Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Pangeran Datu · 7th September 2006, 08:14 AM

G'day All,
My belief is that to understand something, one has to try and appreciate its environment.
No doubt, in my mind, that the keris was originally designed as a weapon. However, through the belief systems of the time, it developed into a status/ rank/wealth symbol as well as that of mystical power complete with 'pakem' (protocol) etc. Consequently, it became the weapon of last resort, as any respectable male would always have one on him (now merely carried and revered as a symbol/talisman; normally alongside a weapon, such as a wedung). This gave rise to the term 'ngamuk/amuk/amok'; the person not having a 'weapon' to use, is forced to use his keris, as a last resort. However, traditional belief is that a keris, once unsheathed, may not return to its sheath without tasting blood. Thus the person is committed to draw blood. Should he fail, then the keris will turn on him. So 'ngamuk' became synonymous with 'babi-buta' and 'nekad'; loosely tranlates to suicidal blind fury.
As for the martial arts.... penca-silat adopts whatever is at hand to use as a weapon. That is why there is no 'standard' weapon(s) of penca-silat. In the case of the Javanese prince; case in point, he only demonstrated with what he had handy at the time ... a keris ( the same moves would have been just as applicable to the bedog/golok (machete)... much favoured by the West Java penca-silat artists, as that was the most common implement worn on a daily basis).
WRT the Balinese keris... a lot of Javanese fled to Bali under the onslaught of Islamisation, so they could retain their Hindu systems. I think that it was around this period that the Balinese keris developed its own identity, separate to the Javanese; bigger, different ricikan... though some things remained the same (such as pamor?).
Hope I didn't murky the waters.

cheers.

7th September 2006, 08:14 AM	#11
Pangeran Datu Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 79	G'day All, My belief is that to understand something, one has to try and appreciate its environment. No doubt, in my mind, that the keris was originally designed as a weapon. However, through the belief systems of the time, it developed into a status/ rank/wealth symbol as well as that of mystical power complete with 'pakem' (protocol) etc. Consequently, it became the weapon of last resort, as any respectable male would always have one on him (now merely carried and revered as a symbol/talisman; normally alongside a weapon, such as a wedung). This gave rise to the term 'ngamuk/amuk/amok'; the person not having a 'weapon' to use, is forced to use his keris, as a last resort. However, traditional belief is that a keris, once unsheathed, may not return to its sheath without tasting blood. Thus the person is committed to draw blood. Should he fail, then the keris will turn on him. So 'ngamuk' became synonymous with 'babi-buta' and 'nekad'; loosely tranlates to suicidal blind fury. As for the martial arts.... penca-silat adopts whatever is at hand to use as a weapon. That is why there is no 'standard' weapon(s) of penca-silat. In the case of the Javanese prince; case in point, he only demonstrated with what he had handy at the time ... a keris ( the same moves would have been just as applicable to the bedog/golok (machete)... much favoured by the West Java penca-silat artists, as that was the most common implement worn on a daily basis). WRT the Balinese keris... a lot of Javanese fled to Bali under the onslaught of Islamisation, so they could retain their Hindu systems. I think that it was around this period that the Balinese keris developed its own identity, separate to the Javanese; bigger, different ricikan... though some things remained the same (such as pamor?). Hope I didn't murky the waters. cheers.