Fighting with keris

[A. G. Maisey]

I find this an intensely interesting subject.

In the Nagakertagama (circa 1365) , canto 54, stanza 2, verse 4:-

"Exterminated were the animals,thrusted, lanced, crissed,dying without a gasp."

also:-

"The criss, a token of manfulness has its place at the front"---this was in reference to the progress of the king.

In the Pararaton ( circa 1480-1600) there is a description of an exhibition of keris play as an entertainment.

When Sultan Agung attacked Batavia (1628), his principle weapons were firearms. In fact, although his levies were for the most part pikemen, all his military actions relied heavily on firearms.

By the time of the Kartosuro troubles roughly 100 years later, firearms were common amongst the general populace.

In 1811 Raffles was appointed Governor of Jawa, and I think he took up his post in 1812. In his book "The History of Java" he mentions that the keris in Java at that time occupied the position that the small sword had occupied in Europe 50 years previous.

From the time of Kartosuro, European influence in Jawa, and European manipulation of the Javanese rulers and social system resulted in changes that were reflected in social norms and consciousness. During the Kartosuro period, and continuing through to arguably the Japanese occupation during WWII, Javanese society emphasised some elements of Javanese culture, and de-emphasised other elements, as a compensating measure for loss of power and identity under European domination.

The keris was in early Jawa a weapon, with many of the attributes of culturally significant weapons found in other cultures across the world, for instance, in the Viking sword. With its weapon function reduced by replacement with more effective and efficient weapons, its symbolic and iconic status appears to have increased and this, combined with the social and cultural compensatory trends of the 19th and early 20th centuries , have led to its present cultural position.

It is important that in any commentary on the keris, the conclusions drawn about its nature be placed within a framework related to historical time.

If anybody has any interest in pursuing further reading in this matter, I would be happy to provide a reading list. I have not done so here, because this list would be very lengthy, and I could just be wasting my time in compiling it.

[David]

Well Alan....not a waste of time from my perspective.
I think such a list would be considered very helpful by many.

[A. G. Maisey]

OK, I`ll put it together, but it won`t happen overnight. Maybe next week.

Bear in mind:- this will not be a list of books about keris, but rather about history and social comment, along with some Javanese babads. You`d need to plod through the whole lot and then digest it and form some opinions.It will include English language, Indonesian and Javanese sources.

[David]

Here's the quote from Stone:
"Prince Pakoet Alam at Djockjakarta showed me the old methods of fencing with the kris. He said that if a man had only one kris with him he held the scabbard in his left hand with the straight part extended along his forearm and guarded with it. If he had two krisses, he took his favorite in his right hand and the other in his left to guard with. The left-hand kris was held against his forearm with the edge and point at the top outward.In this position it was not only useful as a guard, but if his opponent tried to catch his arm a slight motion would cut his hand serverely."
This seems too detailed an account too have been a misunderstanding and i don't see what Stone would have to gain from making it up. This information was apparently shared with him in the early 20th century by a member of the royal family who i would think would know something about the cultural uses of the keris in Jawa.
One wonders at what point then, the keris ceased to be seen in a materially martial sense in Jawa. I would also extend this question to Bali. Certainly, from my own observations, the Balinese keris tends to be more of a fighting blade. It is often longer and heavier than it's Javanese brother. Bali also holds claim to the culture of the Mojopahit empire, though one could never say that the culture of, say, 19thC Bali was the same as Mojopahit Jawa, we can at least see it as an evolution of that culture. For instance, it is my understanding that blades were once polished in the Balinese style in Jawa. This tradition continues in Bali, yet it passed out of fashion in later Javanese periods. If the keris was still considered a weapon in 19thC Bali (if???) is it possible that it was also considered so in Mojopahit Jawa? Hard to say.
This passage from Wiener's Visible and Invisible Realms comes from Gusti Ketut Jelantik, Buléléng's chief minister, in response to a proposed Dutch treaty offered up in 1844:
As long as he lived there would be no Dutch sovereignty over his land. Declaring that no mere piece of paper could make anyone master over another he announced dramatically,"Let the keris decide!"
This sounds like an act of war with the keris at it's forefront. I suppose it could have been metaphorical, but it seems not to me.

[A. G. Maisey]

Jawa and Bali are different fish.

No doubt at all that the keris was serious weapon in Bali right through until the puputans.

No doubt at all that the keris was a serious weapon in early Jawa.


