Trisula of unknown origin

[David]

Hi Ben. I trust that you will not take offense as well, but while it is undoubtly true that the Dutch have amassed a great deal of information on the keris and related weapons, having been colonial rulers in the region for centuries, i don't necessarily believe this means that they are the owners of the greatest amount of "knowledge" on the subject and therefore automatically trump all other opinions on the subject. Certainly the largest collections for study do exist in the Netherlands. To be realistic, while some of these weapons my have come into Dutch hands through mismanagement and gambling, hundreds more keris were also, no doubt, taking off the still warm corpses of their Balinese owners after the 1906 and 1908 pupatans. From my readings on the history of colonial Bali i have gotten the general impression that the Dutch never really fully understood Balinese culture. The same can probably be said for any colonizing nation. We Americans never understood the American Indians very well either. I admitedly know very little about their dealings in Jawa or othe parts of Indonesia. But it is my general understanding that it was not a completely friendly occupation.
Tammens work is invaluable, but probably not without it's flaws. The same can be said for just about all Western writers on the keris and probably quite a few native Indonesian ones. There are indeed many studies on pamor in European books and many of them disagree with each other. I guess my point is that i am not willing to simply accept that your Dutch keris chairman is correct just because he is Dutch and he says so. I must say that the supporting illustrations that you posted don't seem to my eye to be positive matches for the trisula Michael has posted. For instance, which of the metuks shown in the drawings do you think resembles Michael's? And the center blade in the drawings is not the same angular shape as Michael's. I also must say that while it is not impossible, i am finding it hard to see this as 17thC work. I don't know enough about these to form a viable opinion on origin, but i would say it is hardly a closed matter.

[Dajak]

Hi David

lets talk about the real name at that time is java not jawa

I don t tell he is right about because that he is Dutch
No he did research on this subject in many books with other people

The fight in Bali has nothing to do with misunderstanding cultures
but with getting the control back .

Same what the American people did taking land from the Indians

Can you tell me an Indonesian book about keris that is 100 years old please

I only talk about facts not what I think

let me know

I only wanna tell that by that time the most indonesian people have no interest about the keris at that time I dont now any old book about Indonesian weapons from that time while european people make study s about the subject

Ben

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for your response , Ben.

There can be no doubt that the Dutch people did acquire many keris, and other Javanese and Indonesian artifacts during the time they were in the Old East Indies, and there can be not doubt that a number of Dutch people have carried out serious study of these artifacts, including keris.However, this thread is focussed on a single object:- a specific trisula.

This trisula is claimed as being from Jawa, or if you prefer Java. Jawa is the spelling and pronunciation used by people who live there, Java is the spelling and pronunciation that is general in the English language. Original Javanese script, when romanised, gives the sound of Jawa, not Java, but I'm not interested in getting into a debate on the name of the place.

What I am interested in is defining as nearly as possible the concept of The Land of Jawa, from a Javanese point of view. I've discussed this over the years with a number of people, and it seems that to define in strict geographic terms is not possible, however, most traditional Javanese people do have a very good idea of what is "Jawa", and what is "outside Jawa".

Now, this is extremely important, when we come to look at any item of wesi aji.

Why is it important?

Because if we wish to claim that an item of wesi aji is of Javanese origin, we first need to classify that item of wesi aji in accordance with the indicators that are used in tangguh. We can use overall form, we can use the characteristics of the material, and with a tombak, we must use the form of the metuk.

Once we have arrived at a classification that is defensible in terms of the guidelines used in tangguh, then we can say that the item concerned originated from The Land of Jawa.

Now, with this trisula that is under discussion we have a problem.

The primary indicator used to establish a classification is so much at variance with any of the accepted forms that it simply does not fit into any classification within the system.This primary indicator is the metuk.

Further, it is out of stain. It is impossible to read the material, and of course, from a photograph we cannot feel the material, thus we know nothing about the material and cannot classify the material.

Ben, you have quoted Stone P. 629 as showing a similar trisula as Javanese.

I have an earlier edition of Stone than the edition that shows this trisula on P 629. The illustrations in my edition are much more clear than the illustrations in this later edition that you are using. Still, the trisula shown in Stone only shows an overall shape, it is impossible to see the form of the metuk, and of course we know nothing of the material.

