Greneng

Kiai Carita · 14th November 2007, 05:11 AM

As the first found inscriptions that mention keris call it kres, it might be safe to assume that from the beginning the greneng was called a greneng. The Balinese alphabet does have a dha, by the way.

When did the keris begin to have non-weapon function features? I would say from the beginning, as soo as the ganja was attached there you have a non weapon form to follow a symbolic function.

Salam hangat,
Bram

A. G. Maisey · 14th November 2007, 09:17 AM

Kiai Carita, I admire your absolute certainty.

Most especially do I admire it in the absence of any certainty that the object to which the word that has been romanised as "kres" was in fact an object that we would recognise as a keris. It may have been, then again it may not have been. Interestingly, the word "kres" is not to be found in Zoetmulder.

If we can assume that the greneng has been a part of keris design since some time during the Majapahit era, then it seems reasonable to assume that we should be able to find the word "greneng", or a word which could have become "greneng", within the Old Javanese lexicon. I cannot find either in Zoetmulder. This is, of course, not proof that the word, or words did not exist, but before we can defend the assumption that the greneng has always been known as the greneng, we do need a somewhat more positive argument.

In any case, this debate over words is once again straying from the core issue. It really doesn't matter whether the early keris was known as keris, kris, kres, or puklak.Nor does it matter by what name the greneng was known. What we are considering here is the reason for the greneng, not its given name.That is immaterial to this discussion.

I disagree totally with your opinion that the presence of the ganja on a blade made of it a non-weapon.

The early monumental representations of the keris quite clearly show these weapons with ganjas, and used in the way they were, that ganja had a definite function in the use of the early keris as a weapon. For that matter, the ganja has a weapon related function in modern keris design too.

Later philosophical interpretations have attached a symbolism to the ganja that cannot be assumed to have applied in a society and culture which could no more have understood this philosophy than it could have understood the Space Shuttle.

Kiai Carita, I acknowledge your right to hold the opinions you have put forward, however, if you would like these opinions to be accepted by others, may I suggest that you offer some logical argument, or substantial evidence to support them?

Regarding your assertion that the Balinese alphabet does in fact contain the consonant "dha".

I know almost nothing about the Balinese language, but I do seem to recall that in the Balinese alphabet there is no "dha", but there is "da". However, Kawi was used in Bali, just as it was used in Jawa, and in Kawi we can find "dha", which would be used in Bali for the writing of script in Kawi.I will stand correction on this Balinese language question, as I really am very ignorant of this language. Perhaps somebody with intimate knowledge of the language may be able guide us?

drdavid · 14th November 2007, 10:21 AM

Might I ask those with more experience if examples of keris from the older collections all exhibit the same form of greneng. It seems that modern keris often carry the dha character shape (or multiples of it) in the greneng but was that always the case? If early keris with greneng have very similar shapes in the greneng as currently that may lead us in one direction, if they varied significantly that would possibly have different implications.
DrD

kronckew · 14th November 2007, 11:51 AM

i am of course, less experienced in this area than most of y'all, but maybe from the outside can offer another view. i can also easily make a fool of myself, but what the heck, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

while not very informed on the subtle definitions of the greneng, which needs to be defined for us new members, and assuming the original poster was basically talking about the ORIGINAL FUNCTION of the notched area at the top of the blade near the ganjah, i note that the rencong also has similar notches cut into the similar area, and in fact on the rear side of the area where your fingers can come in contact on mine (they're sharp little devils too).

the kudi/kujang also has decorative notches on the top of the blade, on my pre-islamic one, they are well forward, over the 3 holes.

10.5 in. blade kujang - 9in. blade rencong

zoomed

european blades frequently have decorative filework notches cut into the blade spine, scots blades are also frequently notched

4 in. weidmannsheil hunter

could it just be that they are decorative items that have evolved into fancy forms & have become 'traditional' in some areas, adding more esoteric interpretations in later ages.

as not all kris blades have them, and some non-kris blades have them, i'd think that if they had a definite non-decorative kris specific function then all kris would have them to some extent, however they are apparently optional.

occam's razor (razors generally come without greneng

)?

David · 14th November 2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

the kudi/kujang also has decorative notches on the top of the blade, on my pre-islamic one, they are well forward, over the 3 holes.

european blades frequently have decorative filework notches cut into the blade spine, scots blades are also frequently notched

could it just be that they are decorative items that have evolved into fancy forms & have become 'traditional' in some areas, adding more esoteric interpretations in later ages.

as not all kris blades have them, and some non-kris blades have them, i'd think that if they had a definite non-decorative kris specific function then all kris would have them to some extent, however they are apparently optional.

occam's razor (razors generally come without greneng

)?

