed.

A very admirable sentiment Johan.

Do we include the cultural owners of the keris, that is to say, the Javanese, Balinese and so on in our attempts to address confusion? Because that is where the seat of the confusion lays, and it is deeply entrenched in the nature of the society.

Or do we acknowledge that to understand the keris we need to first understand the world view of the cultural owners?

Perhaps if all we want to be is a collector of curiosities from places we do not understand it might be best to simply adopt our own lexicon, and our own points of reference.

If we did this there would be very little confusion, and when that detestable beast did raise its ugly head we could very promptly address it.

But then we face another problem:- the nature of the keris has been deliberately confused in Jawa itself, ever since the time when it was adopted by people other than its originators.

[Johan van Zyl]

Well, I must say this: that these sentiments of yours should be regarded as required reading by all new and not so old keris "students". Keris 101, if I may call it that. I thank you warmly for your efforts to instill this insight into our members. I especially admire your patience. I regret that I did not have such patience as a lecturer. Some of my students wanted me to lower my standards so that they need not study so hard. Some would request a remark to get them an extra mark to help them come into the running for a re-examination. I tell them: "You already know so little; you want me to help you know even less?" Lecturing sometimes became a laugh a minute though: In Afrikaans we have the word for "cow udder", which, when you misspel the word by one vowel, it becomes "chicken egg". I warned my students that I would negatively mark them if they should write chicken egg where they mean cow udder! Yes, keep the standard high, I agree, and this also goes for our keris knowledge.

Still, I love it when a ricikan like in the pic above is discussed and members tell what they see and understand.

(I can't think what a "kanyut" could be - but I shudder at the possibilities!)

:D

[Johan van Zyl]

Looks like this thread has drawn to a close. I also need to withdraw then, but there is one aspect still hanging in the air, which I request Alan to solve for me, if you would be so kind. Concerning the keris pictured in post #41, you wrote: "The keris you are now inquiring about is probably classifiable as Pajajaran, this places it as west Jawa, into Sunda. The greneng is not the typical Javanese greneng we are accustomed to, and the element that takes the place of the kanyut is not nameable under present convention."

How do I understand "classifiable as Pajajaran" in this case? AFAIK, Pajajaran is a tangguh, which is a 12th century category: the estimated age in which a keris was made. You cannot mean the specific keris in question is that old, so I am thinking there is another explanation of your choice of words, perhaps the fortified capital city of the Sunda kingdom? Please advise, and I thank you in advance for your patience.

Johan. :)

[Jean]

Looks like this thread has drawn to a close. I also need to withdraw then, but there is one aspect still hanging in the air, which I request Alan to solve for me, if you would be so kind. Concerning the keris pictured in post #41, you wrote: "The keris you are now inquiring about is probably classifiable as Pajajaran, this places it as west Jawa, into Sunda. The greneng is not the typical Javanese greneng we are accustomed to, and the element that takes the place of the kanyut is not nameable under present convention."

How do I understand "classifiable as Pajajaran" in this case? AFAIK, Pajajaran is a tangguh, which is a 12th century category: the estimated age in which a keris was made. You cannot mean the specific keris in question is that old, so I am thinking there is another explanation of your choice of words, perhaps the fortified capital city of the Sunda kingdom? Please advise, and I thank you in advance for your patience.

Johan. :)

Johan, I advise you to carefully read the numerous threads about the tangguh classification and its limitations, and the kanyut is simply the tip of the ganja (see post# 9 from Alan).
Regards :)

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, regrettably the diagrams in my previous posts are not very clear, they're OK if you know what you are looking for, but if you do not, they can be confusing.

The kanyut is the second last named part before the extreme end of the greneng, it is the part that looks like the decline of a hill, the last part is the buntut mimi, which viewed from above becomes the buntut urang.

