The keris is certainly one of the most unique artefacts of island Southeast Asia under the category of weapons. Like the rest of the indigenous Malay peoples of the archipelago, the peninsula Malays not unlike the Javanese, Minangkabau, Brunei Malays and others also regard the keris as a special heritage of their culture. It is nevertheless difficult to ascertain when exactly the keris became part of Malay culture since its early beginning is shrouded in the mists of time. Despite several attempts made by scholars and others interested in unravelling the history of the weapon little is known of its origins until today. Unlike its counterpart in Java the history of the Malay keris has never been well documented as much as that of the Javanese. The dearth of manuscript sources for the early period of Malay history is one reason that contributes to this problem. However, a cursory glance at the present vocabulary of the Malay Keris and its making would give the impression that its vocabulary has been much influenced by the language of the Javanese, particularly Kawi or Old Javanese. The presence of a large number of Old Javanese words in the Sulalat u's-Salatin (the genealogy of kings, also known as the Sejarah Melayu or Malay Annals) has led this writer to embark on a search for any traces of information on the origins of the keris. From the Malay Annals it has been possible to gauge a little about the role of the keris in Malay society especially during the period of the Melaka sultanate (c.1400-1511).
Through reading of the Bukit Siguntang myth in the Sejarah Melayu it does seem possible to glean something about the early beginning of the Malay keris. It appears that when Raja Culan's three sons, (Bicitram Syah, Nila Pahlawan and Karna Pandeyan), landed on the Siguntang Hill, one of them had in his possession a "sword" named Curik Sumandang Kini. Even though the word “sword” was used by the author of the Sejarah Melayu, interestingly enough, the blade was also named Curik which actually referred to the keris. Curik is an Old Javanese word for keris (Zoetmulder, 2000 (1): 182; cf. Mardiwarsito, 1981: 142) borrowed from the Sanskrit, curika which gives the meaning of “a knife or dagger” (Monier-Williams, 1999: 407). While the word curik could be found in Old Javanese vocabulary, its Sanskrit form churika was nonetheless already in use as evident from the seventh-century Old Malay inscription of Bukit Siguntang discovered at Palembang (Bambang and Nik Hassan, 2009: 44). Does this finding mean that the dagger (curika) was already known as early as the seventh century?
The name Curik Sumandang Kini can literally be translated as “to wear or to be dressed with this keris”. The root word for the Old Javanese sumandang is sandang. The word sumaṇḍang renders the meaning of: “to carry, wear, dress in, to be well-dressed, or to be in official or festive attire” (Zoetmulder, 2000 (2): 1011). Its derivative, sinaṇḍangan means to clothe with, give to wear or carry (ibid). Whereas kini is the Sanskrit word for "is" and it is probably Old Malay for "this". Even though the word pedang (sword) was used by the author of the Sejarah Melayu, it could nevertheless be inferred that he was in fact referring to a long keris, something close to the sundang perhaps. In the myth about Sang Supraba's founding of the Minangkabau kingdom, the same Curik Sumandang Kini was used to kill the mythical giant snake in Minangkabau. From the narrative of the Bukit Siguntang episode in the Sejarah Melayu it may be deduced then that the keris was traditionally part of a man’s grooming or dressing up. The Bukit Siguntang myth also revealed that the second prince, Nila Pahlawan, had a spear (lembing) called Lembora (a giant-size fish from the sea). While lembing is probably Old Malay, the word lembora or lembwara is Old Javanese (Zoetmulder, 2000 (1): 584).
The possibility of Old Malay being influenced by Kawi or Old Javanese must have happened very early that is, during the period when Srivijaya and Malayu came into contact with bhumi Java; thus the diffusion of Javanese cultural elements with Old Malay culture might have begun even before the period when Sumatra came to be under the shadow of Javanese influence between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries, and particularly so during and after the 1275 Javanese-led Pamalayu expedition which had brought the Malayu-Sriwijaya territories under Javanese hegemony. In the Malay peninsula itself there is evidence to show that Javanese cultural influence had already made its mark in the thirteenth century on the northern districts of the peninsula, such as the use of Old Kawi writing on the Buddha graha statue discovered in Chaiya, now in South Thailand. According to the late Dr. J. G. de Casparis the inscription could have been written after 1270. The extensive influence of Old Javanese on the Malay language could in fact be discerned from the large number of Kawi words in the early narratives of the Malay Annals. The present writer's own study of the Sejarah Melayu reveals that no less than two hundred Kawi words, intermingled with Sanskrit, are found in the text of the earlier copies of the manuscript, namely the Krusenstern's MS. 1798 and the Raffles MS. No. 18.