Your kudi looks like a fairly modern piece to me, not pre-Islamic.

Greneng is certainly much more developed than the notches found on European blades and the form does look very much like the Dha letter it is reputed to represent. It seems to me that they are much more than just decoration.
Keris were/are made on many different levels for many different classes of people and for various purposes. I don't find it surprising therefore that some keris have greneng while others do not.

Raden Usman Djogja · 14th November 2007, 09:07 PM

dearest kerislovers,

bear in mind when you trace pre-islamic ages, perhaps it is better not only to refer hindhuism and bundhism but also JAWAISM. by doing this, hopefully, we are not trapped in the condition: "free from tiger mouth fall in crocodile mouth"

notice that to know greneng must to know the context of pre-islamic era is brilliant. BUT it is still in the middle of expedition. the rest seems harder

take care,
Usmen

A. G. Maisey · 14th November 2007, 09:51 PM

It is tempting to think of the very first, original expression of the greneng as a purely ornamental device, it is difficult to argue against this, as it is obvious that to say such a thing never happened, and never could have happened we would need knowledge of every keris ever produced, prior to the widespread use of the greneng as a feature in the keris.

However, once we reach the point where we can see a distinct form in the greneng, and we see this repeated in a number of blades, irrespective of the quality of the blade, I am very reluctant to accept mere ornamentation as an explanation.Most especially so when that form can be aligned with a form existing in Javanese script.

In fact, when we consider the 16th and 17th century examples in European collections, and compare these with examples in Jawa that are supposedly from this period, and earlier periods, it seems possible that in blades where complex ricikan were used , their addition to the blade was not the product of a gradual development process, but rather all the features were added at one time, or at least within a span of time that was relatively short.

To my mind, this indicates a planned process for an intended purpose.

Yes David, the Hindu faith was present in early Jawa, but it was not the Hindu faith as practiced in its homeland. It was Jawa-Hindu, which was a syncretic form of the faith incorporating indigenous Javanese elements and a parralelism with the practice of Buddhism. Not really a particularly easy subject to come to terms with, but an understanding of what was going on in the religious sphere at this time is essential before we can begin hypothesizing in respect the keris and its features.

Let us not forget that a culture and society consists of more than just its religious beliefs. We need also to try to gain an understanding of the other elements involved .

We must not think of early Javanese society as a Hindu culture. It was not. It was Javanese culture with overlays of foriegn belief systems that had been accepted, absorbed, and altered to fit the host society.

Kiai Carita · 17th November 2007, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Kiai Carita, I admire your absolute certainty.

Most especially do I admire it in the absence of any certainty that the object to which the word that has been romanised as "kres" was in fact an object that we would recognise as a keris. It may have been, then again it may not have been. Interestingly, the word "kres" is not to be found in Zoetmulder.

Pak Alan,

I am certain that I have read somewhere, that the first inscriptions of keris mention it as KRES, and experts who analysed the prasasti were convinced that kres means keris. I notice your certainty in judging the knowledge of the experts who examined the paticular prasasti that I think was mentioned in Harsrinuksma's ensiklopedi. I can't say that they were not certain that the word kres in the prasasti was refering to an object we would now recognize as a keris. In fact, I believe their opinion, that kres is refering to keris.

The words kres and keris contain the sound RIS, which is also related to IRIS, which is an important function of keris as a physical weapon besides stabbing, but that is not important in this discussion.

My opinion that a leter like the caraka DHA exists in the Bali alphabet comes from this site: http://www.babadbali.com/aksarabali/books/tobacaan.htm

Salam hangat,

Bram

drdavid · 18th November 2007, 01:28 AM

Dear all, thank you for some wonderful contributions. If you would allow me a flight of intellectual fancy I will float the following ideas.

The concept that the greneng has a function which determined its form seems to have reasonable support.

It seems unlikely that the function was related to its use as a weapon.

It appears likely that the greneng appeared somewhere in the 1100-1300 year range CE (current era= same as AD).

It seems probably that the greneng 'arrived' in that relatively short period of history in what is very similar to its current form and most importantly in a relatively constant form ie it is not the evolution of a decorative tradition.

This form was important to the culture which conceived it and hence was repeated consistently. It is possible/probable that the current cultural interpretation of the form is not the same as its original one.

It has been suggested that all the ups and downs of the greneng represents the northern coastline of the island of Java, (certainly if you look at maps of some stretches of this coastline there are areas that have the 'dha' shape recurrently).

