Mendhak Jogja and Solo
 

Dear Ferry,

This is just one example, on mendhak. The left side, is mendhak type of "kendhit" (Jogjanese), and the right side, "kendhit" type of Solonese. There are only slight differences on the details of the mendhak (Please look at the neck of the mendhak)...

These are types of mendhak "kendhit" inten seling mirah (simple diamond and mirah?)

I hope it will be useful to you...

Ganjawulung

Thank you Ganjawulung.
I've call our dear friend Mr Jumanto to provide some jogjanese silver mendak.

Mendhak Robyong
 

And these are examples on "robyong" type (pile types). From left to right, (1) Jogjanese "robyong", similar to "segara muncar" (sea wave?) of Solonese. (2) Jogjanese robyong with "inten" (simple diamonds), and (3) Solonese "bejen" type.

I hope I was not mistaken with my simple understanding on mendhaks..

Ganjawulung

Great thread subject Ganja. I would like to encourage you to post more comparison examples along this vein. :)

Pak Ganja, apart from the stones used for the deco, what is actually the difference between Solo & Jogja mendaks? I still cant tell the difference...

Thanks David, for the recomendation. I post this thread, because many of us still have difficulty in differing whether this and that mendhak are from Jogja style or Solo style. I've often seen, people show kerises with Jogja warangka but unfortunately with Solo mendhak, or even with Solonese hilt... Or vice versa.

These were just simple examples...

I would suggest you the look carefully at the details. Jogja and Solo style in mendhaks, are only differed from the very small details. It is better if I post the same picture, more close up of each mendhak from pictures above...

Ganjawulung

Oh, well... I'm afraid we would repeat some past discussion..

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...7004#post47004

According to my understanding, the most notable different features of Jogja's and Solo's mendhak is their 'ungkat-ungkatan'. Solo's has a thin, skinny ungkat-ungkat, and Jogja's has a cone-shape ungkat-ungkat.

As a picture worth more than a thousand words, I attach some pictures which had been posted before, with some comments added. I apologize for 'copyright infringement', if any, and also to Mas Ganjawulung.

To Mas Ferry, you could find a fair/good new mendhak easily, usually the better one come in silver and yakut, but the old, good one (I mean, the better then the best new one could available), unfortunately, quite rare today.

Finding the right 'proportion' on ukiran (handle), mendhak, wrangka and pendhok is very tricky. Size, shapes, color, textures and balance/harmony have come into account. You must have several good stock of handles, mendhaks and pendhoks to make proper adjustment. And the utmost is, you must have 'the feeling' to judge the proper harmony. It is the most important part, and unfortunately, that money can't buy. It is also not easy to learn.

Many Thanks, to your correction Mas Boedhy. As a "priyantun Jogja" of course you are reliable to determine which is the proper Jogja style, or which is not proper. This could happened, because I am Solonese but a fans of Jogjanese style. Jogja style is admirable...

I would post the other (Jogja) mendhaks. Do you think the second one is another style of Jogja kendhit?

Ganjawulung

Yes, Mas Ganja. All the mendhak's pictures on your latest post are Jogjas, IMHO. The one with gems is kendhit. It use filigree in spite of ordinary meniran/beads. Just a variation, I think. Kendhit means belt, belted with gems, in this case, and the one with metal ball called mendhak lugas. Lugas simply means 'plain'. The kendhit is not necessarily better than lugas. With a good balance and execution, the lugas frequently beat the ordinary kendhit, in term of beauty, not money, of course :)

Please bear in mind, while the 'lugas' and 'kendhit' are the proper terminology to define the mendhak's type especially in the court's circle, it might be unrecognized by some local seller. You might use 'polos' instead of 'lugas' (means the same, 'plain') or with/without mata (='eyes', the gems). 'robyong' is recognizable for three tier mendhak (might also in use with dhapurs, ex. sinom robyong).

Ganja, Adhitya
Thanks a lot for nice pictures and great explanation

Mendhak and Selut
 

Dear All,

Some mendhak "robyong" Solonese type (?) and "selut" of Banyumasan type. Also combination on the robyong mendhak and Banyumas selut.. Banyumas is a vassal of Solo Kingdom in the past, although Banyumas located far away from Solo -- in the western part of South-Central Java...

The plastic tool box -- that you may find easily in supermarkets -- might be used as a "keris spareparts" box. Don't throw away the old and broken selut. It might be usefull someday, to repair your broken mendhak...

Ganjawulung

Dear Gonjo,

Hope you can enlighten me. After the equal division of Mataram kingdom (Paliyan Nagari), Mataram became Surokarto and Jogjakarto that its border cutting of Prambanan.

Furthermore, there were several Nagari Gungs (the extended territories), perhaps as you said "vassals", such as Banyumas, Pasir, Ponorogo, Pacitan, Ngawi, Madiun. I got some stories that Nagari Gung was also divided equally. For example Pasir was divided into two regions. As a consequence, in Pasir there were both Surokarto and Jogjokarto influences depended in which part of Pasir. It is a story without supported by written evidence. So, if you have other story especially "history" about the status of Mataram's vassals after the division of Kingdom, please share in this forum.

warm salam,
Usman

frustrations !
 

gentlemen,
I like indeed your discussion about mendak, about keris, about the history of Indonesia, etc. but you use often words in Indonesian that I do not understand. As I have purchased an excellent English-Indonesian dictionary (as recommended by my good adviser from Australia who speaks both languages) I have tried to look for these words and other from the book "Keris Jawa antara Mystic dan nalar". To my great frustration, I have found none ! Assuming that I am not a complete nut, (past history is no proof for the present) I must do something wrong when I look at words in my dictionary. I suspect it may come from the prefix and suffix used in Indonesian. or from the spelling as it appears that Indonesian word may be spelled variously. (i.e. mendak, mendhak). Can you tel me how can I identify the base form of the word ? ( in particular since bases undergo apparently modifications when certain prefixes are attached.)
Please do not answer the easy way by telling me : learn Indonesian !
I have tried some 10 years ago with Bahasa Malaysia and already at that time it was not a success !
Thanks for any clue
Michel

Dear Michel,

I understand your difficulty. Especially in understanding the keris term that sometimes came from javanese words, and many times from old javanese for instance Kawi, or even Sanskrit.

Even the word "mendhak" in keris term, is different with "mendhak" -- or mendak -- in the general javanese meaning. Mendhak (dha is just to differ from "da" (soft spelling. Because in javanese, if you spell "deder" with hard "dha" like "dhedher", then the meaning is very far different) in keris term mean like "keris ring" below the ganja, keris accesories. But, mendhak in general javanese term (you may write to as mendak, it depends), may means "every". And may means too as "to low down -- for instance, in a move from upper step to lower step."