Based on the word curik it is possible to surmise that both the keris and the sword were already known to the Malays during the period of the Srivijaya polity. The period of the invasion of the Chola kings in the eleventh century could probably be linked to the Bukit Siguntang myth that narrates the arrival of Sang Supraba, Nila Pahlawan and Karna Pandeyan. Be that as it may though, the art of keris-making would have probably developed after the Javanese conquest of Palembang as a result of the launching of the “Pamalayu” expedition by Kṛtanagara of Singhasari in 1275. The emergence of Majapahit, in the last decade of the thirteenth century as successor to the indomitable Singhasari, had ushered in a golden era for Javanese cultural imperium over several parts of island Southeast Asia including the Malay "kerajaan" in Sumatra, and the peninsula. Thus, in the fourteenth century neither Kedah, Jerai, Kelantan, Terengganu, Pahang, Muar, nor the northern territory of Patani [Langkasuka], could avoid being brought under Javanese hegemony, the territories of the south, that included Kelang, Ujung Tanah, and Temasik, also found themselves placed under the aegis of Javanese cultural influence (Slametmulyana, 1979: 279-280; Robson, 1995: 33-34). The resulting effect of this could be seen from the spread of Old Javanese and Middle Javanese on the Malay language (Sarkar (1970: 76-79); Poerbatjaraka, (1952: 57, 7374)). It was also most likely that it was during this period of Javanese cultural predominance that saw the spread of the keris-making technique in the Malay-Indonesian archipelago. But with regard to the Malay peninsula, it is possible to conjecture that the full development of the art was likely to have occurred with the founding of Melaka at the turn of the fifteenth century. From the Sejarah Melayu it is possible to postulate that it was during the heyday of the Melaka sultanate that the keris was incorporated as an important cultural artefact in Malay life.
The adoption of Old Javanese or Kawi word keris in place of curik in the Malay language must have also begun in Java and later spread to the rest of Southeast Asia where the population is made up of people of the Indonesian-Malay stock. The contention by some writers that the keris might have its origins in Indochina, Champa in particular, is interestingly challenging to scholars, but it nevertheless still needs further research. Although the late Mubin Sheppard, a great collector and lover of kerises himself, first speculated on this possibility, he nevertheless did not give ample justification for his assertion on the matter. As a matter of fact, the word keris does not exist in the language of Champa, even though the beladau, was referred to in the Sejarah Melayu as the state sword of Champa. The beladau could very well be a sword or a sword-keris even though according to some people it was unlikely to be a sword. In one of his definitions of the beladau, Wilkinson describes it as “a curved single-edged dagger worn hidden in the sleeve or waist belt and used for stabbing.” (Wilkinson, 1959 (1): 102). Also nicknamed “tiger-claw dagger”, the beladau seems similar to the kerambit (one-edged curving knife). While this description of the weapon seems to differ from that given by the author of the Sejarah Melayu who called it a sword, it was not improbable that the beladau was meant to be a sword-keris during the period of the Melaka sultanate. Even in later times the beladau, as described by Wilkinson, had different meanings in different places. In Borneo the beladau had a straight blade and it could be single or double-edged. In the eighteenth century the beladau was also described as a short dagger and was found to have been used by the Bugis in Riau who wore it in their waistcloths (Ibid). But there is however a similar dagger that fits in well with the description of the modern beladau in the Khmer language. Such a dagger was called kambәt in Khmer. The word appears close to the Malay word kerambit which is actually a short curved dagger.
The word keris does not appear in the modern Cham language, but pisau (knife) does. It carries the meaning of “anything made of iron that cuts” (Po Dharma, 2000: 234). In the classical texts of the Chams, several words were used for sword. The Lakkuraba which was referred to as a sword in the Akayet Dowa Mano [the story of Dewa Mano], seems to match or show some semblance with the pedang Lukewa or Lukaiwa mentioned in the Sejarah Melayu. The other words for sword were khainat and kutuang (the former means a long knife (parang) and the latter a big sword) (Po Dharma et al., 1998: 190; 174) However, the word keris could not be found in any of the Cham manuscripts that have been published so far. Thus, if it was true that the keris could have originated in Champa, it is indeed an irony that the word does not appear in the written language. The claim that the word kroeus existed in the Khmer vocabulary (Sheppard, 1986 [1972]: 124) also needs further investigation since there appears to be no corroborating sources in the form of linguistic evidence to support it. But we do know that in the Khmer language there are several words for blade. Other than the word kambɘt, mentioned earlier on, the words p’keak, dha (from Chinese dao meaning knife or any bladed weapon with only one edge), lompeng and kambәt sneat also seemed to refer to the dagger. Interestingly enough, both the lompeng and the kambәt remind us of the words lembing and kerambit, the Malay words for spear and the tiger claw dagger (Wilkinson 1959 (1): 566 and (2): 675).
Although the word beladau was referred to as a sword by the author of the Malay Annals and that it was the “state sword” of Champa, it seems over the centuries however its meaning has changed. Even though in later times the beladau came to be regarded as similar to the Malay kěrambit, or the kambet of Indochina, this makes one wonder whether at a certain point in time it might have been associated with the keris. The Kawi word welad refers to the bamboo knife and its derivatives kawelad and winĕlad render the meaning of “to cut or to slit”. In the word welad one notices that phonetically the phoneme [w] is interchangeable with [b] in Malay (as in wulan for bulan, for moon);. the Malay word beladau therefore must be seen as a generic name for a knife or dagger not unlike the word dha (dah) or dao in thirteenth century Angkor which was also the generic term for a sword or knife It is said that the word dao is also related to the Malay words pedang and sundang, meaning sword.
