Bitten by the Keris Bug

[Laowang]

Originally Posted by David

Just curious...does no one care to comment on my observation that according to Spirit of Wood "anak ayam teleng" and "pipit teleng" are two completely different hilt forms, with "pipit teleng" being the form present on the keris in question.

David, I agree that the photos and accompanying captions in Spirit of Wood appear to contradict what Kai & I have written in previous posts. I admit I have no particular knowledge of peninsular Malaysian hulu names other than what I have read in posts from Kai Wee and Alam Shah, and from Adni on his website, which formed the basis of my own comments. I would love to hear from either Kai Wee or Alam Shah, but they haven't posted much as of recent.

It does make me reflect a little on the importance of the name. One could argue that it's important to know the correct name, in order to classify the keris, and understand what it is known as in its region of origin. One might also acknowledge, as Alan has suggested, that knowledge, names, and terms have changed over time, due to evolution within and/or disruption to the original culture. Perhaps there simply isn't consensus within the peninsular Malaysian community regarding the proper name for the forms given that loss of knowledge, or lack of continuity.

If the importance of the name is to define a set of commonly shared formal attributes, so that when one refers to a hulu pekaka everyone understands what that hilt looks like in the absence of a photograph, one could also resort to more generic terms. E.g. "jawa demam, northern Malay variant" for the pekaka, or "jawa demam, Terengganu variant" for the anak ayam teleng and/or pipit teleng form.

I'm not sure I personally see the need to have all questions answered with absolute certitude. For me, the beauty of a hulu pekaka or hulu tajong lies within the grace of the form, the power of the carving, and the resonance of the original cultural belief system that created the piece and imbued it with power. It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Laowang

It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

Very well said!

[A. G. Maisey]

Its not just a matter of "nice" to know the correct name, its a matter of extremely difficult to know the correct name.

Where keris are concerned, the names change all the time, depending on situation, period, geographic location, social group, and so on. In Central Jawa the name for something can change from one town to another, and those towns might only be 30 miles apart.

Sometimes one particular group of people can be led by the opinions of a single person, who is recognised within that group as the most senior within the hierarchy of the group, and he might decide that something should be named as something other than it is currently named. Often the reasons for that decision will be known only to the senior person.

But then we have the situation where it is essential to know a correct name, within a defined context, because interpretations associated with that name follow. I'm thinking here of dhapur in accord with a particular kraton's understandings.

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

[Laowang]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Its not just a matter of "nice" to know the correct name, its a matter of extremely difficult to know the correct name.

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

Alan, I am in complete agreement with your point of view, in this regard.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This is the frustrating thing about the Name Game:- sometimes it is essential to be able to play it, and play it without defect, but on other occasions it is simply a waste of time.

Laowang, if you have been following my method of posting on this thread and what i have been trying to bring to light you will understand that i do indeed share your opinion of the name game. i have brought these conflicts of opinions on correct names not to attempt to support one over the other, but rather to point out the futility of it on many levels. But ultimately what is important is that we can use words and understand what the other is describing. Unfortunately in the case of a word like "pekaka" we are now in a situation where some people still consider this a word for the tajong or "kingfisher" variety of hilt while other consider it a proper term for the peninsula version of Jawa Demam (Northern Jawa Demam). This does create some problems for communication showing the importance of the "sometimes it is essential" part of Alan's above statement.

[F. de Luzon]

To provide context to the complex issue being discussed, what follows is a footnote of Farish A. Noor’s article “From Majapahit to Putrajaya,”

“With the spread of Islamic influence in the Malay world a number of kris hilt designs were renamed by the newly-converted Malay peoples. Thus the Garuda-hilt that was prominent in Vishnuite regions was not only redesigned to appear as a man crouching, it was also renamed the Jawa Demam (fevered Javanese) hilt. A revised and Islamised account of the origin of the Jawa Deman hilt (which is an adaptation of the Garuda hilt) is explained in the Hikayat Sejarah Melayu. The Sejarah contains an account of the visit to Java by the two warriors of Melacca, Hang Tuah and Hang Jebat. In the course of their travels there, they encountered a Javanese who was squatting by the roadside. Hang Jebat noticed that the Javanese has his sarong wrapped all around him, and suspected that they were about to be attacked. The assailant leaps at both of them, kris in hand, but is killed by Jebat. The incident inspires them to design a particular hilt called the ‘fevered Javanese’ (Jawa Demam). Note that all references to the Hindu origins and traces found in the hilt form have been erased in the narrative. (Abdul Halim Nasir, pp. 6-7). The hilt is also known by other names like hulu Anak Ayam sejuk, hulu Pipit Teleng, hulu Telunjuk, etc. The hulu Tajung from Lankasuka (Patani, Kelantan and Trengganu) was subsequently called the hulu Pekaka- a serious mistake which endures till this day. While the hulu Krishna was renamed the hulu Tapak Kuda or hulu Ekor Itek.”

http://www.othermalaysia.org/2006/09...o-putrajaya/7/

[A. G. Maisey]

There are several differing approaches that could be used as a response to your proposition Kai. In fact, I've got an article half written for a journal that touches on some of the issues involved in this matter, but I'm not going to get too involved with in-depth answers, I understand that you are playing Devil's Advocate, and we can probably pretty quickly put the cap on any ideas that that Jawa today resembles Malaysia of the mid-1970's, in so far as keris culture is concerned.

