[A. G. Maisey]

When I started this thread I chose the path of using a business organisation as a model for a loose organisation of a group of people who were interested in a particular subject. That subject was the keris.

As a group, some of the contributors to this thread have maintained this line of thought and have presented their comments couched in terms that echo the idea of a business organisation. In my most recent post I have continued to play this game, in the belief that this type of scene painting was managing to reach a number of people.

David has just shown me that rather than using the business model to try to convey my thoughts, I perhaps need to be a little more direct and stop trying to be mildly amusing.

I will state this as simply and as directly as I am able:-

I am not recommending that the specific techniques of IA be applied to all avenues of investigation of the keris, rather I am stating my belief that the philosophy of information gathering, analysis and the drawing of conclusions should proceed in an ordered fashion for each individual aspect of keris culture.

Keris culture can be identified as a system containing many units within that system for example, manufacture, maintenance, practical use, societal practice, use as an item of dress, character as a store of wealth, nature as an heirloom, nature as a kin group symbol --- and so on. Each of these units is something that can be looked at as a separate entity, but one that is related to the other units. For example, if we look at manufacture the output from that unit is into commerce,so then we can examine the trade in keris as a unit. The output from the trade unit could be into societal usage, so then that can be examined as a unit.

Once the unit we wish to study has been identified we then gather information relevant to that unit.

When the information has been gathered tests can be devised to try to verify the information.

When the information has been verified it can be analysed and supportable conclusions can be drawn.

All of this is simply the application of logic.

I am not saying that any of this is easy. Its not. I've been working at the questions intermittently in this way for a very long time, and it involves countless hours of extremely boring reading and even more time in trying to understand what early Javanese writers are really trying to tell the reader.

But the information is there. As David has pointed out, it is based in myth and folklore, and in many respects it is biased, but if the objective is to understand the unit we are investigating in Javanese terms, rather than in the terms of modern man, then this is no impediment.Once understanding in Javanese terms has been acquired, then it may be possible to translate that understanding into a framework that is acceptable to a 21st century western mind.

Or it may not. The same, or similar terms of reference may not exist in that western mind.

Something does not need to be true to us, we need to understand that it is, or was, true to the people to which this cultural artifact belongs.

David has mentioned the "original cultural context" of the keris.

To address this question we first need to decide exactly what we mean by "keris", and again, exactly when that "keris" was original.

Was it in the Middle Jawa period circa 800AD?

Or was it in East Jawa with the appearance of the modern keris around the 14th century?

In the one case we need to rely on monumental evidence and logical analysis, in the other case we can use texts to supplement our enquiries.

Nothing is going to be spelt out for us. It will not laid in our laps. But if we wish to look at the unit of keris culture which encapsulates "original cultural context", there is probably sufficient evidence in existance to build a reasonable hypothesis.

It must not be forgotten that it is not simply the keris and its culture that needs to be examined. Although we may be dividing that big, spongy mass of unapproachable mystery into little bite sized units that we can comfortably examine, in order to examine that little bite sized unit we need to go outside the unit, outside the sub-culture of the keris, and thoroughly examine the parent culture. Only then will we have a foundation upon which to build.

What I am attempting to do here is to get people interested in the concept of looking logically and analytically at the keris.

Throw aside the big mysterious too hard idea of THE KERIS.
If we do not identify the specific unit of keris culture that we wish to examine, and go after information within the bounds of that unit, the whole question simply becomes too hard.

If we want to understand the technology this is now a very, very simple matter. All the work has been done and there are no more mysteries. It is just a matter of getting active and digging out the information.

If we wish to examine the current beliefs surrounding the keris, this is also easy:- its just a matter of reading , and perhaps talking to a few people.

Investigation of the keris through time is much more difficult, but the information is there to allow construction of solid supportable ideas. However, gathering that information is not easy and it is very time consuming.

The task of understanding only becomes insurmountable when we do not think clearly, logically, and in an analytical fashion. Then we are in danger of getting lost in a mist of bovine excreta.

If the question that interests us is the place of the keris in Javanese society in the distant past a good starting point for information gathering could well be Pigeaud's 5 volume "Java in the Fourteenth Century". There are no translations of works by 14th century Javanese ahli keris in this work, but there is a wealth of information on Javanese society and a little bit of information that relates directly to the keris.

But that work is only a starting point. You will need to read the accounts of early travellers, history texts, court babads, myths, folk stories, legends. You will need to study Javanese art, anthropology, sociology, philosophy. And when you have done all of that you will need to learn the way in which Javanese thought and world view differs from that of modern western man. And don't forget Bali. If we are talking "original" Islam has contributed to much of how the keris is now understood in Jawa.

The job can be done. But it is not an easy one, and probably not one for a single person.