Jejeran Pulungan

A. G. Maisey · 25th June 2018, 11:47 PM

Bjorn, based upon personal experience I feel myself that the difference between the two is perhaps a matter of what school one attended, or perhaps how erudite one wishes to appear to be --- but then again, I do admit to being somewhat of a sceptic.

The photo is copied from "Pesona Hulu Keris", Aswin Wirjadi, ISBN 978-979-25-2533-5

Incidentally, "bajang" translates as "stunted", "buta" as "ogre" or "giant", so more or less "stunted ogre"

Bjorn · 26th June 2018, 06:44 PM

Alan, that would certainly not seem uncommon to the realm of kerisology.

Then, would it be fair to say that for all practical intents and purposes, the terms pulungan and buta bajang refer to the same style of pasisir hilt?

A. G. Maisey · 26th June 2018, 09:43 PM

I do not believe I can go that far Bjorn, I think if we took 100 or so of each of these hilts, had them classified by three experienced members of a Jakarta keris study group, and then very closely inspected and compared the hilts in each group, we would find minor stylistic variation that would permit us to say that one varied from the other in identifiable ways.

However, if we did the same thing with a group of hilts and referred them to a group of collectors from other places, I believe that we would get an overwhelming classification of all 200 hilts as "raksasa".

The thing is this:- in Jawa, there was a keris revival that began in the early to mid-1970's and grew from the early 1980's into a major social element in Jawa and in Indonesia overall. Analysis can reveal the reasons , and at the top end of the market those reasons had very little to do with an interest in the keris per se.

From about 1990, classification of all things to do with the keris really blossomed, to the point that respected keris authorities in Solo would sometimes wonder where all this new knowledge with which they were surrounded had come from. Over time it became fairly clear that the new "knowledge" was being driven by prestige and market orientated forces.

It is really very simple:- you can create a naming hierarchy by making variations in style into variations in type. Many, if not most collectors focus on type, style can be split into a number of stylistic or execution or regional variations which then can be recognised as variation in type. The more recogniseable "types" you can create by recognising style variation as type variation, the broader your market becomes.

Most collectors of almost anything love classifying. The collector who can come up with the most names for similar objects tends to move higher in the hierarchy of his group. Invent a few more names and you can move up a notch. The desire for prestige tends to drive an increase in classification in all fields of collecting.

The result of all this is that I can see a lot names used in keris classification that I had never even heard of 30 years ago, and these new names and knowledge seem to appear regularly. As I mentioned above, during the 1990's a number of old-time Solo keris experts were similarly amazed at this increase in knowledge that seemed to materialise from nowhere.

I have a very great tendency to disregard the game that we now know as "The Name Game".

In 1978 Garrett & Bronwen Solyom published a small exhibition catalogue, more of a guide book really, that in my opinion is still the very best publication in English dealing with the Javanese keris. Garrett did the field research, Bronwen assisted in the writing. Garrett's mentor was the man who was recognised in the 1970's as arguably the most knowledgeable collector of keris, and certainly one of the most knowledgeable keris authorities in the country. This man was the man who became Panembahan Harjonegoro (Alm.).

Garrett's major teacher was perhaps the most respected m'ranggi in Solo, a gentleman to whom he refers as Pak Bei ( I forget his formal name).

Think about it:- here we have two highly intelligent academics who were instrumental in the Javanese keris revival of the 1970's. They were very eager to get everything as precise and as correct as it could be. Is it reasonable to assume that if all these names that are now accepted as "keris knowledge" had been known in the 1970's that Garrett & Bronwen would have known those names and included them in their book?

Well, now go and re-read "The World of the Javanese Keris". This is a statement on the level of keris knowledge that was current at the highest level in Solo during the 1970's.

Where did all this so-called "knowledge" that we now have come from?

Bjorn · 27th June 2018, 09:23 PM

Thank you for the detailed response, Alan. The matter is very clear now.
I had erroneously assumed that the name pulungan had a far longer history already, but that it was one that was not well known or of little interest to most collectors. I had not at all considered yet that it was part of the name game.

A. G. Maisey · 27th June 2018, 09:51 PM

Bjorn, I think that the real truth of the matter might be that we do not really know what the true name of any of these was at the time they came into use. In fact, it seems likely to me that the name "Raksasa" is simply something that is also a comparatively modern invention , just an invention that pre-dates the others.

In the elite levels of society prior to, say, 1800, what were these hilt styles really called?

I do not know, and I doubt that anybody else does either.

I'll take this a little bit further:- the keris has been around for over 1000 years, in one form or another.

But what was it called in ancient times?

We have a number of names to choose from, but we do not with any certainty know exactly what that asymmetric dagger was called, in fact, it seems likely that just as is the case today, it had several names, each name depending upon style of wear or method of use.

Bjorn · 29th June 2018, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In the elite levels of society prior to, say, 1800, what were these hilt styles really called?

I do not know, and I doubt that anybody else does either.

I fear you are completely right here, Alan. One of the frustrating aspects of keris study is how much knowledge has been lost to time.

rasjid · 1st July 2018, 06:08 AM

As Alan, mentioned: naming game, we do not know where originally certain names pops up. It could also from within the area we found the items ( in this case hilts).

Just to add a few, we could also get names from local people for example :cirebon then the elders told them this is what they called or could be some marketing guys thinking of selling his item and call something fancy to sell things. We do not know, for me: i just accepted the information and with times and other information we could come into a conclusion of our own.

My samples here: its just a variation from the carver?
1. One crown over the head
2. With snake over the shoulder
3. Something in front the chest, or pendant?
4. Round head?