No doubt at all that even in the 1950's the keris was being used as weapon in the Peninsula. I once met a British soldier who had served in Malaya during the troubles there; he had been attacked by a keris wielding Malay and stabbed in the thigh. Left a pretty ugly scar.

As to George Cameron's comments, I believe that he was probably given a bit of demo. Bear in mind that young royals at this time were given a "palace" education. The Prince of the Pakualamanan that he mentions would have been given lessons in how to handle a keris in dances. Possibly what Geo. C. saw was a classical representation of keris usage, not the way in which one was actually used. The prince himself may well have believed that he was demonstrating the real thing. What a person believes is actual for that person.

If you study Javanese ---and Malay for that matter--- ethics and combat tactics, it is perfectly obvious that no self respecting Javanese was ever going to engage in formal frontal fencing displays. The dominant characteristics of Javanese combat are surprise and speed. I have had it said to me, by a man for whom I have very great respect in this area of Javanese edged weapon combat, that if a person was correctly attacked with a keris, he should be dead before he ever realised that he has been attacked.

My personal feeling is---and I emphasise "feeling"--- that there never was a formal system of fence attached to the keris. It was not that sort of weapon, rather it was an extension of self.

However, the argument against this is my reference to keris play exhibition in the Pararaton.

If we are going to put "the keris as a weapon" into a time frame frame, I think we`re probably looking at something like pre-Mataram. The period prior to the outcome of a battle depending on firepower, not personal skill with things that cut.In Jawa, in any case. All my comments are being made in a Javanese context. I knew an Australian Federal Policeman who was attacked by a keris (sorry, I prefer keris, even if it is a big one) wielding Moro in the Southern Phillipines in the 1970's.

[Bambang Irian]

In Javanesee concept basically keris is not weapons for fighting, but it is a symbol of live.
Each racikan has a symbol of philosopy.

Bambang Irian

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, I agree with you Pak Bambang,in Jawa today the keris is not regarded as a weapon, but it is important to realise that this view of the keris is a comparatively recent one, that appears to have developed during possibly only the last 200 years or so, with an increased emphasis during possibly the last 50 years.

If we examine old Javanese literature, and old historical records, we find that the keris was most definitely used as a weapon in times past.

This is the reason that I say that when we consider the keris, we must consider it within a defined period of time.

[Pangeran Datu]

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.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, it is frequently noted in the literature that a keris was a weapon of last resort, however, the wedung is not a weapon, the wedung is a badge of rank , symbolising the willingness of the bearer to cut a way through the jungle for his lord. Its wear is restricted to certain classes of people within the keraton hierarchy.

I know of no "traditional" belief in Jawa either at the present time, or appearing in literary works of the past, that requires a keris to draw blood once removed from its wrongko. I have read this in various popular works written by authors based in western societies, but I do not have any idea where this "traditional belief" may have come from. Nor am I aware of any beliefs of a keris "turning on" its owner because of the owner`s failure to draw blood with it. I find it extremely difficult to believe that these stories originated from any source within the Javanese cultural framework.

Amuck means to attack blindly.
The presence of a keris is not necessary for amuck to occur.

I have witnessed several cases of a person running amuck, in one case the person concerned had a bottle as a weapon. This incident occurred in Kuta, in Bali, and was brought on by insults delivered by a couple of young western tourists. The Indonesian man snapped and attacked everybody in sight with what he had in his hand, which was a soft drink bottle. Other Indonesians caught him and held him down until he came out of his rage, and when he had regained his senses he appeared to have no recollection of what had happened.

In another case the person concerned had no weapon at all.

In all cases that I have witnessed, or that I know of, the people were not really conscious of their actions.

Amuk and the phrase "babi buta", and the word "nekad" are not synonymous with "amuk".

Babi buta, or babi membuta means to rage blindly.

Nekad is a variation of nekat which simply means "determined to accomplish something no matter what"

Medical opinion seems to be that the state of amuk is brought as a semi automatic response to social pressures.

There is another form of amuk, where a person dedicates his life--- or perhaps more correctly his death--- to the destruction of enemies, however, although this does have some similarities to that which we would normally term "amuk" I personally do not like the term amuk applied to this self sacrificial action.

My readings of the biographies of several Javanese princes, and of practices within the Javanese keratons in the late colonial period indicate that Javanese princes were educated in European martial and social skills, and Javanese cultural and social skills. I have not read of a Javanese prince being taught silat, however, they were taught dance, and a number of classical dances require the keris to be used.