Bahasa Indonesia and Bahasa Malaysia, came from the same root of Malay. But sometimes with different spelling and even the vocab words came from the different origin. Malaysian, used to add the vocabulary from English words. But Indonesian, more from Dutch word and many of them from Javanese, or old javanese words. So complicated not only for foreigners, but even for Indonesians theirselves. As you know, Javanese language is only one of hundreds slangs in Indonesian archipelago.

As you know too, Indonesia spreads in more than 33.000 islands, and in three different time-zones (West Indonesian Time, Central Indonesian Time and Eastern Indonesian Time). The javanese people, spreads almost all over the archipelago, and so dominant in the Indonesian culture. I hope this will help you, a little bit...

Ganjawulung

Dear Michel,

I'm terribly sorry to hear that you became frustrated on learning Indonesian, and keris terminology, specifically. Keris's terminology, especially Javanese keris terminology, is a highly specialized terminology. It came from Javanese language, not Indonesian. Today, even an ordinary Javanese, which was born and speak Javanese every day, is not 'guarantee' to understand some specific keris's jargons such as ganja, greneng, or mendhak. It is a highly specialized jargon for special peoples : keris lover :). So, if you are looking a keris jargon in Indonesian Dictionary, it will be very likely taht you find none, or misleaded, such if you find 'ukiran' you may find 'carving' other than 'handle' as the translation. It doesn't mean that Javanese dictionary will 100% help you either. It may help you, but not 100%. Not even the thick Zoetmulder dictionary. I heard SNKI will compose a Dictionary on Keris Terminology, but I think it may face it's own challenge: disagreement amongs keris expert regarding some specific terminology. But it is worth to try :)

Yes, Indonesia language use prefix and suffix extensively, and the original word might changed a little bit. If you cannot find the base word, you may try an online dictionary which allow you to put whole word. Perhaps this may help :

http://www.kamus.net/

Software on learning Indonesian : (Free, they said, but unfortunately I haven't tried it) :

http://www.byki.com/download_FLS.pl?cod=4x8BU1

Most of all, you have this forum, certainly for free :D

Cheers,

Boedhi Adhitya

keris related terminology
 

Dear Ganjawulung,
Thank you. Your kind explanations show quite clearly that what I had assumed as feasible for an old brain like mine, may be a bit far fetched. My objective is not to understand a complete Indonesian books about keris but only to understand captions under illustrations (as in Keris Jawa antara mystic dan nalar) or words in a discussion on the forum.
I will see what I can do with the two very interesting on line support that Boedhi Adhitya, has kindly supplied. Thank you very much Boedhi Adhitya.
You suggest Boedhi that I could ask on the forum the meaning of some words. I have thought about it previously but it is not really feasible. To give you an example, I was trying to understand the exact meaning of the different phases in the sculpturing of a keris as explained on pages 110,111 and 112 of Keris Jawa. Even if the illustrations are excellent, the exact meaning of each caption would be enlighting. With an average of 15 words per page, I found none of the words in my dictionary. I do not think I can come with 45 words, each one specifically related to one picture in one specific book in the forum and ask for its translation. It would be boring for too many forumnites and the translators !
Considering what you have said about the keris terminology I may not succeed even with the on line dictionary but it is worth trying.
Thanks again to both of you
Regards
Michel

Dear Michel,

The instructional of keris making in Haryono's book (page 110, 111, and 112), is really technical. Litterally, the "javanese" words -- yes, those are all javanese words -- may means different from the words. Like "nyawati" in the first picture (number 15). Literally means like "throwing stones to somewhere". Or "diwangun" (there are diwangun 1, diwangun 2, and diwangun 3) literally means forming the blade in order not to be "clumsy" (?) -- you may help me, Mas Boedhi. On "ngilap" and "ngleseh" these were really "plastical" javanese words, that needs to see the demonstration...

I think Alan could explain to you better on these really technical instructions of keris making -- the second stage of keris blade forming...

Ganjawulung

Without the book on my hand, I'm afraid I cannot give much explanation, Mas Ganja. But if I may suggest you, Michel, you should understand the meaning of "diwangun", "ngilap" of "ngleseh" simply as grinding, filing or shaping. Yes, there are some different purpose/stress on each step, but the action is almost the same. "ngluroni" is to anneal / normalize the blade. Furthermore, you don't miss much by not understanding the exact meaning of each steps in keris making, as long as you can 'grasp' the meaning :)

wish may help,

boedhi adhitya

"diwangun", "ngilap" of "ngleseh"
 

Thank you Gentlemen,
You both helped.
To let you understand why is it important for me to understand some words of "Javanese" (and not Indonesian, as I had assumed), I am in the process of giving shape to a keris patrem. During my first steps (forging) I made few errors that were corrected by Alan, lemmythesmith, Ric, all forumnites. Before and during the long process of stock removal, I wanted to avoid new errors and the good images of Keris Jawa, are an excellent guide that can be improved by the understanding of the words :diwangun", "ngilap" of "ngleseh". as grinding , filing , shaping. It is a confirmation that my understanding was correct. But fig. 30 and 31 : Natah tikel alis and Natah sraweyan, would be even more useful !
Alan was also kind enough to supply a complete glossary of terms related to keris, which quite obviously do not cover very specific Javanese keris manufacturing terms.
Thank you to all, your help is appreciated.
Regards
Michel

One of the big defects with my language skills is that I do not really know when I am speaking Javanese or when I am speaking Indonesian, I've never learnt either language formally, only picked them up from talking to people, mostly in Solo. If I read the instructions on pages 111, 112, it seems to me that I am reading a mixture of what many people in Solo will claim is Indonesian, plus some Javanese. These are not literate people, true, but this is what they will speak to me if I say--- sorry, I'm not following, could you use Indonesian please--- then I get these words mixed with other definitely Indonesian words. If you tell me its all Javanese, Pak Ganja, then its all Javanese, but its what a lot of people have used to me when I've asked for Indonesian.

The diagrams and captions given on these pages are only a very broad overview of a work flow. I wouldn't call any of it technical, its just like a schematic of the progress of making a keris, it certainly does not in any way tell you how to actually make a keris.Its just stuff like "put in the jalen", "bend the kembang kacang","soften", "chisel out the sogokan", "smooth the chisel work"--- and so on.And not everybody would necessarily agree with the order given. Not at all technical instructions, just a broad over-view of workflow.

As to my explaining these instructions, well, they're not really instructions.The workflow shown is more or less :- plan the work, design the work, roughly shape the work, cut the kembang kacang, put in the jalen, bend the KK, refine the form, cut the sogokan etc, smooth the chisel work, refine the work. As I said, its just a broad overview and doesn't really tell you anything at all about how to make a keris (particularly when it says "nglempeng ada-ada"---how the hell does one "nglempeng" an ada-ada in a waved keris? got me beat).However, for (a collector--deleted) those who do not know the process it will give some rough idea of the way in which the work proceeds. Some of the really vital things that you need to do are not even hinted at.

