[Gustav]

Alan, thank you for your invitation to a Q & A game, I know, you are strong at it. It was your job.

I am reluctant to play it with a person, who in the course of few days either isn't able to recognize own statements, or simply plays a game here.

If I was going in circles during our discussion, it was only because I was trying to follow you in it, but the figures you are making now are more complicated then circles.

I stepped into this discussion because I was intrigued by your statements regarding the "pure" Greneng:

In its most pure form the greneng consists of only the ron dha,sometimes repeated two or three times, this expression of form can sometimes be seen in Balinese keris, and in very old Javanese keris. The other couple of elements sometimes found in later Javanese greneng seem to have been included in the greneng after the keris had become an Islamic icon and was subjected to artistic expression

Later you reinforce that statement, regarding "other couple of elements":

Johan, we can see that in the keris as it is now, and during the period following the rule of Sultan Agung, there are many variations in the way in which the greneng is expressed, so yes, when I say "other elements" I mean anything and everything that can be found in a greneng that is other than just the ron dha.

"Anything and everything" sounds quite strong.


At that point I posted (besides a Greneng on Megantoro) a variation of Greneng on early Keris 1,2 and 3, which consists of two tripartite elements, separated by a Ron Dha, the same element repeated on Jenggot. So a quite extended form compared to your "pure" Greneng.

Your reaction on Keris 1 (with replaced Gonjo) was:

here we have a very good example of what happened when the keris became profane under Islam.

In this keris that you have posted a photo of, we cannot comment on the greneng, because of the replaced gonjo, we can only comment on the ron dha nunut.

The enhancements that occupy the place of the ron dha nunut and jenggot on this blade are very clearly not related in any way to the ron dha of the early Modern Keris within Hindu-Buddhist society.

Regarding Greneng on Keris 2 your remarks were:

in respect of the greneng and ron dha, I noted that they were "very confused".

On both Keris:

This confusion in the formation of the ron dha and greneng is not uncommon in keris from this period. We can only guess why this happened, it could have been intention on the part of either the person who ordered the keris, or of the maker, as a movement away from Hindu-Buddhist symbolism, or it could have simply been a lack of knowledge of the true form required. In any case this distortion of the ron dha is not uncommon and Gustav has given us a very good example of it.

These corruptions of form are most definitely not younger forms of keris enhancement. They are clearly, obviously and logically demonstrable corruptions. They do not appear in the Bali keris, and that tells us exactly what they are.

A question to you at this point: do you mean what you write?

Because after that I presented pictures of two Keris from Bali, 4 and 5, with that variation of Greneng. Keris 4 is, as you noticed, a younger one, probably at least 200 years younger then other Keris I presented.

Yes, I think Keris 4 has the same variation of Greneng as other five (that's why I posted it), it is the only younger one, it's Greneng is stylistically different.

The Greneng on Keris 5, which is an early one, is almost identical to Greneng on Keris 1 and Keris 6, and clearly the same type as on Keris 2 and 3.

With that I hoped to have proved, that this variation of Greneng, which quite extends beyound the "pure" Greneng you presented beginning with #18, aren't

aberrant features found upon keris that were made under Islamic influence

With your post #32 comes a new development in our statements. You take as help your own "Interpretation":

As we can see, right at the very beginning of this section that treats the ron dha I have separated the ron dha from the greneng, and have been very clear that the elements of which the greneng is comprised can vary.

I am inclined to see everything that you have put forward about this variant greneng form as re-enforcement of what I published in "Interpretation".

The elements of a greneng do vary.

May I remind you of your statement:

In its most pure form the greneng consists of only the ron dha,sometimes repeated two or three times, this expression of form can sometimes be seen in Balinese keris, and in very old Javanese keris. The other couple of elements sometimes found in later Javanese greneng seem to have been included in the greneng after the keris had become an Islamic icon and was subjected to artistic expression

and everything else you have said about this "variant greneng" before?

As next you state:

However, not all greneng carry the ron dha. As I said in post #21 of this thread:-

"--- where the ron dha read as "om" appears, it is intended, where it does not appear, it is not intended.---"

What do you mean with that? Are you speaking about the "pure" Hindu-Javanese or Balinese, or Islamic Greneng? If you speak about Hindu-Javanese or Balinese Greneng, you contradict to your own statement above. And the Greneng variation I presented includes a Ron Dha. Moreover, that passage in #21

"--- where the ron dha read as "om" appears, it is intended, where it does not appear, it is not intended.---"

you used in a different context - you referred to a missing Jenggot, not Ron Dha in Greneng, and in your opinion there not always is a Jenggot on early Keris:

You ask if we can assume that "om" was inferred in those cases where the ron dha does not appear as a jenggot. Frankly, I am not prepared to assume this, as I believe the inclusion of the ron dha preceding the kembang kacang was a later development. My attitude to this would be that where the ron dha read as "om" appears it is intended, where it does not appear, it is not intended.

And after that, as if you haven't written nothing before on that subject, you start to explain the same variation of Greneng from "Hindu" viewpoint.

Subsequently, you want from me some clear answers,

not a sliding sideways answer that avoids the thrust of the question

In this thread you are the person, who has left questions unanswered (Bjorn's about other Greneng elements and my about Ri Pandan), and you quite often chose not to answer because of your reasons - I doubt you are now in position to demand answers.


P.S.

My use of word "hypothesis" seems to bother you quite a lot. I used it in a sense of "assumption" (I already wrote about English as my fourth language). Honestly, I don't know how to name it - it appears to be able to change quite quickly.