There has been extensive discussion on tangguh over years in this forum. Different people think about it in different ways. The best way for a collector who is outside the heart of the keris world in Central Jawa to think about it is that the names are simply classifications. Names associated with old eras will refer to old keris, names associated with recent eras will refer to more recent keris, but it is best not to think of the name of the classification as always inferring an age for the keris. With younger keris, say, after mid-17th century, there can be a grain of accuracy in a link between name and era, but in older keris not a lot of people will accept that the tangguh name really links to the age of the keris, but it is likely that the name will link to a geographic location.

EDIT

This might be useful Johan:-

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/keristangguh.html

[drdavid]

This is just a thought, and allowing that nothing is cast in stone when 'reading' a keris, is it possible that the feature identified in Gustav's examples is a representation of Siwa's trisula and hence a continuation of the Shivatic notation.
cheers
DrD

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, in the ones that look more recent this could be a possibility, especially since the keris itself is representative of Siwa, however, when we look at what appears to be the earliest representation of this triple element (Gustav's first example) it would take a very big stretch of imagination to turn that into a trisula

[Johan van Zyl]

I'm sure I was not the only one who gained knowledge & insight through this thread, so thank you on behalf of all those, to Alan and the other "old hands" who frequently are asked to answer sticky questions from members, some of whom demand "black-or-white" answers! Of course it has become clear that everything pertaining to the keris as a collector's item is not all that cut and dried. It remains, however, to be discussed further and more deeply, and legitimate conclusions drawn from these discussions.

Reading up widely on matters keris, we have all found to our confusion that there are many statements made concerning the keris, and many of these must be dismissed with disdain. So it is up to us as collectors to sift all these notions to get at the truth. Long live Keris Warung Kopi! :D

[Gavin Nugent]

I must say, I do love this Keris forum but am a little overwhelmed with this thread. I've been back to this thread so many times in the past week/s with the intention to write something I thought might be of some worth and then keep wondering, do I contribute or not? Not through lack of wanting to share, but in essence trying to understand if what limited input I can offer, am I on the right path? Does my subject matter have relevance or not? The quandary because the thread has some very deep elements to it and some very perplexing points have been raised.

By noting that I have OLD Java, Sumatra and North Malay blades with what I take to be the features in question, does this help, or is it only those from Java/Bali which are relevant to the conversation/context?

Gavin

[kai]

IMHO, go ahead, Gavin!

I also have a few ideas in the works to post soon and one never knows which seed grows best... ;)

Regards,
Kai

[Jean]

IMO the discussion should focus in priority on Javanese and Balinese blades (the Mother kris country).
Regards

[David]

I must say, I do love this Keris forum but am a little overwhelmed with this thread. I've been back to this thread so many times in the past week/s with the intention to write something I thought might be of some worth and then keep wondering, do I contribute or not? Not through lack of wanting to share, but in essence trying to understand if what limited input I can offer, am I on the right path? Does my subject matter have relevance or not? The quandary because the thread has some very deep elements to it and some very perplexing points have been raised.

By noting that I have OLD Java, Sumatra and North Malay blades with what I take to be the features in question, does this help, or is it only those from Java/Bali which are relevant to the conversation/context?

Gavin
Well Gavin, i think that if you have keris from outside the Jawa/Bali nexus that you think have this feature (with all respects to Gustav i have trouble referring to it as "Gustav's Element" ;) ) i think it would be interesting to see them, especially considering that the general thought here seems to be that the understanding of the ron dha's true meaning and the "reading" of the greneng was lost in the keris' transition to Islam. Let's see what you have. :)

[A. G. Maisey]

I know I dubbed the feature I have in mind "Gustav's Discovery", or "element" or "whatever", and I did that for ease of identification. If anybody wishes to call this specific feature something else, it is not any sort of a problem to me.

However, if we look closely at "Gustav's Element" (for want of a better name) what we find is that there is not just one single element to consider. I think Gustav called it a "tri-partite" element at one point, but that "tri-partite" element has a number of forms that may or may not be related.

