[A. G. Maisey]

Guwaya

I can understand why you believe I ask for too much from somebody when I expect a serious keris researcher to be able to read and understand Indonesian at least, and perhaps also Javanese.

One does not need to be a chicken to know what an egg looks like.

However, the keris is a cultural icon, and if we wish to understand the keris within the context of its originating culture we need to be able to approach the keris with a mind-set that at the very least can understand the Javanese world view and the way a Javanese person sees and understands those things around him. I do not believe that anybody who is not born Javanese can become Javanese, and speaking for myself, I would not want to become Javanese, but I do believe that it is possible for a person from outside Javanese society to learn the way in which a Javanese person thinks, and the way in which that Javanese person sees the world.

I do not believe it is possible to achieve this level of understanding in the absence of an understanding of language.

This attitude of mine appears to be shared by many, if not most anthropologists who engage in serious field studies. Time and time again I will read of an anthropologist who has embarked on some project or other, and the first thing they do is to move in with some local family and learn the language.

Now, in the keris we have perhaps the ultimate cultural icon.

My position is this:-

any understanding of the keris that is able to be gained in the absence of an understanding of the relevant language(s) can only ever be a technical understanding, it can never be an understanding on a societal or cultural level.

For a researcher who lacks the language skills, a native speaker as translator and guide might perhaps be of assistance.

I believe that somebody told me that Achim Weihrauch is currently living in Bali. If this is so, it may be possible that at some time in the future he may feel the need to revise some of his writing.



David

I greatly regret being unable to read Achim Weihrauch's entire paper. It has been repeatedly mentioned as the most thorough examination of the keris produced to date, and I know that he received assistance from at least one highly respected German authority on the keris. However, all I have knowledge of from his paper are the few words that Gustav has provided, and the error in that would be obvious to many people, people who have no interest in or knowledge of keris, at all.
Currently, I feel a little disappointed.

Now you have raised the question of whether the short swords mentioned in the Chinese text were truly prototype keris, or whether they might have been some other type of short sword.

In spite of what S.Lumintu has written, amongst the many weapons depicted in the reliefs of Candi Borobudur there are no weapons depicted there that could, by even the most extreme stretch of the imagination, be considered as keris-like in the slightest degree.

However there are a very few representations of weapons which could be regarded as prototype keris to be found in the reliefs of Candi Prambanan.

Candi Borobudur is a Buddhist building, Candi Prambanan is a Hindu building.

The representations of possible prototype keris are found in reliefs on a building of Hindu origin.

Thus, the keris can be associated with Hindu culture in Jawa, but it is exceedingly difficult to associate it with Buddhist culture in Jawa.

Dharmavamsa was a Hindu ruler.

Dharmavamsa re-established relations with China, and in the early 11th century he moved the center of Javanese power to East Jawa from Central Jawa, he died in 1007. Dharmavamsa's son-in-law was Airlangga who established the kingdom of Kahuripan.

Yes, I know, this is a long way round to answer what seems to be a simple question, but bear with me.

I believe that it is possible that the "short swords" sent to China were prototype keris, however, this is a possibility only, based upon the fact that Dharmavamsa was a Hindu ruler, and the prototype keris was a Hindu weapon.

On the other hand, in the Prambanan reliefs there are many types of swords and short swords and daggers shown, amongst these many bladed weapons there are only a very, very few possibly prototype keris.If we can assume that the frequency of occurrence of weapon types in the Prambanan reliefs is representative of the frequency of occurrence of weapon types in Javanese society at that time, then, using a statistical assumption, it is unreasonable to assume that the "short swords" sent to China were in fact, prototype keris.

This statistical assumption is probably a reasonable one because it is generally accepted that the relief carvings of Borobudur and Prambanan do use representations of material objects to be found in Javanese society at the time of those carvings.

Here's the short answer:- no supportive evidence that the "short swords" were keris or prototype keris, and only a very small possibility that they were.

However, here is something further to consider:-

in later times we know that Javanese rulers, and not only Javanese rulers, but other quite ordinary Javanese people would gift a keris to somebody as a gesture of goodwill. Javanese rulers frequently gifted keris to other rulers and notables. When contact with Europe was established Javanese rulers gifted keris to the visiting Europeans and to European rulers.
We do not know how far back this custom started, but if it was current at the time of Dharmavamsa, then just maybe those were prototype keris that went to China.

Your other question relative to use of the word "proven". When I say "free translation", I mean that I have put the Indonesian into English, pretty much as a native speaker of English would phrase the same ideas; here is a word by word translation of the relevant section:-

Hal itu terbukti dari laporan musafir Cina = matter that proven from report traveller China;

terbukti = proven, but could also be translated and understood as "evidenced".

Yep, lots of speculation in there. Dangerous speculation that a lot of people who do not have adequate knowledge could easily accept as gospel truths --- and just maybe they are truly like unto gospel truths.