I'll try to keep this as brief and to the point as I can.

Firstly, we need to define "Jawa".
This is the Land of Jawa, not the Island of Jawa, in basic terms it is that area where the Javanese Language is spoken. This excludes Sunda, and arguably some other minor areas, but most certainly Jakarta is excluded. Jakarta might just as well be a separate entity altogether, for any similarity it bears to The Land of Jawa.

So let's forget all about Jakarta, its just not relevant.

Jawa itself has been subject to changing influences for at least the last 1500 years. Each of those waves of influence have left their mark on Javanese society, and on Javanese culture. The Hindu-Buddhist wave left a multitude of influences that many people would argue are difficult to separate from Javanese indigenous society and its beliefs. One thing that it did leave was the association between mountains, ancestor worship, Mt. Meru, and the Gunungan. Over time, the Gunungan and its associated symbolism and concepts have permeated Javanese culture to the point where it has become almost symbolic of Jawa itself. The Javanese keris in one of its aspects is a symbolic representation of the Gunungan, thus the keris itself is symbolic of Jawa.

Since the symbolism of the keris is so deeply embedded in the Javanese societal values, it has become a matter of:-

"Jawa would not be Java without the keris"

I forget who coined this memorable phrase, but it is very definitely true of Javanese society, no less today than at the time the idea was first uttered.

The centre of the Land of Jawa is the Karaton Surakarta, and this Karaton's presence is re-enforced by the other "younger brother" Karaton of Jogjakarta, as well as by the minor principalities (in name only) of the Mangkunegaraan and the Pakualamanan. As a cultural unit these remnants of the Jawa of times past are guardians of Jawa's cultural heritage. With age they have weakened, but they still provide a formidable cultural presence, and as long as they exist, together with the Javanese people who regard the Susuhunan of Surakarta, and the Sultan of Ngayogyakarta as their true Lords, rather than the remote politicians in Jakarta, Javanese culture will remain strong and vibrant.

All cultures are comprised of many strands, and each of these strands supports, and is supported by, each of the other strands. Keris culture is only one strand amongst many, and although the width of that strand may vary according to the social conditions of the time, in Jawa at least, it is totally impossible that it could weaken to the point of non-relativity, should this happen, then yes, indeed, Jawa would cease to exist. Together with ancestor worship and most other foundation values of Javanese society.

It is not valid to attempt to assess the strength, nor the values of any cultural strand by reference to the depth of knowledge of people who are not conscious participants in that cultural strand. Consider:- would it be valid to assess the importance of ballet to Russian culture based upon a review of responses on a ballet questionnaire completed by Russian passers-by in Moscow? One example only, but I am certain that with minimal thought anybody could come up with multiple examples to demonstrate this disconnect between the "general public" and the culture of the society in which they live.

We cannot deny that the factors that you mention, Kai, have had an effect on Javanese culture and society. Formal Javanese dress is to a large extent derived from European formal dress of the early colonial period. Some Javanese personal characteristics can perhaps be attributed to the brutal overlordship of indigenous rulers applying introduced principles brought from the Indian Sub-Continent, and the Middle East, followed by European lords, followed by Japanese occupation, and then the somewhat extreme policies of modern era politicians.

In fact, a number of keris conscious Javanese people whom I have known have attributed most of the "mystical/magical" qualities attributed to keris to both direct and indirect influence of Dutch colonialism. Certainly, if we compare the esoteric qualities that may be attributed to the Balinese keris, to the esoteric qualities that are frequently attributed to the Javanese keris, we find a very great difference in these qualities. In the Balinese qualities we see reflections of indigenous beliefs, in the Javanese qualities we see reflections of Sufi beliefs and European beliefs, with only a very minor recognition of indigenous beliefs.

The vast chasm that exists between Javanese/Balinese keris belief systems and keris belief systems to be found outside this core area probably has its roots in the fact that keris made their way into other parts of S.E. Asia from Jawa, as both gifts and as trade goods. The physical object was easy to export, but it would appear that the belief systems that were attached to that physical object were not able to be exported along with the object. Instead what the recipients of those original Javanese keris gained was a shattered comprehension of the true nature of the Javanese Keris.

