Actually, the Ying-Yai Sheng-Lan as presented by Groeneveldt is a composite of accounts prepared by two priests named Ma Huan and Fei Hsin , who accompanied the Chinese admiral Cheng Ho.
As is the case when most historical studies are undertaken, that which we wish to investigate, or to learn about is seldom set out in a form that makes our quest for knowledge easy. We need to research available resources, to apply logic and to draw conclusions, and to be prepared to defend those conclusions. In the case of the Ying-Yai Sheng-Lan, it is true that the word used to refer to the daggers worn by the men of Java in the 15th century is not given as "keris", however the description of these daggers does coincide with the description of a keris, and scholars have long accepted that this description does in fact refer to the keris. In the absence of any evidence to support the existence in Java during the 15th century, of some other generally worn dagger with characteristics that would agree with the description given in the Ying-Yai Sheng-Lan, then I believe we must accept that the current concensus of opinion is correct, and that the Chinese writers were indeed talking about the keris when they wrote of the inhabitants of Java:-"---if they get into a quarrel in trading, or if they are drunk and insult each other, they draw their dagger and begin stabbing, thus deciding the question by violence.---"
The passage in which these daggers is mentioned is far from a casual mention of Javanese attitudes and character during this period of history, and paints a vivid picture of the Javanese encountered by the Chinese voyagers.Mention is made of the three types of peoples living in the country of Java at that time:- Mohomedans, Chinese, and the natives who are described as :-"---very ugly and uncouth;they go about with uncombed heads and naked feet and believe devoutly in devils---".
Four hundred years later, in the period immediately after 1812, Raffles when writing of the Javanese was full of praise for their cleanliness and good manners, and in reference to the keris wrote:-"---the keris, among them, has for a long period been more exclusively a personal adornment, than a rapier was in Europe fifty years ago---"
Clearly, some civilising influence had been at work in Java between the early 1400`s and the early 1800`s.Could this influence perhaps have been Islam? Or are we simply looking at societal development?
Further evidence of the use to which the keris was put in early Java can be found in the relief carvings of Candi Panataran and Candi Lara Jonggrang. The explicit nature of these carvings leaves no doubt that the keris in early Java was indeed a weapon.
So, we have evidence in the literature of Java itself, we have the reports of Chinese voyagers, and we have graphic illustrations in relief carvings on Javanese candis that show clearly how to use a keris if we wish to end another`s life with one. Additionally, we have the various mentions of the keris as a weapon in historical accounts. We have the instances of use of a keris to end life which are a part of the accepted Javanese version of history, as in the use of Pangeran Puger`s Kanjeng Kyai Balabar, and the execution of Trunojoyo in Kartasura by Amangkurat Amral. In Bali there are several historical accounts on record of execution by keris. Coming up to the present day we have the case that occurred only a couple of years ago in a village near Sragen in Central Jawa, where a man killed his wife and a neighbour, and wounded several other people, with his keris. When he came to court he claimed that the spirit in the keris had caused the homocides, not him:- he was only the instrument of the evil spirit that dwelt in the keris. The judge did not accept this explanation.
The keris of the legendary Mpu Gandring was the one and only Javanese keris ever used to kill?
Oh yes, of course it was.
There is a theory on the nature of truth that says something to the effect that if sufficient people believe something to be true, then it is true.
In spite of evidence, in spite of logic, in spite of reason , if the point has been reached where the mass of faith outweighs the mass of evidence and logic , then the truth lays in faith.
In the matter of this discussion I cede the field to faith, which in this case is clearly stronger than my desire to continue a discussion where objectivity carries no weight.
|