Incidentally Michel, the glossary I pointed you to is far from complete, its just something that has built up haphazardly over the years to answer questions.We could probably triple that glossary, and it would still be deficient.

Not just collector, Alan... Sometimes (me) a knife-seller too. :D Sometimes, I join to watch (watcher, then) my friend Yantono in Solo, making kerises in his "besalen" in Palur. Or making knife with pamor, commissioned by someone. Or sometimes "join" my old friend, Hajar Satoto (young artist in Solo) making "strange dhapur" kerises in Bekonang...

Ganjawulung

Pak Ganja, when I used the word "collector" I was not in any way referring to you.

In fact, you were the furthest thought from my mind.

I was referring to the general public with an interest in keris but who do not understand the making process. Perhaps I should have written :-
"but for those who do not know"

Well, now I see why you desperately want to understand those terminologies/step. :)

What you really need is, IMHO, a stong 'mental image' on how the keris shape suppose to be. Then, try to realize it. It is very important. Take particular attention to proportion of length, width, thickness and angle (the condong-leleh), in whole, in every details (ricikan), and on proportion of each detail compared each other (for example, between the sekar kacang and jalen, and sekar kacang, jalen, and gandhik, and so on). Make a picture, or model as a guide. Ki Yosopangarso described it as Wujud =a finely defined details/ricikans, and Wangun ='proper harmony', 'balance' of each ricikan and the blade as a whole, including the pamor appearance. It also describe the word 'diwangun' = to make it 'wangun', to 'harmonize'. Wangun is deeply connected to your feeling/rasa. 'Wangun' or 'not wangun' is judged by your feeling. You must have a feeling for wangun in every step of keris making. So, wheter you are forging, grinding, filing or chiseling the blank, and even etching, you must make 'wangun' as your main consideration.

Ngilap and ngleseh is part of cold/benchworking process (not so 'cold', I think :) ). So I assume you've made a keris blank.

After you make a keris blank, the next step is 'silak/nyilak waja ' : to reveal the core/steel. Etching the edge will help. Examine the position and thickness of the core (wheter it is properly centered or not and the thickness is even and thick/thin enough). If problem encountered (very likely), you solve it by 'ngilap'= fine forging. Then you do the nyilak waja again or 'nyawati' to see wheter the problems has been solved or not. The difference between 'nyilak waja' and 'nyawati' is : on 'nyilak waja' you simply make a blunt, perpendicular edge, while in 'nyawati' you make a very acute edge/bevel. Nyawati is the refinement of nyilak waja. It also make a rough edge.

Repeat the process : Nyilak waja/nyawati - ngilap - nyilak waja, until all core centered and has even thickness. Some other works may be done in between, including 'diwangun'. After all core centered, the next step is 'ngleseh'. Ngleseh is simply to reveal the pamor by filing/grinding the blank. While nyilak waja/nyawati and ngilap concentrated on the edge, 'Ngleseh' start the process of shaping the whole blade. You may do some ngilap too, if needed.

As Pak Alan said, not every body agree to the order given. You may customize your own process, as needed. But the principle may be the same : working the edge/core, the blade, then the details/ricikan. When and where each process would overlap each other, depends 100% on you.

It is worth to note that not everybody, even today's keris maker, would recognize all the name of the process. Nglanji or pidakan are quite common, but ngilap, I think, is not.They just simply don't bother :). It is useful if an empu try to communicate some of the process to his assistant, such as "please do some ngilap again here and here.." and so on, but not every keris maker has assistant today.

Other book describing the keris making process is The World of Javanese Keris by Garret and Bronwen Solyom, among other.

I made some hasty illustration that I wish may help.

Good luck !

Thank you
 

Thank You Mas Boedhi,
You really did a nice job and translated many words. These instructions will join those of Alan in my references and I think I will complete, for my own purpose, the glossary of Alan, with all these new words and concepts that you have translated.
Your work is very much appreciated.
Kind regards
Michel

Pak Boedhi, when I read your most recent post I found myself wondering how you had managed to extract the information you provided in your diagrams from the captions and diagrams in Haryoguritno's book.

I asked myself what it was that I was missing. What I can see in Pak Guritno's book are diagrams where I can see a workflow, and words that by twisting the meanings as I understand them, I can relate to the workflow, but I cannot see anything that relates to your explanation of truing up the core. Then I realised that you do not have the book and diagrams in front of you, and you are quoting from a different source. Your explanation of truing up a blade core is good, but it is not conveyed by the diagrams and captions in Haryoguritno's book; this is something that you have learnt from a different source--- as you say:- you do not have the book with you.

Actually, if the forging of the blade is carefully carried out, the core will usually be found to be fairly well centered; it is only with careless forging that a core will be so far off centre that we need to make a large compensatory adjustment. Usually you can carry out any necessary adjustment as you go along, without making a special process of it at the beginning of the blade carving. If it is necessary to make major corrections, you would finish up with a blade that was far too thin, which is a well known fault in the work of one particular very well known empu of the current era.

Since the keris book is in Indonesian, and these captions are not standard Indonesian, it occurred to me that perhaps Pak Guritno had supplied a glossary, so I had a quick run through the book, and lo and behold, there on page 98 is a glossary of terms used in making keris.

I have taken the liberty of providing translations of the meanings given in this glossary for the words under discussion.As the languages involved are not my native languages, I would appreciate any corrections you see fit to advise upon.

nyawati--- file the edge of the blade at an angle
diwangun---to shape, to correct, to make perfect
ngilap--- forge lightly to smooth the surface
ngleseh--- not in glossary, but in correct Javanese, not jargon, it means "to spread something out on the ground"
ndudut--- forge out
ngisi--- not in glossary, to put in
ngeluk--- bend
mekak--- sharpen the form ( cut precisely)
ngluroni--- soften (anneal)
natah--- cut with a chisel, carve
ngelus--- not in glossary, to smooth or refine something
nglempeng--- not in glossary, but in correct Javanese "to go in a straight line"; when spoken with accented "e"'s, to make thin and flat.
ngrata--- level the surface
nglanji--- fit with precision
ngrapetake--- not in glossary, to fix tightly
gawe--- not in glossary, a job, nggawe is to make or construct
nglamak--- not in glossary, in this sense, nglamakake is to even up, to make the same with; "nglamak" is jargon from this word.

You are correct, Pak Alan. It wasn't possible to draw the silak waja, nyawati and ngilap's illustration/explanation from Pak Guritno's book alone. I was using 'another sources'. Not really another sources, actually, as it also came from Empu Djeno. It is a note on "Urut-urutan Panggaraping Dhuwung" or "The Sequence of Keris Making", consist of 75 steps from "masuh" to "marangi", with approximate times needed for every step, which totally takes 113,5 days. He needed 1 silak waja, 2 nyawati and 2 ngilap in between. He employed 11 'kewangunan'/diwangun through all process, and the last kewangunan takes 3 days alone.