Perhaps given all this the greneng was originally a physical representation (a map) of the area of overlordship/influence of one of the dynasties of central and/or eastern Java (the Singosari or the Majapahit seem most likely given the dates but if evidence of the greneng is found earlier then other regimes would fit). The dynasty wished to assert its authority over a given area (perhaps after a rebellion, perhaps after consolidating power) and chose to do it by carving it into one of their most powerful representational tools, their keris.

please feel free to shred this idea, it is as I said just a flight of fancy
drd

A. G. Maisey · 18th November 2007, 06:52 AM

Pak Ganja, I really do have a great deal of difficulty in understanding why you would attempt to discourage anybody from reading your interesting and valuable contribution to discussion.I am certain that there are many people who will read this who do not know this part of the Aji Saka legend, and your contribution will add to their knowledge.

However, let us be fair:- the translation and interpretation you have given is not the only one possible from the hanacaraka.Moreover, even when we look at the these translations and interpretations, the true meanings are not simple and obvious. In fact we are considering a moral teaching that has strong links with 19th-20th century Kejawen. Even this moral teaching can be interpreted in varying ways, to carry varying lessons.

I'm not going to diverge into talking about this here, but for those of you who do have an interest, a few thoughtful minutes with Mr. Google will prove very instructive. You might like to start with the Joglosemar site:-

http://www.joglosemar.co.id/kejawen/perfectlife.html

There is much to be discovered about this if you are prepared to put in the time.

But the crux of the matter is this:- Aji Saka is a legendary figure, as is Medang Kamulan. I do not know the origins of this legend, nor when it first began to appear, but if we look at the variations, it does seem obvious that as with all legends it has developed through the telling and retelling, and the current version seems to owe much to the clash between local Javanese Islam and mainstream Islam which occurred at the end of the 19th century. This was probably due to the actions of people returning from The Haj, and resulted in a distinction being made for the first time between the abangan and the santri.

When we begin to consider legend as a source for historic possibility, we need to consider not just the source of the legend, but the way in which it has developed over time.

Then of course we need to consider the philosophy of the hanacaraka, coming to us from PB IX and Yasadipura.But the question must arise:- what has this got to do with the origin of the greneng? I submit:- nothing.

But still, its interesting---just doesn't have anything at all to do with what we are talking about.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

G'day Bram. Can I call you Bram, or Pak Bram, or Pak Kiai? Which would you prefer?

Howabout if I just call you Bram, and you can call me Alan? Lets drop the formalities.

About the "kres" thing, I've also read what you are telling us many times, but I have not yet seen a complete translation done by a qualified scholar and subjected to peer review. All I have seen is the romanisation of the original script and interpretations placed upon it by people who may, or may not be qualified to give that interpretation.
In fact, I'm not even certain as to what inscription this is. I think I've read the source somewhere, but off the top of my head, I don't know it, I don't know who has done the translations, who has checked them---I know nothing except that there is an old inscription that contains the word "kres".

Yes, "kres" resembles "kris", and it might in fact be the same word and mean the same, but even if it does, at the time of the inscription, this word could have referred to an object other than that which we today would recognise as a keris. Then there is the fact that the most authoritative work to date on the Old Javanese lexicon---Zoetmulder--- does not list the word "kres".

Interestingly, the word "kres" is a Modern Javanese word having the sense of cutting or slashing.

I think you may have been reading something into my writing that was not there Bram. I have no certainty at all that the experts who examined the inscription that you mention were either correct or incorrect. How could I have?
I have not seen the complete inscription.
I do not know the process that was applied to romanise it.
I do not who worked on it and who checked it.
I know nothing at all about it, except a vague reference in a book prepared for the popular market.

I do thank you most sincerely for pointing out that this inscription was mentioned in Ensiklopedi. I know I've seen reference to it in other places as well, but Ensiklopedi was a good start. Here we are told that it is an inscription dating from 500AD, it is written in Pallava script, and the language used is Sanscrit. That's a lot of info.

Yes, it would have been written in Pallava script if it was written in 500AD. Last known Pallava script use in an inscription was in March 804.

But was it written in Sanscrit?
I'm not so sure that it was written in Sanscrit. It may have been. The Tarumanegara inscription was written in Sanscrit, and that was about the same time as the "kres" inscription.We don't see Old Kawi until the 8th century, so, yeah, OK, lets agree this "kres" inscription was written in Sanscrit.
But once we do that we have a problem, because Macdonell does not list the word "kres" as a part of the Sanscrit lexicon. In fact, I don't think that the syllabel "kre" occurs at the beginning of a word in Sanscrit; "kri" does occur fairly frequently. Interestingly the word and syllabel "kris" has the sense of thinness in Sanscrit.

