strange javanese

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by Henk

Just like BluErf said. Gonjo is lost. Such a wavy gonjo is not uncommon, but I agree with you most gonjo's are straight.
Pamorless? I think the blade needs a cleaning and staining.

Agree too. The gonja's lost. It seems a good blade, probably with 5 luks of dhapur "pandawa lare" (five luks, with sekar kacang). It missed the "gonja wilut" (type of gonja with luks). If it is "pendawa lare", then it should have "greneng" in the end of the gonja...

I hope you won't throw the good blade away...

Ganjawulung

[A. G. Maisey]

Looks as if everybody is in agreement that the gonjo of this blade is missing.

Please accept my apologies for being a disagreeable old man.

From what I can see in the photo the form and proportion of the sorsoran is not as I would expect it if the gonjo were to be missing, additionally I have in the past owned a couple of blades that were similar to this one that were gonjo iras, not gonjo hilang.

Before I agree with everybody else, would it be possible to remove the hilt and let us have a look at the pesi, especially that part of the pesi which is close to the gonjo?

[Alam Shah]

It looks's like ganja iras to me too... There seems to be a pejetan, (the depression on the blade where the blade is held between the thumb and the fore-finger), which suggest that there is a (sort of) demarkation of the blade and from the ganja iras...

... more like 'ganja siluman' (term... does not exist)... you can see the ganja from the gandik side after that it fade into the blade, looking at the ganja profile and the pesi as Alan suggest to make it more definite.

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Well, I must agree with Pak Alan and Alam Shah, since the proportion of the sor-soran seems O.K. While it is not usual to have a ganja iras in kelap lintah, it is certainly possible. Not so 'unusual', I believe.

If the ganja was missing, then the pejetan/blumbangan will go acros the bottom end of the blade, making the neck of the ganja ('gulu meled') very thin if we see it from the cross-section view. If the pejetan deep enough then nothing we can do but to put a new ganja. 'Deep enough' in this case is simply an ordinary, well-defined pejetan. The part of pesi/tang which immediately connected to the base of the blade (where the ganja once resided) would be swollen/larger a bit, as it must have a snug-fitting to the ganja's hole. It was also protected by the ganja, so it might have the least worn-out compared to the rest of the pesi, and even more, to the rest of the blade.

Your blade, Mandaukudi, seems to have an appropriate size of gulu meled (neck). I bet for it, but would be better to see it from the top (or bottom?)/ cross-section view.

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Ganja, you could well be right, however, we do need more images of this blade before we can be too certain of anything. I think I can see a distinct blumbangan, where the palemahan gradually rises up to the gonjo. If the gonjo were missing the palemahan would continue without a rise and give a sharp fall from the tampingan. If we had an image of the top of the gonjo, looking straight down onto it, we could see if we were looking at a gonjo, or at the end of a blade that had lost its gonjo. Similarly, if we had a nice clear close-up of the pesi where it enters the gonjo we would possibly be able to see evidence of a lost gonjo.

In respect of proportion, we need to understand the various proportions that can be correct for a blade. I agree with you totally, using the blade patterns that you have provided for comparison, the wadidang is far too short in the blade under discussion, however, your examples are one type of blade, the one we are discussing is a different type of blade.

The same proportions are not always correct for all blade styles.In fact, it is fairly usual for any gonjo iras blade to have a shorter wadidang than the wadidang to be found in a keris fitted with a gonjo. This is to a large degree unavoidable, because to forge the wadidang of a gonjo iras blade to the same length as the wadidang of a blade fitted with a gonjo, is very, very difficult; you need to increase the amount of material that you can forge out to form the wadidang to an unusual thickness, and this creates considerable difficulty in forging.To assess correctness or otherwise of proportion you need to look not just a part of the blade, but at the entire blade. Then of course, we need to consider the level of skill of the maker.

In any case, what we really need is more information. Then we might be able to be a little bit definite.

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Pak Ganja, you could well be right, however, we do need more images of this blade before we can be too certain of anything. I think I can see a distinct blumbangan, where the palemahan gradually rises up to the gonjo. If the gonjo were missing the palemahan would continue without a rise and give a sharp fall from the tampingan. If we had an image of the top of the gonjo, looking straight down onto it, we could see if we were looking at a gonjo, or at the end of a blade that had lost its gonjo. Similarly, if we had a nice clear close-up of the pesi where it enters the gonjo we would possibly be able to see evidence of a lost gonjo.

In respect of proportion, we need to understand the various proportions that can be correct for a blade. I agree with you totally, using the blade patterns that you have provided for comparison, the wadidang is far too short in the blade under discussion, however, your examples are one type of blade, the one we are discussing is a different type of blade.