Despite the various names used to refer to the dagger and sword, however, semantically they all point out to the Sanskrit origin of the dagger, that is churika. The author of the Malay Annals was therefore quite correct in naming the curik sumandang kini a sword though it could probably have been a sword-keris. It is more likely that the word curik in Old Javanese could have evolved from the concept of the sword-keris to that of the keris. As to when the transformation from the word churik to the name keris took place (which was to become the generic name for the various types of daggers), is difficult to say. But be that as it may, the churik could be said to have had its origins in Java or Sumatera (when the latter was under the sway of Java) and later spread to other parts of Southeast Asia, only to be called by different names in reference to the dagger.
Following its lapse in popular usage, the word curik was likely to have been replaced by the Kawi word keris and was soon absorbed into Old Malay. Akris in Old Javanese means to wear or use a keris. The word is associated with the verb forms: angĕris or kinris, meaning to stab with a keris. In Malay the words mengeris or berkeris also render the meaning of using and having a keris. The Sundanese word ngeris also means to stab. In Aceh the word kréh also renders the meaning of to cut into small pieces. As a generic term for the dagger, kris, keris, kerés,. kréh, karis or kalis over the centuries had found its way into the vernaculars of Patani, the Sulu archipelago and the rest of island Southeast Asia, particularly in Sumatra, Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa, South Sulawesi, and also Kalimantan, which include Brunei and the Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak, and then Singapore. When the Europeans first encountered the people of Sulu and Mindanao they found that the keris, which was also called sundang, was the most common “Moro” sword.
By definition the sundang is the Malay sword of several forms; there could be a straight sundang or a sinuous kind. Its blade may be single or two-edged, but in all cases the sundang is not too long, roughly about 21 inches measured from its blade end to the ganja. But unlike most kerises the sundang is the heavy sword-keris. Incidentally, the word sundang in Old Javanese means something that supports, assists, or accompanies. The verb form for sundang in that language is masuṇḍang [Malay bersundang]. It renders the meaning of having a companion or being together. But nowhere in that language does it refer to the sundang as a sword, keris or sword-keris. Thus etymologically it must therefore have come from either Malay or Bugis. According to Sheppard, the sundang’s home of origin was Celebes (Sheppard, 1986 [1972]: 133). He claims that it was brought to the Malay peninsula by the Bugis in the seventeenth century. In the Kapampangan language of the Philippines the word is defined as a Bugis sword. The Tausug people who claim to have come originally from the land of the Bugis (tanah Ugi) also consider the sundang as a Bugis sword. We do not know exactly when the sundang was known and used by the islanders of the Sulu archipelago. But we do know that the word sundang exists in many vernaculars of the Philippines including the Cebuano and Visayan languages.
Nonetheless, the word sundang may have been borrowed from the Bugis language. It is not clear however as to when the word sundang replaced the word keris in places where it has been the popular weapon, such as the Sulu archipelago. The Malays used to call it keris sundang or the sundang keris probably because the sundang is another name for keris a word that originated in Old Javanese. But it was certainly because of contact with the Javanese empire of Majapahit, that the keris reached the shores of the Sulu archipelago (Vic Hurley, 1997 [ 1936] : 12, 15). The Nagarakrtagama (see Canto 14) even mentioned Saludung (Manila) and Solot (Sulu) being brought under Majapahit’s “protection”. So also, were places in Borneo, such as Kadandangan, Landa, Samadang, Tirem, Sedu (Sarawak), Barune (Brunei), Kalka, Pasir Barito, Sawaku, Tabalung, and Tanjung Kutei considered as subordinate territories of Majapahit. It is therefore not surprising that the sundang is also known in Borneo although sometimes it is also called keris (Evans, 1990 [1922]: 190). But unlike the real keris the sundang is larger as it is a sword-keris. The blade has all the features of the keris -- it is two edged and pointed and thus can be used for cutting, slashing and stabbing. It has a collar and knuckle guard and, like the keris, it may also be straight or sinuous. But it has a different kind of hilt. Unlike the keris which primarily functions as a thrusting weapon, the hilt of the sundang is in the same plane as its blade and is shaped in such a way as to enable the hilt to be gripped like when holding a sword.
Besides being an effective weapon, in the ancient days the keris was also a key symbol of a man's status or rank in society. It was an important part of the everyday wear of a man's dress. It would be embarrassing for a man of status to be without a keris as shown by the experience of the Bendahara of Melaka in the Sejarah Melayu (in the episode narrating how Raja Kasim executed his coup with the assistance of Seri Nara Diraja) and the Bendahara was summoned to come out of his house upon being told that the yang dipertuan (his lordship) was waiting for him outside. On hearing this the Bendahara quickly rushed out but without being properly attired -- he was without his keris.(Sulalat u’s-Salatin, 1798: f. lxii).
The keris, was certainly an important part of Malay dressing. Concerning this, Duarte Barbosa wrote in 1518, “The most distinguished among [the Malaios] wear short coats which come halfway down their thighs of silk, cloth – in grain or brocade – and over this they wear girdles; at their waists they carry daggers in damascene-work which they call crus” (Dames. 1918-21 [1812]: 176). This was confirmed by Marsden, who wrote that the keris was “very generally worn, being stuck in front through the folds of a belt that goes several times round the body". This aspect of the keris being worn fits in well with the original meaning of “curik sumandang kini” (this keris that is worn).