Now it is entirely possible that the trisula shown in Stone is Javanese.

Equally, it is entirely possible that your Chairman is correct in his affirmation that this trisula is Javanese.

However, I believe that both your Chairman, and G.C.Stone were using a much more flexible definition of "Javanese" than we can accept in any serious study of wesi aji.

If one wishes to be a simply a collector of exotic artifacts , and always view those artifacts from a present day perspective that is settled quite firmly in the western world, then it probably is more than sufficient to define an origin of something, as "Java", that is Java in the form of the Island of Java.There is no harm in this; it is a valid, and a simple way in which to enjoy a passtime or hobby.

However, if one wishes to seek a deeper understanding of the way in which the people who identify themselves as Javanese people regard their own culture, then one must apply the same standards as those people apply.

If we take the standards that Javanese people use to determine whether an item of wesi aji is from The Land of Jawa, or from outside The Land of Jawa, and we apply those standards to this trisula, then there can be no doubt that the prime identifying indicator used in accordance with those standards places this trisula outside The Land of Jawa. Regretably the other vital indicator of material is simply not available to us.

Now, I am prepared to accept that your Chairman is absolutely certain that this trisula was made in the Island of Java.

However, if he is certain of this I would very much appreciate it if he could validate his opinion by referencing the material type of this tombak to a specific location or classification, and providing just one example of a metuk similar to this metuk , from another tombak of either known provenance, or from a classsification accepted by a cultural center within the island of Java.

When we consider the classification of items of wesi aji from a Javanese perspective, it not acceptable to use overall form in isolation from the other indicators , as an adequate indicator of classification. It is only one of many.


Regarding the material used for a tunjung.
I have not claimed that all tunjung are iron.
In an ornamental landean the tunjung/sopal will be a soft metal and will sometimes be ornamented with embossing or engraving, however, in a landean intended for actual use, the tunjung will be iron. I cannot say that it will always be iron, because I have not seen every landean ever made, but I can say that in every landean I have ever seen in Central Jawa, that has been made as a using landean, the tunjung has been iron.



Ben, you have requested advice of indigenous keris literature dating from more than 100 years ago.

Apart from Centini, which does not have a great deal of keris related content, there is Pangeran Wijil's "Silsilah Keturunan Empu Tanah Jawa". This work dates from the 18th century, and gives the line of descent of each of the Empus of the Land of Jawa, as well as outlining the characteristics of their work.I agree with you that most indigenous keris literature is of a fairly recent date, however you must recognise that within traditional Javanese culture the written word had a different place and purpose from its place within western cultures. You must also recognise that traditional knowledge and belief was subject to a verbal tradition rather than a written tradition, and this verbal knowledge and belief was not available to just anybody. In fact, if we examine closely information gathered from indigenous sources during colonial times, what we often find is that that the information being given to those western colonists was what the informants either wanted the enquirers to believe, or what the informants believed the enquirers wanted to hear.In Jawa knowledge of the keris has always been knowledge of a select nature, not available to everybody. It is very true that the majority of Javanese have not had very much interest in the keris for many, many years. Not only in times past, but also at the present day. But that does not mean that no knowledge or belief was passed on within the group of people who have preserved this knowledge and belief.

Some of the finest keris art ever produced was produced during the time of PBX. Hardly an indication that interest in the keris had lapsed.PBX passed away in 1939.

To return to our trisula:- I accept that your Chairman has absolute belief that this trisula was made in the Island of Java.

I would most humbly request that he provide an explanation of the factors that have led him to this belief, just as I have provided an explanation of the factors that prevent me from accepting that this trisula was made within The Land of Jawa.

[David]