So---where does this leave us in respect of our respected archaic inscription that contains (supposedly) the word "kres"?

Personally, I think we need to know a wee bit more about the inscription, its translators, and its checkers, before we draw any conclusions at all.

In any case, this inscription was from about 500AD.

It would be a magical feat of language development if the word "kres" really and truly referred to an object that we would recognise as a kris.
Language is living beast. Constantly moving, jumping and changing direction. Once it ceases to behave thus it dies.

Yes, I think many of us may have heard the "iris" relationship brought up in the past. In fact, I wrote a paper about this maybe 25-30 years ago---before I learnt that I knew nothing.But still, even though I knew nothing---and in truth, still do not--- it wasn't a bad guess, because "iris" does occur in Old Javanese, and might logically be considered as a root word for "kris", which also appears in Old Javanese. Maybe it might not be a direct root, but the idea is there, and the feeling of "slicing", "making thinner", the Sanscrit "kris", and the Old Javanese "kris", together with Old Javanese "iris".

Yeah---why not? Looks like a good basis for a thesis to me.

The mistake I made in my old paper was to link "iris" to Old Malay, rather than Old Javanese.

But anyway, all this interesting stuff has wandered away from our core question:- origin of the greneng.

I've already remarked upon the way I feel this question should be considered, so I won't repeat myself.

I love this divergent crap. It means we can talk all day if we feel so inclined. Good stuff, and interesting. Lets you play with ideas.

Keep this stuff coming Bram. Love it!!

Thanks for the alphabet link.
As I said previously, I was running on memory. What I had was a mental picture of the Balinese alphabet with the same order as the Javanese alphabet, but with different romanisations, which obviously can be put down to differing speech inflections. After looking at your link I threw "balinese alphabet" into google. Here's what I got:-

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/balinese.htm

Actually, the romanisation ain't worth a cupfull of cold water; what we need to look at are the original script representations.In my link you'll see these are a modern version. If you go to Raffles you'll find that he presents maybe as many as a dozen different script forms that have been used in the past for writing Javanese---and by extension, Kawi and Balinese.Yes, of course there's a DA, or a DHA in the Balinese alphabet, but most importantly, there is a script character that echoes the Javanese DHA.---whether the person who romanises it aspirates it or not.

As for your beliefs, Bram.
These are your own personal property, and it is not my intention to try to divest you of your own personal property.
Hold fast to your beliefs. Ignore those who would try to make you change them.
However, please do make room for a little logic.
We all have room for both.In one situation we can be creatures of belief, in a different situation, creatures of logic.
Retain the beliefs, but don't let them interfere with the logic.

Please note:-

I have made an error in the above post.

Pak Ganja was kind enough to indirectly point out to me that the word "kres" is mentioned in an inscription dating from 842AD, not 500AD.

This means that it was written in Old Javanese, not Sanscrit.

Which in turn means that what I have written above about "kres" is irrelevant to the discussion.

This "kres" word matter has been more fully addressed in the "Inscriptions" thread.

I apologise for any inconvenience I may have caused.

A. G. Maisey · 18th November 2007, 07:11 AM

Very well David, its a flight of fancy.

Can you explain how the presence of the greneng on the keris assisted in assertion of authority over a portion of the a realm?

Especially when Sunda was virtually ignored in the Majapahit literature.

If we wish to make the greneng a geographical representation of something, we need to look at geography from the perspective of a lord of Old Jawa.

I don't think we can use this map theory. This is just not a reflection of Javanese thought of that period.

Kiai Carita · 18th November 2007, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

.........
G'day Bram. Can I call you Bram, or Pak Bram, or Pak Kiai? Which would you prefer?

Howabout if I just call you Bram, and you can call me Alan? Lets drop the formalities.

If you like, Alan... I am interested in commenting on the mention of Ajisaka. Who was and why Ajisaka? My intuition is that Ajisaka is the personification of "the knowledge of the pillar(s)" similar to current Freemasonry, and is concerned with creating a just and peacful society.

Sorry to wander off the thread.

As for the greneng representing a map, well, old Jawa kings didn't seem to like or need maps much. They often did not have borders on the ground, and they considered owning people more important than territory.

One thing we must consider when thinking about how things became widely used, is the influence of charisma. If a God-King wants a greneng, all his subjects might want one too. When Panembahan Senapati died at his funeral cigarettes were served and from that day Jawa men smoked, court poets noted. So the use of greneng might be like that too, one day a King used it and the next day everyone wanted one. Why? Because of charisma.

Just my opinion...