The times tables is obviously too long for 'contemporary smith', as the 2005 Keris Making Competition proved that it is possible for experinced keris maker to 'carve' a keris from the blank in 3 days, with good result. Angle grinders and other power tools were in charge, though.

The note was presented by Empu Djeno himself in Pametri Wiji Meeting somewhere in 90's. Pametri Wiji is keris lover club founded in 1983, based in Jogjakarta, and still held regular meeting once a month until now.
Fortunately, I accidentally brought this note along with other to U.K., as there are some work that I must finish.

You are right, Pak Alan. This particular well-known empu told me that he was intensionally using an uneven, convex Javanese anvil (on the contrary with European Anvil, known as 'paron londho'='dutch anvil'), as it adds more 'activity' to pamor such as beras wutah. Not all Javanese anvil is uneven. We (and he, surely) know that the activity came directly from forging unevenness. So, he chose consciously to make his blank uneven! Well, of course there is a prize which he must pay. And yes, this particular empu's works should have been better, in term of aesthetical standard. But I admire his works for it's wasuhan and it's ability to show some 'guwaya'. (Guwaya is a very complex term. Perhaps, it could be translated as 'charisma', but not exactly the same).

The reason of why he couldn't reach such a high standard could only be hypothesized. I assume it was simply because he lacked of good examples, while his father didn't fully transferred all the knowledges, as he himself admitted. His father, believe me, was a truly capable empu. Mbah Kamdi (Grandpa Kamdi, as Sukamdi nicknamed), a well-known Solonese keris maker, simply commented,"If it really is Supowinangun's work, then undoubtely, he was a real empu", when I showed him Supowinangun's work, which it's attribution is beyond doubt. Supowinangun passed away in an old ages in 1960's. He left no notes, no drawings, nor any of his works to his family. A very unfortunate event.
I think we all agree that studying many good examples is an important step to produce good kerises. Court's empus could do better because they had access to Court's Pusakas, the best examples as it could be. They event copied it, in 'Mutrani' tradition. The same step is taken by Maduranese or Solonese makers. But never Djeno. I don't know why. Despite his work's flaws, I sincerely honor him for devoting his life to keris world and traditions.

Today's keris makers would haphazardly 'wound' the blank with an angle grinder then forge it flat to achieve the same result. A keris maker which is a good friend of mine told me that he sometimes has to go back and forth to the local smith to adjust the core thickness to prevent him from getting 'kandas waja'(='beached to the steel/core'=the steel core is revealed in the place where pamor should be). He works on Madura's blanks (and on old blades too ), sometimes specially order the blank with a prescribed structure / construction.

Regarding your translation, I believe you have translated those word properly.
Ngleseh is, indeed, tricky word. Lesehan means sitting on the ground, preferably with a mat. But in keris making world, If I may suggest, it better be translated as 'cold-rasping'. You would feel the 'spreading' movement when you do it, and I think it is why it's called 'ngleseh', other than 'ngikir'=from kikir=file/to file.
Nglempeng ada-ada means to precisely center the ada-ada

I am impressed
 

Gentlemen you are impressing !
A question of vocabulary has now evolve in a discussion of specialists. So much information in your different messages. Thank you very much.
Even if you are unsure of some word translation, what you have given is already of a great help for me, because, as you now, the devil is in the details. The identification of chiseling instead of filing gives very valuable information on the process.
Mas Boeghi, you mention the 75 steps from "masuh" to "marangi" given by Empu Djeno and taking 113.5 days to complete. Has this list of successive steps of the process been published anywhere ? If it has, it was probably in the frame of Pametri Wiji and would not be accessible or understandable, by outsiders !
I personally think that such a document would be interesting for those studying keris and understanding Javanese and Indonesian !
Thanks again to both of you
Regards
Michel

Pak Boedhi, please forgive me, but I would prefer not to comment directly upon the work of people who have recently left us.Pak Djeno was a keris maker. That in my opinion is sufficient comment.

Regarding the word "ngleseh". As I said in a previous post, I often cannot tell if I am hearing Indonesian or Javanese. Because I have never had formal instruction in either language, if somebody tells me they are using Indonesian, I accept that, even though they may be using Javanese that they know I will understand. So, when I read those captions in Haryoguritno's book, I thought--oh yes, we've got Indonesian/Javanese as she is spoke by my neighbours.Most, if not all of the words used in those captions are easily understood with just a little bit of mental gymnastics---probably no more than is necessary than that which we need to use when people start to play with words, or give them their own pronunciations.That being so, I understood ngleseh just as it is---spread out on the ground; now, since we are talking about keris-work, the "ground" obviously is the forging we are working on, and the "spreading out" is the spreading of the area being worked on. To me, this is clearly figurative language. I don't read it as having an entirely different meaning such as rasping, or filing, but rather, as having a figurative meaning, easily understood in the workplace.

Ngempleng ada-ada might be understood in keris making as to precisely centre the ada-ada, but that's sure not what it means. Again, we can twist things a bit, and extract the intended meaning, but for somebody not familiar with the game of making keris, it could be a bit confusing.

Actually, it would not surprise me if many of these "traditional keris making terms" were the exclusive property of Empu Djeno alone, or perhaps his family, or the geographic area in which he worked.

Regarding the word "guwaya". This has been explained to me by those I trust, as being of two types:- guwaya cebleh---when the blade is stained it will be pale and unattractive; guwaya mendasar---when stained the blade will appear prestigious and attractive.
Perhaps "charisma" could be an acceptable English word . Certainly no blade will present with good charisma if it is unable to be well stained.

Regarding the length of time taken to make a blade.
If we count in days, this does not necessarily mean a day as somebody in the west would think of a day, that is, a space of time with 24 , sixty minute hours, or the working component of that 24 hour space, say 8, or 10 hours.
In Javanese thought different days have different values, so if we select the days upon which we work, we can work on a day with a value of two, and we have worked two days; we can work on a day with a value of three, and we have worked three days----and so on.
To forge a simple wos wutah blade should not take any longer than two days of 8 hours for a smith and a striker.
Empu Suparman could finish such a forging, working with traditional hand tools, and working between 6 and 8 hours each day, in 14 days.
Thus, four man/days for forging, 14 man/days for making, total 18 man/days to make one fullsize keris with pamor wos wutah.

I have made a number of keris. The shortest time it has ever taken me is 17 man/days of 8 to 10 hours including forging, for a tilam sari. The longest time it ever took me was 49 man/days of 8 to 10 hours for a little pasupati. Total time for each includes one man/day for a striker in the tilam sari work time, and two strikers for three days for the pasupati, giving 6 striker man/days.These keris were made with traditional tools, not grinders, nor any other electric tools, with the exception of an electric blower for the forge, used for the tilam sari.