The same proportions are not always correct for all blade styles.In fact, it is fairly usual for any gonjo iras blade to have a shorter wadidang than the wadidang to be found in a keris fitted with a gonjo. This is to a large degree unavoidable, because to forge the wadidang of a gonjo iras blade to the same length as the wadidang of a blade fitted with a gonjo, is very, very difficult; you need to increase the amount of material that you can forge out to form the wadidang to an unusual thickness, and this creates considerable difficulty in forging.To assess correctness or otherwise of proportion you need to look not just a part of the blade, but at the entire blade. Then of course, we need to consider the level of skill of the maker.

In any case, what we really need is more information. Then we might be able to be a little bit definite.

Hi Guy's ,

thanks for all comments! wow I'm impressed by all that knowledge!
The keris is somewhere between USA and the Netherlands now , as soon as its arrived I can list better pics.I only have this vague pics from the seller.

Arjan.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

In respect of proportion, we need to understand the various proportions that can be correct for a blade. I agree with you totally, using the blade patterns that you have provided for comparison, the wadidang is far too short in the blade under discussion, however, your examples are one type of blade, the one we are discussing is a different type of blade.

Yes Alan, they are not the right comparison. I just want to show the "sor'soran" part of a five luks keris with sekar kacang, and also the other example on keris with ganja "kelap lintah" (not wilut as I just said, I think). Of course, not ganja iras type as we are discussing... Keris with ganja "with luks" is not uncommon...

Ganjawulung

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

Well, I must agree with Pak Alan and Alam Shah, since the proportion of the sor-soran seems O.K. While it is not usual to have a ganja iras in kelap lintah, it is certainly possible. Not so 'unusual', I believe.

Dear Mas Boedhi,

Ganja "kelap lintah", or "wilut"? Or both are the same? These pictures are from Mr Bambang Harsri...

Ganjawulung

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Originally Posted by ganjawulung

Dear Mas Boedhi,

Ganja "kelap lintah", or "wilut"? Or both are the same? These pictures are from Mr Bambang Harsri...

Ganjawulung

Or "dungkul" ? Oh, well... I've read many books discussing ganja's types, and sometimes they didn't agree one another. BTW, which one is the distinct character of "kelap lintah" : the curled-end, or the 'double curve/undulation'? I have a ganja with double undulation, but without the curl. Should I call it wilut or kelap lintah ?

But strictly speaking, yes, according to Bambang Harsrinuksmo, the ganja we discuss is ganja wilut. Kelap lintah and wilut (and dungkul) are different forms of ganja. Which one is the distinct character of each types, some authors have different opinions. My previous post wasn't in accord with any specific opinion, and use 'kelap lintah' as a generic terminology which is commonly used to define any undulating ganja.

If I'm not mistaken, kelap lintah and dungkul are also the names of dhapur. One of them (or both ?) is five luks.

Let's wait for another picture(s) from mandukudi

[A. G. Maisey]

I reckon I'm with you on this one Pak Boedhi.

I only ever heard kelap lintah used by anybody for waved gonjos for years and years.

Then a few years back I started to see all these other names in print, but all the people I knew still called all the waved gonjos of whatever type, "kelap lintah".

I think that probably "kelap lintah" has become the generic---or maybe was always the generic, and those extremely knowledgeable experts---one of which I am not--- delight in using other names to distinguish one type of waved gonjo from another. Of course, this tends to become a little bit confusing when many of these experts are unable to agree on what is "correct", and what is not.

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

Or "dungkul" ? Oh, well... I've read many books discussing ganja's types, and sometimes they didn't agree one another. BTW, which one is the distinct character of "kelap lintah" : the curled-end, or the 'double curve/undulation'? I have a ganja with double undulation, but without the curl. Should I call it wilut or kelap lintah ?

But strictly speaking, yes, according to Bambang Harsrinuksmo, the ganja we discuss is ganja wilut. Kelap lintah and wilut (and dungkul) are different forms of ganja. Which one is the distinct character of each types, some authors have different opinions. My previous post wasn't in accord with any specific opinion, and use 'kelap lintah' as a generic terminology which is commonly used to define any undulating ganja.

If I'm not mistaken, kelap lintah and dungkul are also the names of dhapur. One of them (or both ?) is five luks.