Ben, forgive me if i have in any way misunderstood or misrepresented your position. I use the word Jawa because it has been my understanding that this is how the place is referred to by the inhabitants of the island of Java. I may be incorrect in this assumption. Regardless, if it is only an old world name that is no longer in use, we are certainly discussing old world Jawa and it's weapons here, so perhaps it is appropriate.
I have no doubt that the chairman of the keris club of which you speak has done his research. I likewise have no doubt that Mr. Maisey has done his research as well. So we have different opinions. I have questioned yours because you choose to validate it with this statement " I don t like to insult any one but the most knowledge about the keris and Indonesian weapons from the past can be found in the Netherlands" instead of hard facts. Mr. Maisey presented a logical agrument which in the end doesn't prove origin one way or another, but he details how and why he comes to believe that this trisula may not be from Jawa. Knowing nothing about Trisula i find myself more swayed by Mr. Maisey's argument. It is detailed and lists reasons for his conclusion.
I would tend to disagree with you that the fight in Bali had nothing to do with misunderstandings (although, from my readings the Balinese people were very good at fighting amongst themselves with no interference from the Dutch). And it had everything to do with taking the control away, not getting it back. As i have already pointed out, we Americans have done the same thing (again and again) so this is not meant as an indictment of the Dutch per se. I was just attempting to explain that Colonial powers rarely understand the cultures that they dominate. Americans were just as bad in our own country with the indians.
I realize that English is not your first language and i may have misunderstood your remarks. If so, please forgive me.

[A. G. Maisey]

David, I don't think I can classify the foundation of what I have written as "research".

To me, research implies a structured search after knowledge.

This is not the base that I am writing from.

I am repeating here what I have been taught over many years by many people, and what I have learnt over many years through day to day dealing in Javanese markets.

You could probably say that I am writing from 40 years of acquired experience, rather than from a defined search for knowledge.

It would be as pretentious for me to claim I had "researched" this matter as for a carpenter to claim he had "researched" the driving of a nail.This is what I do; I live it, I don't research it.

Regarding the name "Jawa".

Jawa is ngoko for Java, Javanese, or referring to Java; the krama equivalent is Jawi.

As it is often pronounced, to your ear it would sound as "Jowo".

On any map of Indonesia where the names are in Indonesian, you will find Java identified as "Jawa". In any Indonesian or Javanese dictionary you will find the word "Jawa" with the meaning given as "Java".

Go back in history, and you can find a dozen different names given for Jawa, some have a sound close to Jawa, some do not.

The only reason I use Jawa most of the time is that I live in a house where probably more than half the conversation is in Javanese or Indonesian. In normal daily conversation I use the pronunciation Jawa. It is simply easier for me to use Jawa than Java. If anybody objects to me using Jawa, I am quite happy to go back and edit any posts I write and change the spelling. I have no problem with this.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

If anybody objects to me using Jawa, I am quite happy to go back and edit any posts I write and change the spelling. I have no problem with this.

I am sure this won't be necessary Alan.
Thanks for clarifying your information sources. What i meant to say really was that you were making sustainable points in your argument, no so much that you were actually "researching" the info as if writing a paper. Bad choice of words on my part.

[A. G. Maisey]

OK, thanks David. I thought I did need to clarify that idea of research, because some things I do need to research and go back to written sources, or do the rounds and ask questions---all that sort of stuff. Do the hard work, dig out the answers. But with the classification of wesi aji, its it part and parcel of buying in Jawa. If you cannot classify in accordance with the parameters of tangguh, you can lose out bigtime.

Why?

Simply because tangguh forms the basis for pricing. If you cannot, for instance, tell the difference between Mataram SA, Mataram Senopaten, Kajoran , and Koripan you can drop lots and lots and lots of money. Screwup on Majapahit and Tuban-Majapahit, and it can be even worse.

Understanding tangguh is essential for what I do.

[Dajak]

I realize that English is not your first language and i may have misunderstood your remarks. If so, please forgive me. [/QUOTE]



Hi David no problem about that but sometimes it is hard to explain for me it in English and write it the good way so it might looks some time arrogant but that is not my intension .
I have to apologize for that not you.


Ben

[Dajak]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Thanks for your response , Ben.


Some of the finest keris art ever produced was produced during the time of PBX. Hardly an indication that interest in the keris had lapsed.PBX passed away in 1939.

I don t think you can say this I see some from 14 cent that have pamor like no other

I would most humbly request that he provide an explanation of the factors that have led him to this belief, just as I have provided an explanation of the factors that prevent me from accepting that this trisula was made within The Land of Jawa.

as soon as i have made contact with him I let you know

Ben

[David]

Hi Ben. Thanks for your understanding. No apology necessary.
Perhaps you could convince your keris club friend to join our discussion. I am sure we would all find his research interesting.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for that Ben, I will be most interested to see his justification, if he is willing to give it.---alan.

[Dajak]

Hi I might meet him the 17 off december so I ask him



Ben