From the Sejarah Melayu we learn that it was important for anyone desiring to enter the palace of Sultan Muhammad Syah of Melaka to observe the royal injunction that he must be properly attired namely to wear his sarong in a lopping off fashion and with the keris worn in front and his scarf over his shoulders. Whoever failed to observe this rule regardless of him wearing his keris behind his back would have his keris confiscated by the guard. The need for immaculate dressing especially for a prince of the court is also illustrated by the Sejarah Melayu in the narrative about the prince of Tanjung Pura who became the adopted son of the penyadap (toddy-tapper). When Prince Kiyai Emas Jiwa (lord with a golden soul) was paraded as one of the suitors seeking marriage with the Majapahit ptincess, Naya Kusuma, the author of the Sejarah Melayu spared no effort to praise the prince’s attire which included the keris.. For example, Kiyai Emas Jiwa was described as having immaculately dressed, wearing a bright yellow sarong tied in a lopping of fashion, and complete with green-coloured waistcloth, as well as a magnificent keris with the hilt crafted in the form of a dragon-horn, adorned with pearls. The wearing of the keris by the prince is again a reminder of the Curik Sumandang Kini that Bicitram Syah had with him at Bukit Siguntang.
In his writing about Javanese dressing, Stamford Raffles also described the dress ethics that a member of the nobility had to adhere to, especially when it involved wearing the keris. Raffles pointed out that “the kris or dagger, which is universally worn by all classes, completes the dress” (Raffles 1994 [1817]: 87]. He also described the difference between the war attire and the court dress. According to him, the war dress as opposed to the court dress consisted of the ang’ger or sword belt that goes round the waist. In it the pedang (sword) “is suspended on the left side. Three krises are usually worn on the waist ... one on each side and the other behind. These consist of the kris which the wearer particularly calls his own, the kris which has descended to him from his ancestors, and the kris which he may have received on his marriage from his wife's father. The latter is often placed on the left side for immediate use ..." (Ibid: 91). As for the court dress, according to Raffles, "the shoulders, arms and body down to the waist, are entirely bare … The sabuk or waistband must be of gold lace, the fringed end of which usually hang down a few inches, and the [war] party must only wear one kris, which is tucked in the waistband on the right side behind, while on the left he wears a weapon, or rather implement, called a wedung, in the shape of a chopper, together with a small knife, indicative of his readiness to cut down trees and grass at the order of the sovereign” (Ibid: 91).
The Sejarah Melayu clearly shows that for both Javanese and Malays the keris since its very early beginning became an important ornament and weapon as evident from the legend of the Curik Sumandang Kini. It was also considered as an appropriate royal gift. In the story of Sultan Mansur Syah’s visit to Majapahit the Sejarah Melayu describes how the Sultan of Melaka and the leading forty members of his entourage were each presented with a ganja kerawang keris – keris with fretted pattern along the edge of its collar guard – but with the blade drawn from its sheathe. That the keris was a beautiful work of art was corroborated by Tome Pires himself. The Portuguese apothecary who turned writer had observed that the Javanese nobles “used krises, swords and lancers of many kinds, all inlaid with gold” (Cortesao, 1944: 174). He noted that “every man in Java, whether he is rich or poor, must have a kris in his house. and no man between the ages of 12 and 80 may go out of doors without a kris in his belt” (ibid.). Judging from the fact that that krises and swords from Java formed part of the chief merchandise sold by the merchants in Melaka (Cortesᾶo, 1944: 93), Javanese kerises must have been quite popular even in the early decades of the 16th century.
Despite its being part of a person’s dressing, the keris, nonetheless, as mentioned earlier, was used as a weapon to kill. Fighters wielded the keris in combats; and as weapons kerises were carried by warriors in battles only as a secondary armament. Their main weapon was usually a spear. From the Sejarah Melayu we are again reminded of the famous duel that Hang Tuah (sic) the legendary laksamana had with Hang Kesturi. Considered a sanctified heirloom of the sultan, the keris that the sultan gave to Hang Tuah (sic) was his own personal keris. Hang Tuah (sic) was asked "to cleanse him from the shame" caused by the treasonous Kesturi (Sulalat u’s-Salatin, 1798: f. xcviii: 2)
Based on the Sejarah Melayu and the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic), it seemed clear that Javanese kerises tended to draw a special awe from among Malays. They believed in the magical power of the keris and this is very much elaborated in the mythical Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic) which traces the mythical Tameng Sari’s keris to its Javanese owner of the same name. During his initial duel with Tameng Sari it struck in the mind of Hang Tuah (sic) that his inability to subdue the Javanese warrior quickly was due to the man's possession of a magic keris; It was only after having secured the keris, that Hang Tuah (sic) found it easier to subjugate Tameng Sari. To show that the keris possessed by Tameng Sari was a coveted prize, as a sign of his satisfaction after the event, Hang Tuah (sic) even muttered to himself, “This keris that is now mine can never be exchanged even with ten tributary streams of [the island of] Jemaja (Kassim Ahmad, 1964: 137). Following the defeat of Tameng Sari his keris was presented by the Batara of Majapahit to Hang Tuah (sic) (Kassim Ahmad, 1964: 135 - 137). This belief in the mythical keris has in fact led many Malays into believing that the Tameng Sari keris is still around, and this has shaped their thinking about the invisibility of the fictitious Tameng Sari keris while also augmenting the belief that the Javanese keris is much superior in quality.