Dear Mas Boedhi,

The distinction is probably based on the undulation of ganja's side view. Mr Moebirman in his book "Keris Senjata Pusaka" (Keris, Heirloom Weapon, 1970) only differed in two forms: (1) dungkul or dhungkul -- curved ganja, (2) ganja leser -- flat ganja. Mr Moebirman also mentioned -- ganja sebit lontar (not ron tal -- or tal leaf as Mr Haryono Guritno)

But Mr Haryono Guritno in "Keris Jawa Antara Mistik dan Nalar" (2005) gave more details than Moebirman and also Bambang Harsrinuksmo, differing into 5 forms: (1) ganja sebit ron tal -- curved like tal or fan palm's leaf, (2) ganja wilut -- I supposed means "welut" or eel in English, (3) ganja dhungkul -- I don't know the litterally meaning of dhungkul, (4) ganja kelab -- not kelap -- lintah, the moving of leech.., (5) ganja sepang -- I don't have the litterally word for sepang.

Haryono Guritno also differentiate the forms from upper or bottom view of ganjas (please look at second picture): (1) nguceng mati -- dead little fish, (2) nyebit ron tal -- or like torn fan-palm leaf, (3) nyirah cecak -- like small house lizard's head, (4) nyangkem kodok -- like frog's mouth, (5) nyirah tekek -- like big house lizard's head.

It ought to be a visual discussion...

Ganjawulung

[Mytribalworld]

Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya

Well, I must agree with Pak Alan and Alam Shah, since the proportion of the sor-soran seems O.K. While it is not usual to have a ganja iras in kelap lintah, it is certainly possible. Not so 'unusual', I believe.

If the ganja was missing, then the pejetan/blumbangan will go acros the bottom end of the blade, making the neck of the ganja ('gulu meled') very thin if we see it from the cross-section view. If the pejetan deep enough then nothing we can do but to put a new ganja. 'Deep enough' in this case is simply an ordinary, well-defined pejetan. The part of pesi/tang which immediately connected to the base of the blade (where the ganja once resided) would be swollen/larger a bit, as it must have a snug-fitting to the ganja's hole. It was also protected by the ganja, so it might have the least worn-out compared to the rest of the pesi, and even more, to the rest of the blade.

Your blade, Mandaukudi, seems to have an appropriate size of gulu meled (neck). I bet for it, but would be better to see it from the top (or bottom?)/ cross-section view.

After some trouble with our local customs ( that should be a thread worth on his own) the keris has arrived.
Strange object and the worse nightmare too see how "someone" has tried to glue the wranka , one thick bunch of hardened glue in there.
the wranka is not the original, or maybe worse, It seems that someone tried to file out the hole because with a those glue it didn't fit quite well!!!!
Silverwork sarong totallt destroyed by the "restore-expert:

The blade seems to me , but I'm no expert, no "missing ganja" type.
there's no thick lower part of the peksi and the patina shows good on the end of the blade.

It good be a compilated piece but why did they leave the pure gold mendak with semi-precious stones on it?

sorry for the bad pics I will try to make better ones.

[A. G. Maisey]

Not a bad keris. It is 100% restorable, and none of the restoration is difficult. If the pendok is too far gone to do anything with you might need a new one, but that's no big deal.

Gold mendak?

Tested?

Depending on what you paid, you might have had a win here.

Yeah---not a bad keris.

Incidentally, this is definitely gonjo iras. No doubt at all.

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Thank you, Mandaukudi, for posting additional pictures. Definitely, the mistery solved. You're very lucky getting those gold mendak! Test it thoroughly, though, as the balls might be made of gold, but the middle part might be not. I hope you really have a gold mendak.

Good luck!

Boedhi Adhitya

[ganjawulung]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Looks as if everybody is in agreement that the gonjo of this blade is missing.

Please accept my apologies for being a disagreeable old man.

From what I can see in the photo the form and proportion of the sorsoran is not as I would expect it if the gonjo were to be missing, additionally I have in the past owned a couple of blades that were similar to this one that were gonjo iras, not gonjo hilang.

Before I agree with everybody else, would it be possible to remove the hilt and let us have a look at the pesi, especially that part of the pesi which is close to the gonjo?

Originally Posted by Alam Shah

It looks's like ganja iras to me too... There seems to be a pejetan, (the depression on the blade where the blade is held between the thumb and the fore-finger), which suggest that there is a (sort of) demarkation of the blade and from the ganja iras...

... more like 'ganja siluman' (term... does not exist)... you can see the ganja from the gandik side after that it fade into the blade, looking at the ganja profile and the pesi as Alan suggest to make it more definite.

(1) The form of wadidang (the tail) is too short to be an iras type. Please compare to these pictures of five luks with sekar kacang, though not iras type, nor wilut type of ganja. And also the wilut type of 7 luks keris. Pls regard the proportion of the tail and also the gandhik. (2) The form of the wadidang's curve, seems like the end of a tail. (3) Five luks, iras tipe with no greneng? What should you call the dapur then? (4) The dubious one is the "blumbangan" or "pejetan". Is it original? One of the clue answer is here, I think...

Ganjawulung