View Single Post
Old 7th September 2006, 04:56 AM   #7
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,012
Default

Here's the quote from Stone:
"Prince Pakoet Alam at Djockjakarta showed me the old methods of fencing with the kris. He said that if a man had only one kris with him he held the scabbard in his left hand with the straight part extended along his forearm and guarded with it. If he had two krisses, he took his favorite in his right hand and the other in his left to guard with. The left-hand kris was held against his forearm with the edge and point at the top outward.In this position it was not only useful as a guard, but if his opponent tried to catch his arm a slight motion would cut his hand serverely."
This seems too detailed an account too have been a misunderstanding and i don't see what Stone would have to gain from making it up. This information was apparently shared with him in the early 20th century by a member of the royal family who i would think would know something about the cultural uses of the keris in Jawa.
One wonders at what point then, the keris ceased to be seen in a materially martial sense in Jawa. I would also extend this question to Bali. Certainly, from my own observations, the Balinese keris tends to be more of a fighting blade. It is often longer and heavier than it's Javanese brother. Bali also holds claim to the culture of the Mojopahit empire, though one could never say that the culture of, say, 19thC Bali was the same as Mojopahit Jawa, we can at least see it as an evolution of that culture. For instance, it is my understanding that blades were once polished in the Balinese style in Jawa. This tradition continues in Bali, yet it passed out of fashion in later Javanese periods. If the keris was still considered a weapon in 19thC Bali (if???) is it possible that it was also considered so in Mojopahit Jawa? Hard to say.
This passage from Wiener's Visible and Invisible Realms comes from Gusti Ketut Jelantik, Buléléng's chief minister, in response to a proposed Dutch treaty offered up in 1844:
As long as he lived there would be no Dutch sovereignty over his land. Declaring that no mere piece of paper could make anyone master over another he announced dramatically,"Let the keris decide!"
This sounds like an act of war with the keris at it's forefront. I suppose it could have been metaphorical, but it seems not to me.
David is offline   Reply With Quote