Keris measurements
G.C. Woolley, a British colonial administrator based in Brunei, published this review in 1938 of G.B. Gardner’s Keris and other Malay Weapons (Singapore, 1936), offering corrections grounded in his own field experience in North Borneo. Woolley’s central argument is taxonomic: he contends that the keris is defined by the sudden widening of the blade into a guard, a feature that excludes the Tumbuk Lada and Badek from the keris class and places them instead among daggers or knives (p. 44).
Summary
Woolley begins by endorsing Gardner’s derivation of the keris from the stingray (Ikan Pari) and notes its compatibility with the Javanese tradition attributing the weapon’s invention to Inakarto Pati of Janggolo in the early 14th century, as recorded by Crawfurd (1820). He then advances his own classification, arguing that the keris is a double-edged thrusting weapon of variable length—straight, slightly curved, or wavy—whose defining morphological feature is the blade’s widening into a guard, even in the oldest Majapahit and Pichit forms (p. 44). He explicitly disagrees with Gardner’s inclusion of the Tumbuk Lada and Badek as keris forms, placing them with the Lawi Ayam and Beladau in a separate class of daggers (p. 44).
The bulk of the review consists of terminological corrections drawn from Brunei informants. Woolley supplies alternative names for keris parts (e.g., Puting for the hilt, Lidah Tiong for the guard, Kuku Alang for the ricasso) and corrects Gardner’s illustration of the keris grip, which he says would place the edge rather than the flat of the blade in the hand (p. 45). He also identifies misprints in Gardner’s plate references and notes that the Sulu “Sundang” is known locally as Keris Suluk, with blades ranging from very light to thick and heavy with rounded points (p. 45).
Woolley extends his local knowledge to Bornean cannon, noting that Brunei was a major production centre and that cannon served as currency on the West Coast, with one picul of ordinary-type cannon equivalent to approximately $30 (p. 45). He closes by observing that Gardner’s treatment of pamur (damascened blade patterns) omits the names and meanings of different patterns, and that the book’s bibliography is “exiguous,” lacking sufficient Dutch-language sources (p. 46).
Key Findings
- The keris is taxonomically defined by the sudden widening of the blade to form a guard; the Tumbuk Lada and Badek lack this feature and belong to a separate dagger class (p. 44).
- Brunei terminology for keris parts includes Puting (hilt), Lidah Tiong (guard), Kuku Alang (ricasso), Awak (blade), and Kukut (tip), differing from the Johore/Peninsula names Gardner provides (p. 45).
- The correct keris grip places the ganja on the bent forefinger with the Dagu inwards toward the fingertips and the Aring outwards toward the knuckles, with the thumb tip resting in the Janggut hollow below the ganja (p. 45).
- Brunei was a major centre of cannon production; on the West Coast of North Borneo, cannon functioned as currency, with one picul of ordinary-type cannon valued at approximately $30 (p. 45).
- The Sulu “Sundang” is known locally as Keris Suluk and varies greatly in weight and blade profile, from very light blades to thick, heavy ones with almost rounded points (p. 45).
- Gardner’s bibliography is insufficient, omitting multiple Dutch-language publications and the 1817 two-volume edition of Raffles’ History of Java with its large coloured plates showing keris-wearing customs (p. 46).
Conclusion
Woolley’s review serves as a corrective supplement to Gardner’s work, demonstrating that a single English-language monograph cannot capture the full terminological and typological diversity of the Malay world’s blade weapons. His definitive takeaway is that the keris must be strictly delimited by its morphological signature—the blade widening into a guard—and that local expertise, particularly from Brunei and North Borneo, remains essential for accurate classification and nomenclature.
Context
- Woolley’s corrections derive from his position as a British colonial officer in Brunei, giving him access to local informants and material culture unavailable to Gardner in Singapore.
- The article includes Plate I, a set of five photographs documenting the keris grip from multiple angles, which Woolley contributed to supplement Gardner’s erroneous illustration.