Salam hangat,
Bram

A. G. Maisey · 18th November 2007, 12:13 PM

Aji Saka.
Bram, those two words are loaded.
Yes, we can extract "pillar of knowledge" from them, but we can extract other possibilities as well.
What we extract can depend upon what language the words were first used in. Did this legend originate when Old Javanese was in general use, or after Modern Javanese came into general usage?
We can extract "king" from "aji".
We can also extract "kaji" from "aji"---this is a known variation.
Saka?
Again the word can be interpreted in several ways.
However, "pillar of knowledge" is workable, and it could well have been intended in that way.
Possibly when it was first used the story-teller was playing with ideas that would be generated in the minds of his audience by a combination of sounds, and the supporting story. Pillar of knowledge could be used to generate the idea of knowledge coming from The Haj, by the unspoken reference to "kaji". The ideas of "king", and "pillar" could be interchangeable
There are a number of possibilities, my personal feeling is that this legend was born after Islamic penetration of Jawa and was perhaps used in propaganda. I don't like the parallel with Freemasonry much. I cannot see such a thing being a part of the supportive fabric, moreover, it is stretching belief just a little too far, but I have no doubt that the story was used as a teaching medium. You yourself know that these legends were not just for light amusement. They were not 15th century versions of TV soap operas.The story tellers in Javanese society were an informal----and perhaps sometimes a formal---mechanism of societal control.

The greneng flowing from imitation of royal preference?
Undoubtedly.
This would have come from the top, no doubt about that, but why?
And was it a personal royal preference, or by royal dictate?
Was it personalised to the ruler, or was it at the direction of the ruler, and in any case----why?

14th November 2007, 10:21 AM	#3
drdavid Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 369	Might I ask those with more experience if examples of keris from the older collections all exhibit the same form of greneng. It seems that modern keris often carry the dha character shape (or multiples of it) in the greneng but was that always the case? If early keris with greneng have very similar shapes in the greneng as currently that may lead us in one direction, if they varied significantly that would possibly have different implications. DrD Last edited by drdavid; 14th November 2007 at 10:35 AM.

18th November 2007, 01:28 AM	#9
drdavid Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 369	Map of control Dear all, thank you for some wonderful contributions. If you would allow me a flight of intellectual fancy I will float the following ideas. The concept that the greneng has a function which determined its form seems to have reasonable support. It seems unlikely that the function was related to its use as a weapon. It appears likely that the greneng appeared somewhere in the 1100-1300 year range CE (current era= same as AD). It seems probably that the greneng 'arrived' in that relatively short period of history in what is very similar to its current form and most importantly in a relatively constant form ie it is not the evolution of a decorative tradition. This form was important to the culture which conceived it and hence was repeated consistently. It is possible/probable that the current cultural interpretation of the form is not the same as its original one. It has been suggested that all the ups and downs of the greneng represents the northern coastline of the island of Java, (certainly if you look at maps of some stretches of this coastline there are areas that have the 'dha' shape recurrently). Perhaps given all this the greneng was originally a physical representation (a map) of the area of overlordship/influence of one of the dynasties of central and/or eastern Java (the Singosari or the Majapahit seem most likely given the dates but if evidence of the greneng is found earlier then other regimes would fit). The dynasty wished to assert its authority over a given area (perhaps after a rebellion, perhaps after consolidating power) and chose to do it by carving it into one of their most powerful representational tools, their keris. please feel free to shred this idea, it is as I said just a flight of fancy drd