We really do not know for sure, but what we can be sure is:
1. Material used
2. Carving quality
3. Old or newly made or processed
4. If any fixing being done

Regards
Rasjid

25th June 2018, 11:47 PM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,017	Bjorn, based upon personal experience I feel myself that the difference between the two is perhaps a matter of what school one attended, or perhaps how erudite one wishes to appear to be --- but then again, I do admit to being somewhat of a sceptic. The photo is copied from "Pesona Hulu Keris", Aswin Wirjadi, ISBN 978-979-25-2533-5 Incidentally, "bajang" translates as "stunted", "buta" as "ogre" or "giant", so more or less "stunted ogre" Attached Images

26th June 2018, 09:43 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,017	I do not believe I can go that far Bjorn, I think if we took 100 or so of each of these hilts, had them classified by three experienced members of a Jakarta keris study group, and then very closely inspected and compared the hilts in each group, we would find minor stylistic variation that would permit us to say that one varied from the other in identifiable ways. However, if we did the same thing with a group of hilts and referred them to a group of collectors from other places, I believe that we would get an overwhelming classification of all 200 hilts as "raksasa". The thing is this:- in Jawa, there was a keris revival that began in the early to mid-1970's and grew from the early 1980's into a major social element in Jawa and in Indonesia overall. Analysis can reveal the reasons , and at the top end of the market those reasons had very little to do with an interest in the keris per se. From about 1990, classification of all things to do with the keris really blossomed, to the point that respected keris authorities in Solo would sometimes wonder where all this new knowledge with which they were surrounded had come from. Over time it became fairly clear that the new "knowledge" was being driven by prestige and market orientated forces. It is really very simple:- you can create a naming hierarchy by making variations in style into variations in type. Many, if not most collectors focus on type, style can be split into a number of stylistic or execution or regional variations which then can be recognised as variation in type. The more recogniseable "types" you can create by recognising style variation as type variation, the broader your market becomes. Most collectors of almost anything love classifying. The collector who can come up with the most names for similar objects tends to move higher in the hierarchy of his group. Invent a few more names and you can move up a notch. The desire for prestige tends to drive an increase in classification in all fields of collecting. The result of all this is that I can see a lot names used in keris classification that I had never even heard of 30 years ago, and these new names and knowledge seem to appear regularly. As I mentioned above, during the 1990's a number of old-time Solo keris experts were similarly amazed at this increase in knowledge that seemed to materialise from nowhere. I have a very great tendency to disregard the game that we now know as "The Name Game". In 1978 Garrett & Bronwen Solyom published a small exhibition catalogue, more of a guide book really, that in my opinion is still the very best publication in English dealing with the Javanese keris. Garrett did the field research, Bronwen assisted in the writing. Garrett's mentor was the man who was recognised in the 1970's as arguably the most knowledgeable collector of keris, and certainly one of the most knowledgeable keris authorities in the country. This man was the man who became Panembahan Harjonegoro (Alm.). Garrett's major teacher was perhaps the most respected m'ranggi in Solo, a gentleman to whom he refers as Pak Bei ( I forget his formal name). Think about it:- here we have two highly intelligent academics who were instrumental in the Javanese keris revival of the 1970's. They were very eager to get everything as precise and as correct as it could be. Is it reasonable to assume that if all these names that are now accepted as "keris knowledge" had been known in the 1970's that Garrett & Bronwen would have known those names and included them in their book? Well, now go and re-read "The World of the Javanese Keris". This is a statement on the level of keris knowledge that was current at the highest level in Solo during the 1970's. Where did all this so-called "knowledge" that we now have come from? Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 26th June 2018 at 09:59 PM.

1st July 2018, 06:08 AM	#7
rasjid Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Jakarta - Indonesia Posts: 114	Naming Game As Alan, mentioned: naming game, we do not know where originally certain names pops up. It could also from within the area we found the items ( in this case hilts). Just to add a few, we could also get names from local people for example :cirebon then the elders told them this is what they called or could be some marketing guys thinking of selling his item and call something fancy to sell things. We do not know, for me: i just accepted the information and with times and other information we could come into a conclusion of our own. My samples here: its just a variation from the carver? 1. One crown over the head 2. With snake over the shoulder 3. Something in front the chest, or pendant? 4. Round head? We really do not know for sure, but what we can be sure is: 1. Material used 2. Carving quality 3. Old or newly made or processed 4. If any fixing being done Regards Rasjid Attached Images

26th June 2018, 06:44 PM	#2
Bjorn Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 188	Alan, that would certainly not seem uncommon to the realm of kerisology. Then, would it be fair to say that for all practical intents and purposes, the terms pulungan and buta bajang refer to the same style of pasisir hilt?

27th June 2018, 09:23 PM	#4
Bjorn Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 188	Thank you for the detailed response, Alan. The matter is very clear now. I had erroneously assumed that the name pulungan had a far longer history already, but that it was one that was not well known or of little interest to most collectors. I had not at all considered yet that it was part of the name game.

27th June 2018, 09:51 PM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,017	Bjorn, I think that the real truth of the matter might be that we do not really know what the true name of any of these was at the time they came into use. In fact, it seems likely to me that the name "Raksasa" is simply something that is also a comparatively modern invention , just an invention that pre-dates the others. In the elite levels of society prior to, say, 1800, what were these hilt styles really called? I do not know, and I doubt that anybody else does either. I'll take this a little bit further:- the keris has been around for over 1000 years, in one form or another. But what was it called in ancient times? We have a number of names to choose from, but we do not with any certainty know exactly what that asymmetric dagger was called, in fact, it seems likely that just as is the case today, it had several names, each name depending upon style of wear or method of use.