My personal opinion of these "keris making" competitions is that they are farcical. They are carving competitions, and they are constrained by time. To my way of thinking, they are practically worthless.To me, they have no meaning. If they want a real competition the competitors should forge their own keris, and then work on it freed from time constraints. What artwork is produced under the public gaze and subject to time constraints? These competitions are a nonsense, and every time I think of them it makes me angry. This is the degradation and cheapening of art.A better solution would be to hold an annual national competition, with each contestant entering his best work for the year.A true art competition.Not this publicity grabbing rubbish that is being staged now.

The two blades I mention as taking 17 man/days and 49 man/days can be seen here:-

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey3.html

http://www.kerisattosanaji.com/PBXIImaisey2.html

Dear Michel,
I'm afraid my note wasn't published. I recall there is another published note regarding keris making, by Museum Sonobudoyo Yogyakarta. Only a small booklet, without illustration. I believe you won't miss much without both. Keris making is and always be a handicraft. No rigid sequences could be established. I believe Empu Djeno was 'pushed' a little bit to make a rigid sequence presciption, as he was under constant questioning on how to make keris. Keris making art was considered as a lost-art at 60's. Without Mr. Dietrich Dresser's persistence, it would be a real lost-art. So when the 'resurrection' happened, it was quite shocking a bit.

Dear Pak Alan,
The word 'ngleseh, IMHO, is definitely Javanese. As I've written before, you have made a good, literal translation. But I chose not to translate it literally. Instead, I tried to find an equal terminology in western metalworking vocabularies. If you were suggesting the meaning of ngleseh as 'spreading the blade/blank by hot forging', thus, widen it under hammer, I must say I'm disagree. According to my note, ngleseh was done JUST AFTER the ngluroni/annealing/soften the blade. Empu Djeno employed 3 ngleseh steps, all immediately after ngluroni. Thus, ngluroni must be interpreted as a step to make ngleseh easier, and ngleseh must be a cold working. Another, last, ngluroni was done just before 'ngelus'=to smoothen/erase the chisel/rough file marks. Needles to say, ngluroni also makes ngelus easier.
I think no other word could describe Ngleseh properly such as 'rasping', or 'filing the billet to reveal the pamor and make a rough contour' (but ones can use Japanese's sen if he prefers, instead of file/rasp file). The width of the billet should be readily adjusted under 'ngilap' step.

Ones could easily 'lost' in the chaotic world of Javanese grammar and vocabularies. Frankly, I don't think Javanese follow a 'rigid' grammar and vocabularies when they speak daily. What they use as a guidance is 'Rasa', literally means 'feeling', but it means much more than feeling. Everything spoken within context and under prescribed assumption. Most of this assumption is unspoken. A word can be twisted to unlimited meaning, depending on the context. "Plesetan", or playing with words(?) is a common jokes.

I agree with you that "traditional keris making terms", while not all, could be an exclusive property of Empu Djeno. He was under constant pressure to answer all questions regarding keris making. It might push him to "invent" several terms, just to make it more concise and easier to explain. Unfortunately, it is not so concise for many of us, which didn't come directly face-to-face with Empu Djeno. Even a thick book of Guritno didn't help a desperate men like Michel.

Regarding the term 'guwaya', I believe it is not as easy as you've already explained. Indeed, guwaya is influenced by proper marangi. I'm fully understand what you meant about 'guwaya cebleh' and 'guwaya mendasar' ('mendasar' is Indonesian. I think it is not 'recognizable' under strictly Javanese language), but I prefer called it as 'warangan cebleh' and 'warangan mapan'. In Jogja, we refer 'cebleh' as 'welu' : A look of someone just after getting out of the bed in the morning. It's remedy is re-etching, mostly. A properly applied warangan can surely enhance the guwaya, but some blade which had already 'lost' it's guwaya is beyond help. If guwaya is as simple as properly applied warangan, then why should Guritno put it as one of criteria in keris selection? (Gebyar, Guwaya, Wingit, Wibawa, if I'm not mistaken). I've been taught that guwaya is much more than just a blade's ability to be well-stained. In fact, one of the main criticism on contemporary kerises is it's lack of Guwaya, when many of them have an appealing appearance. If ones insist me to define guwaya, than I may say that guwaya is "something that missing in the ones' picture/photograph compared to the real him/her". Surely, going to beautician would help ones appearance, but some faces, which is 'beyond help', would not.:)

Regarding the Keris Carving Competition (I agree with you to name it a keris carving), I would say, Japanese Sword Making Competition, along with limitation on production, would be an ideal model. But if it really applied, well, a much more complication would arise. Seeing the good side, the competition reintroduce the keris to the society. You know how 'ordinary' Indonesian sees keris as a 'dukun's tool'.

Pak Boedhi, I have failed to make myself clear. I apologise.

Let me try again.

On language:- yes, ngleseh is definitely Javanese.

My understanding of the distinction between Javanese and Indonesian is imperfect because my teachers have been the people I meet and converse with everyday in Solo, as well as the members of my own family, and friends here in Australia. All of these people carelessly mix Indonesian and Javanese when they speak with me. None will ever use perfect Indonesian, and their idea of Indonesian is a level of Javanese with perhaps a few more Indonesian words than Javanese words.However, that said, I can often recognise Javanese words, simply because they are words that I do not see in Indonesian language publications.The word "ngleseh" is one such word. Not at all uncommon in the conversations I have, but I cannot ever remember seeing it in a publication in formal Indonesian.

Your remarks on the inconstantcy of the Javanese language are accurate.
Linguists recognise Javanese as a non-standardised language.Apart from which it is equally recognised by linguists that each speaker of Javanese regards the words he uses as his own personal property to alter and manipulate as he will, provided the meaning is clear to the listener.Above all, Javanese is primarily a spoken language, rather than a language designed for clear communication through print, thus, it relies greatly on inflection, and on the accompanying body language.

Which brings us back to "ngleseh".
You are handicapped by not having Haryoguritno's book in front of you, if you did have, I am sure that you would understand instantly what I mean.

If we look at the workflow we see:-

nyawati > diwangun > ngilap > ngleseh > diwangun > ngleseh > diwangun (and a further 20 more steps:- ndudut kembang kacang, ngisi jalen, ngeluk KK, mekak pidakan, ngleseh, diwangun, ngluroni, natah sogokan, natah tikel alis, natah sraweyan, diwangun, nglempeng ada-ada, diwangun, followed by the gonjo work)

the keris process of nyawati involves the opening up of the forged surface so you can see the place where the steel core surfaces; in practice, the way you do this is by a lot of repeated short, light throws of the file, you cannot afford to be too enthusiastic, you need to just pick away at the edge, just sufficient to be able to pick up the edge of the core; the word "nyawati" describes this process well, because you are repeatedly throwing the file at the surface, you are not seriously using the file to remove bulk metal

the next step in the work flow is "diwangun"; when we wangun something we build it, or give it form,or perfect it, so we've taken off a wee bit of metal with our nyawati, then we need to do the corrections by going back to the forge and giving shape, or improvement to the blade forging

the next step is ngilap , "ngilap", from kilap, "lightening"; we strike very light, very rapid blows---blows that are like lightening-- for the purpose of refining the work ( in western forge work, this is parallel with edge packing).

the next step is the much discussed "ngleseh"; in this step we spread the open area of bevelled edge upon the ground of the forged blade, we do this by widening with a file the bevel already established by the previous three steps

then we correct the form of the blade again, by cold working this time, so we have "diwangun" again

the next thing we do is to once again "ngleseh", this time we spread the bevelled edge all the way back to the centreline that will eventually become the place where we put the ada-ada

then we once again "diwangun" and correct the blade form

If we understand the way in which to work on a forging in order to produce a blade, it is fairly easy to see how we could use words like "ngleseh" and "ngilap" to refer to the actions involved in the work process.
To me, the use of these words is a completely logical development of a system of working instructions.