To the Javanese and also Malays of ancient days, the keris was always believed to be in possession of a magical aura. They believed, for example, that a particular keris may have the soul residing in the blade and such a keris would strongly influence its holder. A case in point was the Javanese man who was running amok with a Sunda dagger (golok Sunda); but was halted by Hang Tuah (sic). Thinking that Hang Tuah (sic), the man who was confronting him was in possession of a keris that had some kind of charismatic aura or magic; the amok wanted the keris; therefore when Hang Tuah (sic) who was faking his move dropped his keris and pretended to take a few steps back, the man’s response was to throw away his dagger and quickly attempted to pick up Hang Tuah's (sic) keris’, but only to be exploited in a flickering moment by Hang Tuah (sic) who lurched at him and picked up the Sunda dagger instead to bring its owner down. To Hang Tuah (sic) the golok Sunda despite the name “Sunda” attached to it, was a better weapon since it was also considered “Javanese” and therefore was seen as possessing supernatural qualities. From the narratives in the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic) and the Malay Annals, it appears that despite the familiarity of the Malays with the keris and thus forms an important element in Malay culture, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries however, the origins of the keris as an artefact of culture seemed to be very much tied to the Javanese heritage.
From the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic) one is informed that for the Malays to do battle the long keris (keris panjang) was preferred. But a warrior like Hang Tuah (sic) would usually have both the long keris (which had a chain attached to the sheath) and a keris pendua (the second or reserve keris) on his body. This second keris could be a short keris (keris pandak) or a medium size keris alang. Both the Sejarah Melayu and the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic) (Kassim Ahmad, 1964: 100) mentioned about the keris pendua tempa Melaka, which was of Melaka make using wrought iron. This was of course the reserve keris. Perhaps because of its size that made it convenient to handle, the reserve keris was sometimes used by its owner when he needed to kill his adversary.
The keris was certainly regarded as a weapon for personal defence by Malays, as well as for killing adversaries. The author of the Sejarah Melayu mentioned about the incident in which Raja Ahmad Muhammad, the elder son of Sultan Mansur Syah, felt much slighted when a raga (rattan) ball that the Bendahara's son, Tun Besar, was kicking accidentally struck the headwear (destar) of Raja Muhammad which quickly brought the attention of his butler to bring to him his betel-bowl and thus resulted in Raja Muhammad stabbing Tun Besar with his keris. In another episode in the Sejarah Melayu, Sultan Mahmud orchestrated the murder of his brother, Raja Zainal Abidin because of his jealousy towards the prince who was described as handsome, and popular with the ladies. The murder was undertaken by Hang Berkat who stabbed the prince with a keris "piercing his chest right through his back" when the latter was asleep (Sulalat u's-Salatin, 1798: f. clxv: 2). His attempt to grope for his keris failed, and it was described by the author of the Sejarah Melayu that so excruciating was the pain inflicted on him that "his body tossed and bounced up like a fowl being slaughtered" before dropping dead (ibid). Another incident that shows the keris being employed as a murder weapon is shown in Chapter 22 of the Sejarah Melayu, whereby Tun Ali Sandang a co-rival of Sultan Mahmud in love who were both courting a woman by the name of Tun Dewi was murdered by Tun Isap after the sultan gave him the sirih from his betel-bowl, an act perceived by Isap as indicating that the raja wanted him to kill on his behalf (Sulalat u's-Salatin, 1798: f. cxxxvii: 2) . Another incident showing the keris being used as a murder weapon took place in the story of Sang Naya (Winstedt, 1938: 220-221) who was caught by a Portuguese visiting his house concealing several of kerises in the lower layer of a chest storing letter writing utensils, but used as a sirih box. When Sang Naya was apprehended by the Portuguese soldiers he admitted his involvement in a conspiracy to use the kerises to kill Portuguese soldiers who were attending church. The keris was also used by the Raden di Kalang, who was the son of Sultan Mansur Syah by his Javanese wife to confront a man running amuck at Kampung Keling. When the prince died at the hand of the amok, Sultan Mansur Syah ordered all his personal attendants to be executed, also with the keris, for showing negligence in having caused his death. In another incident, the keris also became handy for the Javanese, Patih Adam, who held hostage Seri Nara Diraja's daughter, Tun Manda, by threatening to stab her if she and her father refused to allow him to take her as his wife. In the incident Patih Adam was also assisted by forty Javanese priyayis all armed to the teeth with kerises, who nevertheless ended being killed by the keris.