So they developed their own belief systems, but these beliefs were grafted onto the pre-existing beliefs of those areas outside Jawa, the newly developed beliefs were not deeply woven into the warp and the weft of the fabric of the cultures that received this Javanese transplant.

The result was that my enquiries of the diplomatic representatives of Malaysia in Australia in 1973/4 resulted in responses that indicated an almost total ignorance of any remnants of a keris culture in Malaysia at that time. I made a lot of other enquiries too, of academics, museums, private people. All came up empty. Possibly the most convincing result came from a fellow collector, who had gone to Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia on a trip specifically to add to his collection. He came back with a lot of keris and other weapons, but what he had managed to buy in Malaysia were in extremely poor condition, except for one that he told me he had seen forged from a bicycle chain. This "bike" keris was a monstrosity, together with the dress it was in , altogether he had only a few keris from his time in Malaysia.

Compare this with the situation in the Heartland of the Land of Jawa of today.

Keris culture is booming.

A push to modernise in Jawa? Well, yes, but only on Javanese terms, and if the modernisation looks as if it might intefere with the The Javanese Way, then sorry , we don't really want modernisation:- "mangan nggak mangan, asal kumpul"

Aggressive Islam in the Land of Jawa?

Not a good idea. Those people in Jakarta might tolerate it, we won't.
Yes, there are good, strong Muslims in Central Jawa, and by and large there is an intolerance of any religious extremism, both from the committed practicing Muslims, and from all others. Probably the vast bulk of people in Central Jawa are Muslim in name only, they are really Abangan.

Tangguh corrupted?

Yes, but it has been given a new role, as a sales tool.

It was developed for a specific purpose, the time for that purpose has passed, and one Javanese characteristic that we cannot deny is that Javanese people waste nothing. Would they waste something as valuable as the tangguh system? Not likely, they just reshaped the rules so they could use it to sell things.

I think that I've written more than sufficient for us to put this silly idea that keris culture is dead or dying in the Land of Jawa, but if I haven't, I could be convinced to write another 2000 words or so using different arguments.

[A. G. Maisey]

I have had a hardcopy of Dr. Noor's article “From Majapahit to Putrajaya" since not long after its publication, I guess about 18 or 20 years ago. It has always caused me to wonder how a man of such meritorious reputation and undoubted scholarship could publish an article of this quality.

Dr. Noor's remarks on hilt naming seem to have come from Nik Rashiddin Nik Hussein, an undoubtedly great artist. Dr. Noor's opinions on hilt naming are not the result of original research, but rather a repetition of what can be found in "Spirit of Wood", and from the same source.

The article is now available online and can be downloaded here:-

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...00000101297280

I suggest that a very careful and inquisitive reading of this article might be quite enlightening.

[Laowang]

Originally Posted by David

Unfortunately in the case of a word like "pekaka" we are now in a situation where some people still consider this a word for the tajong or "kingfisher" variety of hilt while other consider it a proper term for the peninsula version of Jawa Demam (Northern Jawa Demam). This does create some problems for communication showing the importance of the "sometimes it is essential" part of Alan's above statement.

David, I think we mostly share the same opinion here. I agree that names do matter because we use them as a form of communication, and as a shorthand for the form itself, so we need some consensus so we know what we're actually referring to.

In my view, most people in the contemporary keris collecting community (in my admittedly limited experience) in Malaysia/Singapore refer to the tajong as a tajong. Sometimes the Northern jawa demam is called a pekaka (or perkaka, in Spirit of Wood). Gardner's 1936 book aside, I don't sense much disagreement on this.

Kai Wee/Adni, et al. apparently differ from Spirit of Wood regarding the appropriate name for the anak ayam teleng form, but it's easy enough to avoid the controversy, in my opinion, by simply referring to it as jawa demam, Terengganu variant, until someone manages to settle the disagreement.

Besides, isn't unintentional miscommunication a fundamental part of the human experience?

[kai]

Hello David,

Sorry for not noticing right away that we crossed posts. I'm a bit slow to respond these days, too...

Thanks for bringing this up: Indeed, in PoW pipit teleng and anak ayam teleng refer to different hilt types; I haven't seen this reflected by usage within the Malay keris community though and would love to have more input here!

Originally Posted by Laowang

I'm not sure I personally see the need to have all questions answered with absolute certitude. For me, the beauty of a hulu pekaka or hulu tajong lies within the grace of the form, the power of the carving, and the resonance of the original cultural belief system that created the piece and imbued it with power. It's nice to know the correct name, but it's not essential.

I agree that the name game is not really important except for convenience in communication. Thus, I've usually been trying to go with the flow and follow usage of the local communities. Sometimes new info can be brought to light if one tries to dig deeper and David and Alan bring up valid points, especially regarding seemingly inconsistent usage. I'll try to follow this up and get back with any updates.

Regards,
Kai