Pak Boedhi, it is not a matter of "literal translation", it is a matter of "literal understanding". Yes, some of the words I translated literally, because there was no translation given in Haryoguritno's glossary, but with just a little understanding of the actual hands on process it is easy to see how this literal translation can be understood to convey a specific work-application meaning. These words do not acquire a completely different meaning when used to describe keris work, they acquire a meaning parrallel with their common meaning, but specific to work on a keris.

As far as "guwaya" goes, I have simply repeated here the explanation given me by two Kraton Surakarta empus, and verified by a man who is perhaps the most respected authority on Javanese art, especially the keris. I have no opinion on this, I simply pass on what I have been taught. There are other words and concepts to refer to other characteristics, for instance, "wanda". In fact, both wanda and guwaya can be considered to be a level above the understanding of pure physical form, and begin to approach the level of being able to "feel" the keris.Although I used the word "staining" when I spoke of guwaya previously, actually the true meaning goes beyond just the result of staining a blade, but it is not possible for me to put the ideas associated with guwaya and wanda into English; "staining" is a fairly simple concept for ordinary people to understand.Wingit and wibawa are not similar to guwaya or wanda, but are specific feelings that can be generated by a keris;for instance you could say that the feeling of a keris is "wingit", but you cannot say that the feeling of a keris is "guwaya", because "guwaya" is an overall quality, not a specific quality.As I said previously, perhaps "charisma" is near enough for an understanding in English.

Keris competitions.
Keris are art.
Art should not be measured subject to artificial time constraints, nor should it be done under public gaze.
By staging competitions open to the public and subject to time constraints the making of a keris has been reduced from art to a manufacturing process and is measured by commercial viability rather than artistic parameters.
Public, timed keris carving exhibitions are garbage that can do nothing but damage the art.

You are correct, we are not seeing the same sources, while both sources claimed for quoting it from the same sources (Empu Djeno).

On my note are :
Nyilak Waja kapisan (1) > Ngilap (1)> Ndudut pesi > Nyawati (Silak Waja 2) > Mapaki+Kewangunan (1) > Ngilap (2) > Nyawati (2) > Kewangunan (2) > Ngluroni (1) > Ngleseh (1) > Kewangunan (3) > Ngluroni (2) > Ngleseh (2) > Kewangunan (4) > Kembang kacang and jalen works > Ngluroni (3) > Ngleseh... and so on..

While the sequence differs, the essential principle are the same.

Yes, it is. But sadly to say, most new kerises are made with commercial intention in mind. Specialization and division of labor that we see in Madura today can be seen as 'mass-production'. Keris has become commodity. Very limited keris makers work on behalf of art, not to mention spiritual tradition. Thus, 2005 Keris Competition was only a logical step from this situation. I'm not happy with it.

Yeah---well, as already agreed, the sequence can change. I reckon Pak Djeno worked the same as all of us do, he had a goal in mind and shifted things around , dependent on circumstances, to allow him to achieve that goal in the easiest way. Or maybe he did what many of us do when we get asked questions that the asker does not really understand:- he gave an answer that he hoped would satisfy the person who asked.

Pak Boedhi, keris have always been a commodity. Back in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries they were being exported from Jawa to the rest of SE Asia. We have pictures showing keris sellers in the markets in Batavia.

Keris at one level have always been a commodity.For many hundreds of years keris have been made to produce a living for somebody. They are an expensive thing to produce, always were, and nobody produces items that require high resource usage unless they intend to make money out of them.

Similarly with production of a single blade by a group of workers. Except in very early days and in the case of small village workers, group production has always been the norm. The extent to which group production was applied, and the role of the master might have varied a bit, but the objective was always the same:- produce the best quality at an affordable price. People tend to get lost in their imagination when it comes to keris production. Old time Jawa was not some primitive society, it was highly organised and highly stratified.Back when they were having a good solid whack at the Dutch, it took them about five minutes to copy the Dutch weapons and perhaps improve on them.

What we see in Madura today is simply a continuation of tradition, and if there were just a touch more realism around, we would recognise that the idea of exclusive authorship of keris, even old ones, is a very limited concept. It probably may be able to be considered as applicable to very low quality keris, and some (but we can never know which) very high quality keris.The vast bulk of keris have always been produced by more than a single person.You cannot call the current Madura production "mass production". It is not. It lacks the essential elements of mass production. But it is group production, where some people will sometimes do one job efficiently, and others do another job efficiently. In this way it is no different to the way in which keris, and many other complex items have always been produced , not only in Jawa, but in other places as well.It pretty much comes down to what the market wants, and what the market can afford to pay.

Look at the number of people that were used to produce a keris, that are listed in the texts , and the work allocated to those workers. Nobody but the boss (the Empu) knew the complete process, or how one piece of work fitted with another, but he was like the conductor, the music was played by other people with various instruments.

So, what we see today is really no different to what it has always been---on one level.

But we also have people who are capable of producing a keris as a work of art from the beginning to the end. These people are the true artists. Sometimes they may produce commercially orientated items, but so do all other artists in all fields:- artists must live too, you know. What I would like to see is this current commercial competition dumped, and the institution of a true competition for those people who are entitled to be called "pandai keris", or "empu". And there are not very many of these people.

This raises a question for me ; I hope I can express it correctly .

When judging the work of an empu class artisan where does one draw the line between proper form/dhapur and individual creativity on the part of the maker ?

Is there room for imagination and innovation in the process ?

Rick, I cannot answer this question.

It is a matter of experience,knowledge and inate artistic sensibility, as it is with any art work.

What is it that causes the work of one artist, in any field, to be regarded as great, and the work of another artist to be regarded as mundane?

The person with no knowledge or experience, or artistic sensibility could well choose the work of Mr. Mundane as superior to the work of Mr. Great, but the knowledgeable and experienced people will invariably choose the work of the artist recognised as great, even if they do not know it is by that particular artist.

The "proper form" (dhapur) question is a simple one to answer, because various guidebooks or pakems exist which lay down the features and overall form of any particular dhapur. Provided the keris conforms with the laid down design, it is that dhapur.