During the visit of Sultan Mansur Syah to Majaphit there were several incidents showing the significance of the keris. In the narrative about the visit, the author of the Sejarah Melayu described how during the welcoming ceremony held in the Javanese court the Batara of Majapahit had distributed forty Javanese kerises -- all unsheathed --- to members of the Melaka entourage. As for Sultan Mansur Syah himself, who was seated above all other royal dignitaries, while in audience, the Majapahit ruler bestowed on him with a special keris called the "ganja kerawang". The giving away of unsheathed keris to each of the Melaka warriors, appears to reveal a symbolic gesture on the part of the Javanese that the Batara wanted to test the ingenuity of the knights of Melaka. The kerises were given without their scabbards with the sole intention of stealing them later. While stealing a keris from someone may appear to be an act of deception on the perpetrator, as the author of the Sejarah Melayu seems to be saying, it was also a reflection of weakness in character on the part of the victim, who shows laxity and carelessness for letting a weapon of utmost importance be taken away easily. In the same chapter of the Sejarah Melayu the same symbolic gesture is shown by the attempt of the Batara of Majapahit to steal the keris of Tun Bija Sura, the head of the retinue of Melaka warriors. The Batara instructed a kepetangan (night guard) to filch Bija Sura's keris by first asking the Melaka warrior to dress like a Javanese whereby the keris was worn at the back. In the commotion and din of a cockfight the Javanese kepetengan managed to steal Tun Bija Sura's keris and handed it to the Batara of Majapahit. Upon realizing that his keris had been filched and after being asked by the Batara where his dagger was, the sharp-witted Bija Sura was quick to retaliate by seizing an opportunity at court to pinch the Batara's very own keris from a betel-bearer who was carrying the keris for handing to the Batara. In another incident during the visit to Majapahit the two famous Melaka knights, Hang Jebat and Hang Kesturi were both given a hard time by their Javanese counterparts when they were caught trespassing the pavilion adjoining the gallery of the palace reserved for the ladies of the Majapahit court,. This drew the wrath of the Javanese warriors who cornered by throwing spears incessantly at them. But with great skill and adroitness, so claimed the author of the Malay Annals, the two Melaka warriors were able to survive the attack and demonstrated their agility “by cutting the Javanese spears in half with their kerises”.
Apart from the keris, as shown by the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic) the next important weapon for battle was the spear or lance known by its generic name tombak. The word lembing for lance was more popular in the Malay peninsula and was the specific name given for the kind that had ridged upper blade. Other varieties were: tombak bandang, tombak benderang and tombak rambu – the last having shafts with tufts of horsehair attached to them. The presence of the spear is mentioned in the Bukit Siguntang myth in the Sejarah Melayu in which Nila Pahlawan was said to be in possession of a lembing named “Lembuara”. In one other episode of the Sejarah Melayu which describes Tun Telanai’s attempt to exhibit the prowess of the Melaka soldier, when queried by the Siamese king as to how Melaka was able to avoid defeat from the Siamese invasion, an old man with elephantiasis on both legs was asked to demonstrate his skill using the spear. The man threw his spear into the air and placed his back in position to catch it without inflicting injury to his body. In another episode of the Sejarah Melayu the author narrated about the army of Melaka that was outnumbered by the rebellious army of Pasai, who attacked fiercely and brought disarray within the Melaka ranks; although this situation had caused the Bendahara to be hesitant at first, he nevertheless decided later to fight the enemies bitterly by using his spear. Besides the spear, bows and arrows were used by the Melaka soldiers. There are several incidents found in the Sejarah Melayu which show that other than the spear, keris, and sword, the next important artillery was the bow and arrows.
A narrative in the Sejarah Melayu describes Hang Nadim’s competence in handling the bow and arrows after he was attacked by the Pahang warriors sent by the raja to chase after Hang Nadim, following the latter’s escapade to Melaka with Tun Teja, the fiancée of the raja. Not only did the attacking party from Pahang succumb to Nadim’s arrows, but the whole episode brought anger and shame to the raja of Pahang when Hang Nadim and Tun Teja made their escape successfully. Both the spears and bows and arrows came in handy when war broke out between Melaka and Kampar as a result of the latter’s refusal to pay homage to the former. As a consequence of the invasion by Melaka both the raja and the chief minister of Kampar were killed by these two weapons (Sulalat u’s-Salatin, 1798: f. cviii). Apart from the spears, bows and arrows, the blow pipes or sumpitan also proved to be an effective armament for Melaka when Hang Tuah, the laksamana battled with, Semerluki. the warior of Mengkasar. Following his encounter with the laksamana of Melaka, however, the formidable Semerluki were later to do hand-to-hand combat with the Raja of Kenayan who proved to be an adversary equally too strong for Semerluki due to the raja’s possession of a large sword called jenawi (Sulalat u’s-Salatin, 1798: f. cvii). This apparently was another formidable sword known to the Malays. The pedang jenawi as it was called was a long straight sword, similar to the Japanese or Chinese type which, in order to have a good grip of its handle, would require the user to use both hands (Wilkinson, 1959 (1): 460).