The form shown in Post #26, is, I believe, the oldest example shown (gold kinatah), and is a distinct example that shows detail and style that I believe is the most pure of the examples shown, "pure" in the sense that an attempt seems to have been made to represent in iron a form that might be able to be identified elsewhere:- note the tiny spike from the root of the central curved spike, something like this cannot be accidental, it must be able to be interpreted, a matching form in another medium must exist.

However, if we look at the other examples it seems to me that we could be looking at a different representation of something, in the other couple of examples shown in this original thread, and in other examples that I have seen, the same distinct statement that we can see in the Post #26 example does not exist. By a very large stretch of imagination it might exist, or it might be a distillation, or a corruption, or something else entirely.

For example, look at the "tri-partite element" in Post #31. This is a Bali keris. Anybody who has done even the smallest amount of reading on Balinese culture and society will be aware of the importance of the number 3 in Bali. To quote Murni & Copeland :- "everything comes in threes in Bali".

The "tri-partite" element in a Bali keris is open to any number of possible interpretations. As Dr. David suggested:-

"This is just a thought, and allowing that nothing is cast in stone when 'reading' a keris, is it possible that the feature identified in Gustav's examples is a representation of Siwa's trisula and hence a continuation of the Shivatic notation."

This idea is totally defensible and fits perfectly, for the form shown in this Bali keris. The keris itself is an icon of Siwa, why not put another icon of Siwa into the enhancements on a keris? It is a good idea, but it needs some sort of confirmation, and speaking only for myself, I have not encountered that confirmation, even though I could mount a very good logical argument to support the "good idea".

But does this element in the Bali keris look like the element in the keris with kinatah? To my eye it does not. There are any number of three part elements in a keris, but the original as shown in Post #26 is quite unique and distinct.

This form in Post #26 is the form that needs to be addressed:- solve this riddle and then it is possible to look at later variations of the "tri-partite" form and consider if we are looking at a derivation of the original, a corruption of the original, or something else entirely.

We need to identify the form of the tripartite element shown on the keris with gold kinatah.

Then we have a beginning.

Everything else comes later.

[Gavin Nugent]

I've taken a snippets from 4 keris and a Sundang...is this helpful and on point?

Gavin

[kai]

Hello Gavin,

I've taken a snippets from 4 keris and a Sundang...is this helpful and on point?
Well, all seem to be nice blades and deserve to be posted in dedicated threads, especially the keris Jawa and the Malay Sundang (or Sulu kalis?) IMHO.

All your examples exhibit a ron dha nunut; despite the differences in wear, it would be good to also include the whole gonjo since the carvings are often better preserved here than on the (usually thinner) blade.

In Gustav's motif/element, there is no classic ron dha nunut: the central opening in the form of the letter/syllable "dha" is missing and the "spikes"/parts/elements building the free space in-between are also of a different form. This motif is repeated on the gonjo (the best example has a replaced gonjo though) and also visible on the jenggot side (above/on the sekar kajang). I don't see this with any of your examples.

Regards,
Kai

[rasdan]

Hi Gavin,

Below is a comparison between a Malay greneng and the Javanese greneng in question. I think the Malay greneng below is a variation from the Javanese where the Dha on the Malay keris is at the normal position and the "bump" dha is probably a copy of the probably older Javanese style.

The difference is that on the Javanese examples (which is probably older), there is no Dha at the normal position, just a gap - which makes me think that the dha was shifted to the upper position on a third element that the "bump" dha style. Plus on the Javanese examples there is a gap between the ganja and the blade that resembles the gap on Megantara greneng.

The ri pandan style in your #3 and #4 in my opinion is newer development as many keris with this greneng style uses newer homogeneous steel that has no grains (probably late 1800's to early 1900's) rather than the older grainy wrought iron. (This is in the case where the keris does not use pamor - your #4 looks like it uses pamor). But this is just my amateur observation, I cannot demonstrate what I write here even as a hypothesis let alone a theory that can be proven.

[Gavin Nugent]

Thanks guys. "I feel like the child who has not yet learnt anything" like Alan mentioned in the thread leading to this point.

Gavin