However, the "creativity" question is very difficult, because the individual artist must interpret the laid down form and features within very narrow parameters, and be able to express the art and the feeling within those parameters.To detect and appraise this you need a lot of experience, very good tuition, and at least some innate artistic feeling.

One of the constant and deeply felt complaints of my own teacher was about people who saw fit to discuss and comment upon the excellence or otherwise of keris, but who could not determine the difference between the work of a talented artist, and the work of a maker without talent.I recall one time when my teacher, I, and a couple of other people attended a keris meeting in a neighbouring city. He and one of his close friends, who was also highly placed in the Surakarta Kraton, fumed all the way home because of what they considered to be a total lack of knowledge displayed by our hosts. The repeated comment was:- "It is easy to invent stories; it is very difficult to learn the keris".

Yes, there is room for creativity, but that creativity must be displayed within a very narrow range. Unless we have an extremely thorough knowledge of what is regarded as excellence we are not in a position to judge what is acceptable, and what is not.

Now, what I am talking about here are the standards as they are applied by an artistic elite centered on the Surakarta Kraton.

For anybody who is not in a position to learn these standards, and who is not committed to be bound by these standards, it becomes a bit easier.

For proper interpretation of a form you simply consult a pakem. Find that exact collection of specific features in a pakem, any pakem, and you've got a legitimate dhapur.

For the way in which those features are expressed, it comes back to whether it pleases your eye, or not.In the final analysis, you are the person who needs to live with the keris:- if it pleases you, it is a good keris --- for you.
If it does not please you, get rid of it.

The alternative to this simple approach is to go to Solo and find a good teacher.

Dear Gentlemen,

I appreciate very much your valuable dialog on this keris making topic. Even in Indonesian keris forum, or Indonesian keris dialog, I think it never happened talking of keris making -- between "Jogja-school" and "Solo-school" (sorry, if it is not a proper term for you) -- in a friendly manner such this.

Once again, I appreciate very much of you both, Mas Boedhi and Pak Alan. You are both the best waroenger in this Warung Kopi, if I may praise you...
This dialog will not only be valuable for us all, waroengers, but also for the development of Indonesian keris, I think...

Thank you Gentlemen,

Ganjawulung

Thank you, Pak Alan, for remind me that keris have always been commodity. Yes, it is, it was and it will. We both know that keris as a product could be divided roughly into two groups: Keris Gramen (made without any specific order=commodity which will be sold readily in open market) and Keris Yasan (Keris which is made under commision). Most of kerises, even the old ones, are gramen. The high-quality keris are not for everyone, as not many peoples could afford it. Even if ones could afford, in the old days, it would be restricted for him, and depended heavily on his social status. And in fact, keris knowledges were not for everyone, makes keris surrounded with many myths and stories.

I don't mind certain keris become commodity nor for keris artisans to develop his special ability and making money from it. It was done before. But it doesn't mean all have to be commodity and commercial. Today's keris 'industry' has gone too far. They're losing grip on the meaning of 'tosan aji'. It is not just about 'beauty'. It has a deep spiritual aspect in it. O'Connor in "Metallurgy and Immortality at Candi Sukuh" simply wrote, "The perfection of spirit is figured in the perfection of metal, and, in a sense, imposes itself in the poetic logic of the metal workers' physical operations." Without some 'spiritual involvement', it is imposible to make a real 'tosan aji'.

I don't mean every keris makers should become hermit or priest, or should conduct 'slametan' or give some offerings when working. What I mean is, they should consciously honor the tradition on keris making, or at least, bear in mind what they're doing. In some extend, I envy the Japanese traditional sword makers, and I wish keris makers could match their devotion.

Mas Ganjawulung, I don't think that there would be much differences in keris making between Jogja and Solo. Style, perhaps. But even so, I remember Empu Djeno once told me that his father used to sold his keris (gramen) in Pasar Gede, Solo. His father, certainly working under Jogja's school. And at the time he was living, there were much more 'keris literate' people in Solo than today, and the shadow of rivalry between Solo and Jogja should be much more felt than today. But he managed to sell it.

I don't understand the Solo School much. But I get impression, until now, that the Solo school emphasize on learning the technical aspects and details. OTOH, I get impression, until now, that Jogja school emphasize on learning about the 'perfect metal', mainly the iron (tosan) and 'overall appearance'. Under the Jogja school, it is the tosan (iron) which makes an iron object such as keris qualified as 'tosan aji' or not. Other things like dhapur, details/ricikan, pamor motif and tangguh come later. However, after the tosan meets the standart, those factor then come into account. But I must admit, it is practiced under a very limited circle only, mainly kraton-linked. It doesn't mean that Solo neglect tosan, and Jogja neglect the technical and detail. I've found Solo kerises which has good iron, too. It is just a different priority on keris appraisal.
Unaware of this different approach would certainly result in unnecessary endless debate, and possibly harasment.

The proper form/dhapur in 'classical keris school' has already prescribed. It is hard for today empu, or even the old times empu, to make a new dhapur, as 'classic dhapur' aren't just about beauty, but more importantly, it have symbolic meaning. The Javanese empus could not easily alter the shape of greneng, as it was done by Sundang maker for example, as greneng has a prescribed form as 'dha' character. But as your handwriting, it is open for creativity, as long as it could be recognized. For example, you have your own stroke and shape to write 'd' as I have mine, but our 'd' shouldn't go too far from prescribed 'd' universally agreed. So, there are rooms for creativity, such as 'sogokan kandas palemahan/waja' (sogokan was made deep enough until the steel core revealed), square shape pejetan, sogokan 'nyucuk dhandang' ('crow beak' sogokan), tikel alis nerjang/nratas gandhik (tikel alis cut acros gandhik) etc. If some particular details was executed by a particular group of empus attached to a Kraton/Kingdom or certain area, then it might become a Tangguh's marks. But there are so many details in keris, that tangguh would leave some 'unprescribed'. Some of this particular details might be specially prescibed by the court, though, and thus, not an empu's creativity. But it is also possible that some particular style of ricikan/details once belonged to certain empu, then copied by another makers, since it looked beautiful, or was preferred by 'the market'. It's about 'fashion's trend' then.
Alternatively, empu might invented or employed a special technique or 'character' on forging, especially when applying the pamor. He might make the pamor look bolder or tighter or to reflect chatoyancy, etc. Dimension, could be also 'played'. However, as Pak Alan said, ones need an ample artistic talent and experience to appraise/identify whether a particular keris was the work of empu or not.