The importance of the Malay weapons in the Melaka court has been illustrated by the author of the Sejarah Melayu by showing the hierarchical positions of the bearers of such weapons. Whenever there was a procession that would involve the Sultan being carried in a litter such as when he wished to go to the mosque on the festive day of idulfitri marking the end of Ramadhan, apart from being accompanied by the royal orchestral instruments whose players walked on both sides of the retinue, the royal entourage would also be composed of heralds (bentara) carrying ceremonial weapons, namely the swords, and guardsmen (hulubalang) bearing spears of state also on both sides of the procession. These bearers of royal weapons would be seen walking ahead of the procession. From the Sejarah Melayu we know that apart from the kerises, swords, lances (lembing), spears with a ridge blades (tombak), and bows and arrows (which were used to a large extent in the Melaka-Siamese wars), Malay weapons also included the cipan (the battle axe) and sumpitan (blowpipes); but there was no mention of Malays having used the cannons (lela rentaka or meriam) anywhere in the Sejarah Melayu except, of course, by the Portuguese.
For Malays the sword was certainly very useful when there was a need to attack the enemies in battles, but it was also an executioner’s tool to punish someone who had committed a crime. In the story about Sultan Mahmud’s minister, Tun Perpatih Hitam, who was tried for his dispute with a merchant by the Bendahara, and witnessed by the Laksamana, the author of the Sejarah Melayu narrated how during the hearing the accused minister had shown rudeness and disrespect to the Bendahara by shoving aside the mat with his foot while the deliberation was going on. Witnessing the incident, the Laksamana became angry and immediately killed him with a sword (Sulalat u’s-Salatin, 1798: f. clxviii, chap. 27). This particular sword was called pedang lukaiwa. The word lukaiwa or its variant lukewa is of Kawi origin, meaning a long knife or a kind of blade that was used for chopping (Zoetmulder, 2000 (1): 612). The word lukai or in Old Javanese means curved like the curved dagger (Wojowasito, 1977: 158). But lukai or luké also refers to the name of a dagger, or a particular kind of chopping-knife (parang) (Zoetmuder 2000 (1): 612)
In the chapter on how Sultan Alauddin Ri'ayat Syah combatted the thieves in Melaka the author of the Sejarah Melayu described lengthily how the sword became an effective weapon in putting a stoppage to the menace that was troubling the Sultan. On several occasions the author of the Sejarah Melayu also tried to show that the sword of state was an important part of the court’s regalia. According to the author of the Annals, whenever the sultan held court in the royal audience hall the keris was of little significance when compared to the sword. It was customary for the heralds (bentara) and young war-chiefs to stand at the tapakan (the standing place) bearing swords. There was no mention of the keris. being part of the court regalia. It seems clear that the official royal arm was the ceremonial pedang kerajaan or sword of state and this was borne by either the Laksamana or the Seri Bija Diraja. For example when Hang Tuah (sic) was given the honour of becoming the first laksamana to carry the sword of state on his shoulder he and Seri Bija Diraja dutifully positioned themselves at the right and left sides of the gallery of the audience-hall.
Despite the significance of the sword, the keris as was mentioned earlier was still part of the mode of dressing of Malay royalty. Every raja or prince was expected to have his own favourite keris and a keris pedua a second or reserve keris. When Sultan Mahmud Syah ascended the throne at a young age the author of the Sejarah Melayu recounted that the raja had by then recognized the importance of the keris. He had even chosen the keris tempana (from Kawi, tempa meaning model for example) for his reserve keris or keris pedua which was three spans in length when measured from the thumb tip to the tip of the index-finger (Sulalat u's-Salatin, 1798: f. cxxxvi: 2).
The fact that the Sultan's personal keris was also regarded as representing his own person, it had therefore become symbolic when Tun Sura Dirja dan Tun Indera Segara, the bentara (heralds) of Sultan Mahmud, were despatched to the Bendahara Seri Maharaja bearing the Sultan's keris, which was placed on a salver of silver, covered with a piece of yellow ornamental cloth, and placed before the Bendahara. Upon addressing both the Bendahara and Seri Nara Diraja, the herald, Tun Sura Diraja, said (ibid, f. clxxx): "Salutations and prayers from his majesty. Fate from the omnipotent God has now come to the Bendahara". This episode spelt the immediate death sentence of the Bendahara and his brother, Seri Nara Diraja by keris.
Conclusion
In the above discussion on the Malay keris which is based primarily on the Sejarah Melayu and the Hikayat Hang Tuah (sic), we have consciously left out the detailed description pertaining to the physical attributes of the keris, its types and its making as a craft. As a weapon the keris is obviously sharp and has for centuries been used for killing. Like any other dagger, the blade of the keris (mata keris), which is the most important part of the weapon is made of iron, flat-surfaced and tenuous. There are many aspects of the keris that need further elaboration. To fill this need the following essays written by renowned observers and interested scholars on the subject of the keris and other Malay weapons should be of interest to readers who need to know further regarding the description, classification and varieties of the keris, both as a weapon and as a cultural heritage of the peoples of the Malay Archipelago.
