Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

A. G. Maisey · 14th May 2011, 11:27 PM

I thank you Semar for opening this thread.

You have provided a very good example to demonstrate the point I have made in an earlier thread in respect of the lack of relevance of the name applied to the dhapur of a keris.

Your keris has a long gandhik and ac kembang kacang, as well as 7 luk.

Two experienced keris collectors seem to have reached agreement that the dhapur is kebo teki, but with 7 luk, and as Jean has pointed out, kebo teki is listed as a straight blade in at least one pakem.

Now let us look at this question.

In the well known Surakarta Pakem we have kebo teki shown. The ricikan are:-

three lambe gajah jalen kembang kacang greneng

the gandhik is very marginally longer than a normal sized gandhik

when considering dhapur of "kebo" type, we need to also consider dhapur of "mahesa" type; mahesa and kebo have the same meaning.

In Harsrinuksmo we can find Mahesa Teki.

Mahesa Teki is cross referenced to Kebo Teki in this reference. It should be, as it has the same meaning.

Harsrinuksmo shows a keris with a gandhik perhaps 4 or 5 times the length of a normal gandhik, and with no kembang kacang, no lambe gajah, no jalen, no greneng.This is what he knew as kebo teki.

Interesting.

But maybe we can consider one of the other keris in the kebo and mahesa group as a candidate.

Harsinuksmo lists 7 keris as "mahesa something or other", and 6 keris as "kebo something or other"; some of these overlap because of cross reference.

In Harsrinuksmo one keris is shown that is similar to Semar's keris, and that is Kebo Giri, however, Kebo Giri has a straight blade.

OK, maybe the Surakarta Pakem will help us, so let's have a look at it:-

kebo lajer, kebo dungkul, kebo dhendheng, kebo teki, mahesa nempuh (3 luk), kebo tedan (5 luk), kebo dhengan (5 luk), mahesa nyabrang (15 luk).

Regrettably no blade with a kebo or mahesa designation that has similar form to Semar's keris, and additionally, no 7 luk keris that has similar form.

Several of the illustrations for the forms I have listed above are missing from the copy of the pakem I have in front of me, I do have a complete photographic record of the original of this pakem, and will look at the forms I have not yet seen as soon as I get the opportunity.

However, we are looking at a keris here that definitely has some age and appears to have been made by a competent maker.

So the question arises:-

was the maker wrong, or are the pakems wrong?

or perhaps the pakem that the maker was using has been lost?

If we become involved with the name game we are simply doing the work of a junior clerk or a storeman:- identify, label, record, pigeonhole.

The time spent on this endless and fruitless search for names could be much better spent in study of methods of manufacture and relevant social and cultural questions, or even in an attempt to try to understand the way in which keris quality is appraised.

There is an enormous amount of knowledge that can be pursued outside the mind deadening waste of time that is the Name Game.

14th May 2011, 11:27 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,704	I thank you Semar for opening this thread. You have provided a very good example to demonstrate the point I have made in an earlier thread in respect of the lack of relevance of the name applied to the dhapur of a keris. Your keris has a long gandhik and ac kembang kacang, as well as 7 luk. Two experienced keris collectors seem to have reached agreement that the dhapur is kebo teki, but with 7 luk, and as Jean has pointed out, kebo teki is listed as a straight blade in at least one pakem. Now let us look at this question. In the well known Surakarta Pakem we have kebo teki shown. The ricikan are:- three lambe gajah jalen kembang kacang greneng the gandhik is very marginally longer than a normal sized gandhik when considering dhapur of "kebo" type, we need to also consider dhapur of "mahesa" type; mahesa and kebo have the same meaning. In Harsrinuksmo we can find Mahesa Teki. Mahesa Teki is cross referenced to Kebo Teki in this reference. It should be, as it has the same meaning. Harsrinuksmo shows a keris with a gandhik perhaps 4 or 5 times the length of a normal gandhik, and with no kembang kacang, no lambe gajah, no jalen, no greneng.This is what he knew as kebo teki. Interesting. But maybe we can consider one of the other keris in the kebo and mahesa group as a candidate. Harsinuksmo lists 7 keris as "mahesa something or other", and 6 keris as "kebo something or other"; some of these overlap because of cross reference. In Harsrinuksmo one keris is shown that is similar to Semar's keris, and that is Kebo Giri, however, Kebo Giri has a straight blade. OK, maybe the Surakarta Pakem will help us, so let's have a look at it:- kebo lajer, kebo dungkul, kebo dhendheng, kebo teki, mahesa nempuh (3 luk), kebo tedan (5 luk), kebo dhengan (5 luk), mahesa nyabrang (15 luk). Regrettably no blade with a kebo or mahesa designation that has similar form to Semar's keris, and additionally, no 7 luk keris that has similar form. Several of the illustrations for the forms I have listed above are missing from the copy of the pakem I have in front of me, I do have a complete photographic record of the original of this pakem, and will look at the forms I have not yet seen as soon as I get the opportunity. However, we are looking at a keris here that definitely has some age and appears to have been made by a competent maker. So the question arises:- was the maker wrong, or are the pakems wrong? or perhaps the pakem that the maker was using has been lost? If we become involved with the name game we are simply doing the work of a junior clerk or a storeman:- identify, label, record, pigeonhole. The time spent on this endless and fruitless search for names could be much better spent in study of methods of manufacture and relevant social and cultural questions, or even in an attempt to try to understand the way in which keris quality is appraised. There is an enormous amount of knowledge that can be pursued outside the mind deadening waste of time that is the Name Game.