I understand that under Surakarta's Court, the keris shape was stricly prescribed. I've been told that there are 'master keris models' found in Kraton Surakarta, made of wood/bronze/brass (?). Master models, that every Court's empus had to conform. I know today's respected Solo keris maker who used to bring vernier caliper, and make his keris to exact milimeter and angle.
Kraton Yogyakarta, on the other hand, seemed not so strickly prescribe it's keris measurement as Surakarta did. Until now, no keris model has ever found. Empu Djeno worked without a 'master model' as long as I know, and so did his father. But it didn't throw the Yogyakarta keris to the chaotic order. The style was prescribed and strickly controlled, but the control was based more on 'rasa/feeling' rather than from model. It was important for both court to produce a high quality kerises, as it reflected it's cultural sophistication. Which one is better ? Both are.

The 'gramen keris', from Karsten's Krisdisk

Many of our most earnestly held beliefs are the result of a point of view.

And many earnestly held beliefs seem to generate an unwarranted degree of heat.

For more than 30 years I have been witness to very learned and very respected authorities on the keris, whose beliefs were centered around the Solo school, become vitriolic when discussing the Jogja point of view, and the level of Jogja knowledge, relating to keris.

I have had less exposure to what goes on behind closed doors in Jogja, but from the limited contact I have had, and the snide, thinly cloaked slurs I have heard from Jogja orientated people, I rather suspect the private discussion in Jogja of the Solo point of view might generate just as much slanderous comment.

I rather feel that within this discussion group we might do well not to become too involved in discussion of differences between Jogjakarta and Surakarta points of view . There is ample to criticise in both points of view, and very little to be gained from discussion of either. These are things that concern people living in Solo and Jogja:- I feel that these things need not concern us here.

As to the "spirituality" of the keris, this is something that is within the heart of the members of the society, it is not something that is dependent upon the keris, but rather something that is dependent upon the culture. Over time, the needs of a culture change:- nothing stays frozen in time, and a living culture is no different. The keris remains a part of Javanese culture, but its role in the culture now is not the same as it was 1000 years ago, nor even 500 years ago.

Yes, O'Connor wrote on the spirituality of iron working, but he was dealing with a 14th century perspective. Any culture that does not move on, and adapt, will die. As will the elements of that culture.

Some time after 1812 Raffles wrote that in Jawa the keris had assumed a position analogous to the position of the short sword in mid 18th century Europe. In other words, in the first quarter of the 19th century the keris in Jawa had become primarily an item of dress. The old literature, and inscriptions tell us that the keris was the symbol of the male. Well, in the Jawa of Raffles' time it still held its position as a male symbol, even if a somewhat diluted one. In Bali, it took another 100 years for the keris to become what it already was in Jawa in 1812.

In today's Jawa the keris is still a living part of the culture, but Javanese culture itself has lost the fundamental understanding of "tosan aji" or "wesi aji", just as it has lost the understanding of the original concept of the pusaka. Comprehensible, because in today's world , where is the necessity for such understanding?We can wring our hands and mourn the loss, or we can try our best, and in our own ways to support for a little bit longer something that we value.The keris is still a part of today's Javanese culture. Yes, its role has changed, it is no longer understood in the same way it might once have been understood.But this is true of the keris throughout its history:- it has changed its nature in accord with the demands of its society.
Rather than cry for the passing of lost values, let us accept the current framework of the society and its culture and work within it.

Several years ago I read the opinion of a professor at one of the universities in Central Jawa. He put forward the proposition that within a generation or two the Javanese language would have to all intents and purpose have disappeared, corrupted beyond recognition by Bahasa Indonesia. He predicted that before long, Javanese would become a language that would only be understood by academics.

If the primary identifier of a culture is to disappear, what hope is there for the continuance of secondary identifiers?

As students of the keris we have a unique opportunity to support the continuance of this blossom of Javanese culture. Let us provide this support, rather than mourn the loss of values that no longer exist. We cannot change a society, but if we value an element of the culture of that society, we can support that element. We can do this by attempting to gain a valid understanding of the keris and its nature, as it has moved through time, and by providing support for today's artists and artisans involved in the continuance of the keris traditions.

Dik Budhi, Pak Alan & Pal Gonjo,

if there is a collaboration amongst you, there will be a new book of keris.
all of you have opened what somebody said "ilmu sinengker" (secret knowledge).
the world of keris will thank to you and your effort, I am sure.

warm salam,
OeS

Dear Mas Boedhi,

I am Solonese, born in Solo, grown up in Solo. But yet, admire much the Jogjanese "nom-noman" (keris with "young" tangguh, Hamengku Buwanan for instance). Sri Manganti keris, (and) "ping piton" (The Seventh, to mention keris with tangguh Hamengku Buwana VII -- 1877-1921) are the ones of my admiration. You may compare with the Solonese "nom-noman" from about the same era, of Solonese Paku Buwana IX (1861-1893) or Paku Buwana X (1893-1939). I cannot describe the details, because it is a matter of "visual and rasa or feeling appreciation".

If I'm not mistaken (please correct me if I'm misled with my understanding), "nom'noman" of Hamengku Buwana style is more "mataram" style, while the Paku Buwanan are "new style" -- in form of ganja, and the whole appearance of the blade.

According to you, which Hamengku Buwanan style is more specific? The seventh? Or the older Hamengku Buwana? What is the most specific characteristic of Sri Manganti, Mas Boedhi?

Ganjawulung

Pak Ganja, you have addressed your question to Pak Boedhi, and it will interest me to see his response, however, please permit me to present my opinion as well. I emphasise that this is my opinion. I have never heard anybody else voice a similar opinion.

If we study closely the details of Jogja style blades what we find is a reflection of the Mataram style, most noticeable in the square blumbangan, but also able to be supported in the form of some other ricikan.

But with the Surakarta style, what we have is a reflection of the Majapahit style. In fact, not a "new" style, but a style pre-dating Mataram.

We are used to thinking of blades classified as Majapahit as being rather light ,but much of this fragility is the result of erosion. However, we do have examples of the direct descendants of the Majapahit form in the Banten, and the Bali forms, which are still in close to original condition.These Banten and Bali keris, although displaying ricikan which are broadly of similar style to the ricikan of Majapahit blades , are of much more substantial proportions than the Majapahit blades, primarily because they have not been subjected to ongoing erosive conditions.

The Surakarta form of keris most closely resembles the Banten and the Bali blade form. These two forms are continuations of the Majapahit form, and the Surakarta form similarly reflects a Majapahit style, just as the Jogjakarta blade form reflects a Mataram style.

The single blade feature that anchors the proportion of a blade is the blumbangan:- the form taken by the blumbangan dictates the proportions and placement of the other ricikan; get the form and proportion of the blumbangan wrong, and everything that follows will be wrong.

The blumbangan of the Surakarta blade form is a direct reflection of the Majapahit blumbangan; this same elongated blumbangan can be seen in the Banten blade form, and in the Bali blade form.

An inconsistent variation between Jogjakarta and Surakarta keris will be noted in the form of the ron dha/greneng , however, this is a superficial difference that has no effect on the form of the rest of the blade.

The Surakarta blade form is not a "new" style, rather it is a reflection of an older style of blade, a style that pre-dates Mataram.