18th November 2007, 06:52 AM	#10
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,748	Pak Ganja, I really do have a great deal of difficulty in understanding why you would attempt to discourage anybody from reading your interesting and valuable contribution to discussion.I am certain that there are many people who will read this who do not know this part of the Aji Saka legend, and your contribution will add to their knowledge. However, let us be fair:- the translation and interpretation you have given is not the only one possible from the hanacaraka.Moreover, even when we look at the these translations and interpretations, the true meanings are not simple and obvious. In fact we are considering a moral teaching that has strong links with 19th-20th century Kejawen. Even this moral teaching can be interpreted in varying ways, to carry varying lessons. I'm not going to diverge into talking about this here, but for those of you who do have an interest, a few thoughtful minutes with Mr. Google will prove very instructive. You might like to start with the Joglosemar site:- http://www.joglosemar.co.id/kejawen/perfectlife.html There is much to be discovered about this if you are prepared to put in the time. But the crux of the matter is this:- Aji Saka is a legendary figure, as is Medang Kamulan. I do not know the origins of this legend, nor when it first began to appear, but if we look at the variations, it does seem obvious that as with all legends it has developed through the telling and retelling, and the current version seems to owe much to the clash between local Javanese Islam and mainstream Islam which occurred at the end of the 19th century. This was probably due to the actions of people returning from The Haj, and resulted in a distinction being made for the first time between the abangan and the santri. When we begin to consider legend as a source for historic possibility, we need to consider not just the source of the legend, but the way in which it has developed over time. Then of course we need to consider the philosophy of the hanacaraka, coming to us from PB IX and Yasadipura.But the question must arise:- what has this got to do with the origin of the greneng? I submit:- nothing. But still, its interesting---just doesn't have anything at all to do with what we are talking about. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ G'day Bram. Can I call you Bram, or Pak Bram, or Pak Kiai? Which would you prefer? Howabout if I just call you Bram, and you can call me Alan? Lets drop the formalities. About the "kres" thing, I've also read what you are telling us many times, but I have not yet seen a complete translation done by a qualified scholar and subjected to peer review. All I have seen is the romanisation of the original script and interpretations placed upon it by people who may, or may not be qualified to give that interpretation. In fact, I'm not even certain as to what inscription this is. I think I've read the source somewhere, but off the top of my head, I don't know it, I don't know who has done the translations, who has checked them---I know nothing except that there is an old inscription that contains the word "kres". Yes, "kres" resembles "kris", and it might in fact be the same word and mean the same, but even if it does, at the time of the inscription, this word could have referred to an object other than that which we today would recognise as a keris. Then there is the fact that the most authoritative work to date on the Old Javanese lexicon---Zoetmulder--- does not list the word "kres". Interestingly, the word "kres" is a Modern Javanese word having the sense of cutting or slashing. I think you may have been reading something into my writing that was not there Bram. I have no certainty at all that the experts who examined the inscription that you mention were either correct or incorrect. How could I have? I have not seen the complete inscription. I do not know the process that was applied to romanise it. I do not who worked on it and who checked it. I know nothing at all about it, except a vague reference in a book prepared for the popular market. I do thank you most sincerely for pointing out that this inscription was mentioned in Ensiklopedi. I know I've seen reference to it in other places as well, but Ensiklopedi was a good start. Here we are told that it is an inscription dating from 500AD, it is written in Pallava script, and the language used is Sanscrit. That's a lot of info. Yes, it would have been written in Pallava script if it was written in 500AD. Last known Pallava script use in an inscription was in March 804. But was it written in Sanscrit? I'm not so sure that it was written in Sanscrit. It may have been. The Tarumanegara inscription was written in Sanscrit, and that was about the same time as the "kres" inscription.We don't see Old Kawi until the 8th century, so, yeah, OK, lets agree this "kres" inscription was written in Sanscrit. But once we do that we have a problem, because Macdonell does not list the word "kres" as a part of the Sanscrit lexicon. In fact, I don't think that the syllabel "kre" occurs at the beginning of a word in Sanscrit; "kri" does occur fairly frequently. Interestingly the word and syllabel "kris" has the sense of thinness in Sanscrit. So---where does this leave us in respect of our respected archaic inscription that contains (supposedly) the word "kres"? Personally, I think we need to know a wee bit more about the inscription, its translators, and its checkers, before we draw any conclusions at all. In any case, this inscription was from about 500AD. It would be a magical feat of language development if the word "kres" really and truly referred to an object that we would recognise as a kris. Language is living beast. Constantly moving, jumping and changing direction. Once it ceases to behave thus it dies. Yes, I think many of us may have heard the "iris" relationship brought up in the past. In fact, I wrote a paper about this maybe 25-30 years ago---before I learnt that I knew nothing.But still, even though I knew nothing---and in truth, still do not--- it wasn't a bad guess, because "iris" does occur in Old Javanese, and might logically be considered as a root word for "kris", which also appears in Old Javanese. Maybe it might not be a direct root, but the idea is there, and the feeling of "slicing", "making thinner", the Sanscrit "kris", and the Old Javanese "kris", together with Old Javanese "iris". Yeah---why not? Looks like a good basis for a thesis to me. The mistake I made in my old paper was to link "iris" to Old Malay, rather than Old Javanese. But anyway, all this interesting stuff has wandered away from our core question:- origin of the greneng. I've already remarked upon the way I feel this question should be considered, so I won't repeat myself. I love this divergent crap. It means we can talk all day if we feel so inclined. Good stuff, and interesting. Lets you play with ideas. Keep this stuff coming Bram. Love it!! Thanks for the alphabet link. As I said previously, I was running on memory. What I had was a mental picture of the Balinese alphabet with the same order as the Javanese alphabet, but with different romanisations, which obviously can be put down to differing speech inflections. After looking at your link I threw "balinese alphabet" into google. Here's what I got:- http://www.omniglot.com/writing/balinese.htm Actually, the romanisation ain't worth a cupfull of cold water; what we need to look at are the original script representations.In my link you'll see these are a modern version. If you go to Raffles you'll find that he presents maybe as many as a dozen different script forms that have been used in the past for writing Javanese---and by extension, Kawi and Balinese.Yes, of course there's a DA, or a DHA in the Balinese alphabet, but most importantly, there is a script character that echoes the Javanese DHA.---whether the person who romanises it aspirates it or not. As for your beliefs, Bram. These are your own personal property, and it is not my intention to try to divest you of your own personal property. Hold fast to your beliefs. Ignore those who would try to make you change them. However, please do make room for a little logic. We all have room for both.In one situation we can be creatures of belief, in a different situation, creatures of logic. Retain the beliefs, but don't let them interfere with the logic. Please note:- I have made an error in the above post. Pak Ganja was kind enough to indirectly point out to me that the word "kres" is mentioned in an inscription dating from 842AD, not 500AD. This means that it was written in Old Javanese, not Sanscrit. Which in turn means that what I have written above about "kres" is irrelevant to the discussion. This "kres" word matter has been more fully addressed in the "Inscriptions" thread. I apologise for any inconvenience I may have caused. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 19th November 2007 at 01:51 AM.

