Join Date: May 2006
Yes, I take your point, David.
Perhaps we could all benefit from an exploration of this aspect of the keris.
I do still feel that Pak Bambang`s contribution belongs where it is, for my already stated reason. After all, the keris has had different natures at different times in its history, and here we have a good, clear explanation of how some people regard the nature of the keris today.
This effectively says:- in Jawa, in the year 2006, and for some indeterminate time prior to that, a body of people do not accept that the nature of the keris is that of weapon.
By clearly establishing this attitude at this time and place, it frees us to move backwards in time to the point where the keris was regarded as a weapon.
I personally see Pak Bambang`s contribution as quite valuable in establishing these parameters of time and place.
However, perhaps somebody who holds similar beliefs to those put forward by Pak Bambang may feel inclined to open new discussion along these lines.