Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 15th March 2005, 10:58 AM   #1
tom hyle
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 1,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAHenkel
We all spend a lot of time wondering and thinking about what part of what is what. Javanese blades, Malay sampir, Bugis hilts - and rightfully so. Its interesting, its fun and we learn a little bit about the origins and lifetime of an individual keris. Who defines whether the keris is Javanese because the blade is - or Malay because the dress is depends on who you talk to I suppose. I'd venture to say that the folks in Jerteh would probably tell you its a Terengganu keris with a Javanese blade and they'd be right in their humble opinion. You might even find one or two contrarians around to back you up in an argument. Who knows.

Still, I'd love to see people's reactions when you march into the bale of the Kraton Solo in full formal Javanese costume with this "Javanese" keris tucked into your kemben.

There does seem to be a growing fascination with "proper" dress; with seeing a Java k(e)ris in Java dress, etc, and this phenomenon does not seem to me to be old/traditional nor SE Asian.

Bluerf: those are interesting points that do seem to colour the issue. However, allow me to propose that they carry a greater weight with items, like the examples you give, where the blade has been incorporated into what is intended as at least a more-or-less permanent assembly; becoming in effect a part of a single object. This is prominantly not the case with k(e)ris.

Further, allow me to suggest that being raised in a culture foreign to your genes is more like being a java k(e)ris made from Balinese ore, while a person FROM China who moves to USA and learns N American English and wears N American clothes is more like a Bali blade in Java dress. Although Java and Bali are not that far apart, of course......


I might mention here, BTW, that I do consider there to be a significant difference it type between shotels (with native or foreign blades) and sabres mounted as shotels, as well as between sabre sayf and the straight usually foreign blades one occasionally sees so mounted. Firangi is interesting, as it seems, though locally influenced, to have been invented specifically for the foreign blades. But my understanding of its name is that, in India, it is being called an European sword.
tom hyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2005, 02:37 PM   #2
DAHenkel
Member
 
DAHenkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 125
Default

Guys, we're talking about keris here, not ethnicity or race or anything else. There are paralells sure but its still apples and oranges. Humans can be defined by others but they can also define themselves. A keris is an inanimate object. It cannot define itself any further than its features communicate to us meaning and significance.

I would put to you that people in general assess the keris, as with most other examples including these cited by BluErf, based on the sum total off its parts. A Javanese blade dressed in Terengganu parts is a Javanese blade dressed in Terengganu parts. Why limit ourselves to such a simplistic notion that, because the blade is Javanese, ergo the keris is Javanese? Certainly we can grasp the complexities of a Javanese keris, dressed in Terengganu parts?

I would further argue that people will only define things based on what they know about them. In that sense my argument about walking into the Kraton was a bit unfair. After all they could not reasonably be expected to recognize the blade as being Javanese when they could not see it. And once they were assayed of the facts they would certainly be most willing to accept that the keris was in fact a Javanese blade dressed in Terengganu parts. Of course they would have probably have gotten bored and gone for coffee half-way through the explanation but hey that's real world and we're speculatin' here.

Also, Tom I'm afraid I don't quite buy your arugement about permanent (or impermanent construction). Its fair to say that in almost every case, a Javanese keris that has been dressed in Malay dress has been permanently modified - precisely because the pesi of a Javanese blade would almost certainly have to be shortened to fit a Malay hilt. Sure, you could re-dress the blade back in Javanese dress but I would also suggest that most Javanese would be appalled upon removing the hilt and discovering that the blade had been permanently disfigured.

I leave you all will a fun image of the excesses of parts sharing...let it be a warning to us all
Attached Images
 
DAHenkel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2005, 03:00 PM   #3
Alam Shah
Member
 
Alam Shah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,248
Default

Yikes...what an ugly combination. The sheath is the most inappropriate combination. The pendok, instead of complimenting the sheath, spoils it.

Last edited by Alam Shah; 16th March 2005 at 01:23 AM.
Alam Shah is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.