14th November 2007, 05:11 AM	#1
Kiai Carita Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 91	As the first found inscriptions that mention keris call it kres, it might be safe to assume that from the beginning the greneng was called a greneng. The Balinese alphabet does have a dha, by the way. When did the keris begin to have non-weapon function features? I would say from the beginning, as soo as the ganja was attached there you have a non weapon form to follow a symbolic function. Salam hangat, Bram

14th November 2007, 09:17 AM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,748	Kiai Carita, I admire your absolute certainty. Most especially do I admire it in the absence of any certainty that the object to which the word that has been romanised as "kres" was in fact an object that we would recognise as a keris. It may have been, then again it may not have been. Interestingly, the word "kres" is not to be found in Zoetmulder. If we can assume that the greneng has been a part of keris design since some time during the Majapahit era, then it seems reasonable to assume that we should be able to find the word "greneng", or a word which could have become "greneng", within the Old Javanese lexicon. I cannot find either in Zoetmulder. This is, of course, not proof that the word, or words did not exist, but before we can defend the assumption that the greneng has always been known as the greneng, we do need a somewhat more positive argument. In any case, this debate over words is once again straying from the core issue. It really doesn't matter whether the early keris was known as keris, kris, kres, or puklak.Nor does it matter by what name the greneng was known. What we are considering here is the reason for the greneng, not its given name.That is immaterial to this discussion. I disagree totally with your opinion that the presence of the ganja on a blade made of it a non-weapon. The early monumental representations of the keris quite clearly show these weapons with ganjas, and used in the way they were, that ganja had a definite function in the use of the early keris as a weapon. For that matter, the ganja has a weapon related function in modern keris design too. Later philosophical interpretations have attached a symbolism to the ganja that cannot be assumed to have applied in a society and culture which could no more have understood this philosophy than it could have understood the Space Shuttle. Kiai Carita, I acknowledge your right to hold the opinions you have put forward, however, if you would like these opinions to be accepted by others, may I suggest that you offer some logical argument, or substantial evidence to support them? Regarding your assertion that the Balinese alphabet does in fact contain the consonant "dha". I know almost nothing about the Balinese language, but I do seem to recall that in the Balinese alphabet there is no "dha", but there is "da". However, Kawi was used in Bali, just as it was used in Jawa, and in Kawi we can find "dha", which would be used in Bali for the writing of script in Kawi.I will stand correction on this Balinese language question, as I really am very ignorant of this language. Perhaps somebody with intimate knowledge of the language may be able guide us?

14th November 2007, 11:51 AM	#4
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,154	i am of course, less experienced in this area than most of y'all, but maybe from the outside can offer another view. i can also easily make a fool of myself, but what the heck, nothing ventured, nothing gained. while not very informed on the subtle definitions of the greneng, which needs to be defined for us new members, and assuming the original poster was basically talking about the ORIGINAL FUNCTION of the notched area at the top of the blade near the ganjah, i note that the rencong also has similar notches cut into the similar area, and in fact on the rear side of the area where your fingers can come in contact on mine (they're sharp little devils too). the kudi/kujang also has decorative notches on the top of the blade, on my pre-islamic one, they are well forward, over the 3 holes. 10.5 in. blade kujang - 9in. blade rencong zoomed european blades frequently have decorative filework notches cut into the blade spine, scots blades are also frequently notched 4 in. weidmannsheil hunter could it just be that they are decorative items that have evolved into fancy forms & have become 'traditional' in some areas, adding more esoteric interpretations in later ages. as not all kris blades have them, and some non-kris blades have them, i'd think that if they had a definite non-decorative kris specific function then all kris would have them to some extent, however they are apparently optional. occam's razor (razors generally come without greneng )?