The essay by A. H. Hill is certainly an eye-opener for many who wish to know more about Malay weaponry. Mr. Hill discusses extensively on topics relating to the keris and other weapons such as the sword and the spears, covering many aspects ranging from the types of blades, the keris parts and classification, to the handling and description of the Malay keris as a weapon and as a cultural artefact. An essay by Geoffrey Hodgson elaborated on the parts of keris by enumerating the lexical terms used in keris vocabulary. The two essays by G. C. Wooley traces the origin and development of the keris and at the same time discusses the types of keris found in the different parts of the archipelago and several aspects on its manufacture and its cultural meaning. There are three essays on keris measurements written by H. G. Keith, G. C. Woolley, and G, M. Laidlaw. While Keith provides information about keris measurements from North Borneo, which include discussions on the practice of the art by the Bugis, Suluk, and Brunei Malays, Woolley focusses on the method of keris measurements as related to him by a Malay from Negeri Sembilan who was residing in Sabah. G. M. Laidlaw complemented the two essays by quoting Skeat's Malay Magic on the method of measuring the keris and its 'magic' formula. Towards the end of the monograph, G. C. Wooley gives a review of G.B. Gardner's book, Keris and other Malay Weapons, and this is followed by an essay by Gardner himself who writes about the Keris Majapahit and the Keris Picit under the heading of: "Notes on two uncommon varieties of the Malay Keris". His notes on the Majapahit keris is supplemented by a brief essay by Abu Bakar bin Pawanchee entitled, "An Unusual Keris Majapahit" which appears after E. Banks's essay entitled, "The Keris Suluk or the Sundang". The monograph then ends with Woolley's "Notes on Two Knives in the Pitt Rivers Nuseum" at the Univerity of Oxford, and a brief discussion of the Malay cannon.
It goes without saying that these valuable essays concerning the keris and other Malay weapons which were sporadically published in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Malayan Branch in the years, 1933, 1938, 1940, 1947 and lastly 1956, are of extreme importance to many keris lovers and enthusiasts of Malay weaponry that they have since been collected to form a monograph of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society with a reprint last published in 1998, and now owing to further demand from readers another reprint is again being undertaken.
------------------------------------
[ Bibliography ]
Internet sources
- http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=176211
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dha _(sword).
Books and manuscripts
- Adam, Ahmat. “Sulalat u’s-Salatin yakni per[tu]turan segala raja-raja. Dialih aksara dan disunting dengan kritis, serta di beri anotasi dan Pengenalan” (in Press).
- Bambang Budi Utomo & NIk Hassan Shuhaimi bin Nik Abdul Rahman. 2009. Inskripsi Berbahasa Mālayu Kuno di Asia Tenggara, Bangi: Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
- Cortesao, Armando (trans.), 1967 [1944]. The Suma Oriental of Tome Pires and the Book of Francisco Rodrigues, Vol. 1, Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint Ltd.
- Hudoyo Doyodipuro, Ki 2005 [1997], Keris: Daya Magic, Manfaat, Tuah, Misteri, Semarang: Dahara Prize.
- Johnson, W. J., 2009. Oxford Dictionary of Hinduism, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
- Kassim Ahmad, 1964. Hikayat Hang Tuah(sic), Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
- Monier-Williams, Monier, 1999 [ 1899]. Sanskrit-English Dictionary. New edition, greatly enlarged and improved with the collaboration of E. Newmann and C. Capeller, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
- Po Dharma, 2000. Empat Leksikon Bahasa Melayu-Bahasa Cam yang disusun di Campa pada abad ke-17 (Penterjemah: Mohd. Zain Musa, Danny Wong Tze-Ken dan Po Dharma), Kuala Lumpur: Kementerian Kebudayaan dan Pelancongan Malaysia Ecole Française d’Extrême-Orient.
- ___________, G. Moussay and Abdul Karim (penyusun), 1998. Akayet Dowa Mano, Kuala Lumpur: Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia – Ecole Francaise d’Extreme-Orient.
- Poerbatjaraka, R. Ng. & Tardjan Hadidjaja, 1952. Kepustakaan Djawa, Djakarta/Amsterdam: Penerbit Djambatan.
- Robson, Stuar (trans.), 1995. Desawarnana (Nagarakrtagama) by Mpu Prapanca, Leiden: KITLV Press.
- Sarkar, Himansu Bushan, 1970. Some Contribution [sic] of India to the Ancient Civilisation of Indonesia and Malaysia, Calcutta: Punthi Pustak.
- Sheppard, Mubin, 1986 [1972]. A Royal Pleasure Garden. Malay Descriptive Arts and Pastimes, Singapore, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Slametmulyana. 1979. Nagarakrtagama dan tafsir sejarahnya, Jakarta: Bhratara.
- The Book of Duarte Barbosa, 1867 [1918-1921] (translated by Mansel Longworth Dames), vol. 2 (reproduced by The Hakluyt Society), Nedeln/Liechtenstein, Wiesbaden: Kraus Reprint Ltd.
- Wilkinson, R. J., 1959. A Malay-English Dictionary (Romanised) Parts 1 & II, London: Macmillan & Co Ltd, New York: St. Martin’s Press.
- Winstedt, R. O. (ed.), 1938. “The Malay Annals or Sejarah Melayu”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. xvi, Part III.
- Wojowasito, S. 1977. Kamus Kawi-Indonesia,Malang: Penerbit C.V. Pengarang.
- Zaehner, R. C., 1966 [1962]. Hinduism, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
- Zoetmulder, P. J. (with the collaboration of S. O. Robson), 2000 [1995; 1982], Kamus Jawa Kuna-Indonesia, Bagian 1 & II (Penerjemah: Darusuprata & Sumarti Suprayitna), Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.