14th November 2007, 09:07 PM	#6
Raden Usman Djogja Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 199	dearest kerislovers, bear in mind when you trace pre-islamic ages, perhaps it is better not only to refer hindhuism and bundhism but also JAWAISM. by doing this, hopefully, we are not trapped in the condition: "free from tiger mouth fall in crocodile mouth" notice that to know greneng must to know the context of pre-islamic era is brilliant. BUT it is still in the middle of expedition. the rest seems harder take care, Usmen

14th November 2007, 09:51 PM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,748	It is tempting to think of the very first, original expression of the greneng as a purely ornamental device, it is difficult to argue against this, as it is obvious that to say such a thing never happened, and never could have happened we would need knowledge of every keris ever produced, prior to the widespread use of the greneng as a feature in the keris. However, once we reach the point where we can see a distinct form in the greneng, and we see this repeated in a number of blades, irrespective of the quality of the blade, I am very reluctant to accept mere ornamentation as an explanation.Most especially so when that form can be aligned with a form existing in Javanese script. In fact, when we consider the 16th and 17th century examples in European collections, and compare these with examples in Jawa that are supposedly from this period, and earlier periods, it seems possible that in blades where complex ricikan were used , their addition to the blade was not the product of a gradual development process, but rather all the features were added at one time, or at least within a span of time that was relatively short. To my mind, this indicates a planned process for an intended purpose. Yes David, the Hindu faith was present in early Jawa, but it was not the Hindu faith as practiced in its homeland. It was Jawa-Hindu, which was a syncretic form of the faith incorporating indigenous Javanese elements and a parralelism with the practice of Buddhism. Not really a particularly easy subject to come to terms with, but an understanding of what was going on in the religious sphere at this time is essential before we can begin hypothesizing in respect the keris and its features. Let us not forget that a culture and society consists of more than just its religious beliefs. We need also to try to gain an understanding of the other elements involved . We must not think of early Javanese society as a Hindu culture. It was not. It was Javanese culture with overlays of foriegn belief systems that had been accepted, absorbed, and altered to fit the host society.

18th November 2007, 07:11 AM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,748	Very well David, its a flight of fancy. Can you explain how the presence of the greneng on the keris assisted in assertion of authority over a portion of the a realm? Especially when Sunda was virtually ignored in the Majapahit literature. If we wish to make the greneng a geographical representation of something, we need to look at geography from the perspective of a lord of Old Jawa. I don't think we can use this map theory. This is just not a reflection of Javanese thought of that period.

18th November 2007, 12:13 PM	#13
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,748	Aji Saka. Bram, those two words are loaded. Yes, we can extract "pillar of knowledge" from them, but we can extract other possibilities as well. What we extract can depend upon what language the words were first used in. Did this legend originate when Old Javanese was in general use, or after Modern Javanese came into general usage? We can extract "king" from "aji". We can also extract "kaji" from "aji"---this is a known variation. Saka? Again the word can be interpreted in several ways. However, "pillar of knowledge" is workable, and it could well have been intended in that way. Possibly when it was first used the story-teller was playing with ideas that would be generated in the minds of his audience by a combination of sounds, and the supporting story. Pillar of knowledge could be used to generate the idea of knowledge coming from The Haj, by the unspoken reference to "kaji". The ideas of "king", and "pillar" could be interchangeable There are a number of possibilities, my personal feeling is that this legend was born after Islamic penetration of Jawa and was perhaps used in propaganda. I don't like the parallel with Freemasonry much. I cannot see such a thing being a part of the supportive fabric, moreover, it is stretching belief just a little too far, but I have no doubt that the story was used as a teaching medium. You yourself know that these legends were not just for light amusement. They were not 15th century versions of TV soap operas.The story tellers in Javanese society were an informal----and perhaps sometimes a formal---mechanism of societal control. The greneng flowing from imitation of royal preference? Undoubtedly. This would have come from the top, no doubt about that, but why? And was it a personal royal preference, or by royal dictate? Was it personalised to the ruler, or was it at the direction of the ruler, and in any case----why?