Another Surakarta Keris

JustYS · 9th January 2024, 12:10 AM

Thank you Gavin.

Thank you Alan for your explanations.

No worries Kai. I dont know who crafted the pendok, but I dont think it was crafted by Pak Dayadi. It was crafted very recently.

Another question regarding dhapur of this Keris (similar to Condhong Campur but missing one lambe Gajah). From the copy Dhapur 1920 book that I have, it exists dhapur Condhong Campur (A), but I could not find Condhong Campur (B). Anybody knows if it exists another variant of Condhong Campur or the (A) in my copy was a typo error?

jagabuwana · 9th January 2024, 05:59 AM

Happy new year JustYS and all reading.

A very nice keris indeed. Thank you for sharing.

A. G. Maisey · 9th January 2024, 07:26 AM

YS, I have the same publication, on P.24 we have the straight version of Condong Campur (A), underneath that text in faint almost invisible print we have: (B)= keluk 7, hal. 54.

So we have a look at page 54, and hey presto --- a 7 luk version.

If we look at EK, the characteristics of Condong Campur vary a bit, and the 7 luk version is not mentioned.

If we look at KJ (ie, HH) we find that HH lists a CC lurus & a CC luk 7.

The simple fact of the matter is that all this stuff about what is and what is not correct terminology is only good if we quote the source that we have drawn upon. As with many things in Jawa, & I guess Indonesia in general, things are not graven in stone.

David · 9th January 2024, 04:42 PM

This is, of course, a completely different dhapur, but i am adding it here for another example of a modern era keris with pamor wengkon. If i am not mistaken i believe this would qualify as wengkon isen as it is wengkon with another pamor contained within its border. I believe this has a fairly well controlled wengkon.

A. G. Maisey · 9th January 2024, 07:27 PM

I have not heard of pamor wengkon isen.

It does not appear in EK, nor in KJ. In fact in KJ, HH calls pamor wengkon "pamor tepen", another term I have not heard used in Solo.

The word "isen" comes from "isi" = "contents", "isen" is normally used as "isen-isen", again meaning "contents", so "wengkon isen" is actually a description, not a name.

HH's name for pamor wengkon, ie, "pamor tepen", I find to be very peculiar, because "tepen" means "a decorative border".

In Solo, I have only ever heard pamor wengkon referred to as "pamor wengkon", and when another pamor is found within the border of the wengkon it would be referred to by its name, in the case of David's fine example, this would be "pamor wengkon and kuta mesir", again, a description, not a name, but a description that names the two component pamor motifs.

Keris terminology varies all over the place, broadly, it is not fixed, and I personally believe a lot of keris terminology these days has been made up to cover lack of knowledge or to satisfy the needs of a person or group.

David · 9th January 2024, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Keris terminology varies all over the place, broadly, it is not fixed, and I personally believe a lot of keris terminology these days has been made up to cover lack of knowledge or to satisfy the needs of a person or group.

Thanks Alan, i am sure quite a lot of names have been made up in the keris world just in the past few years. I had heard the term "wengkon isen" elsewhere before this thread and it does seem to be a fair descriptor for a pamor held within a wengkon pamor. But i am just as pleased to refer to my keris as "wengkon kuta mesir" as well, which would be more specific. I used the term here mostly because JustYS had asked about above.

A. G. Maisey · 9th January 2024, 11:41 PM

David, when I saw it used as a name, & not as a descriptor, I googled it, and I got a lot of hits, so, within the collector community it now apparently in common usage.

My point in commenting at all was just to reiterate what I've been saying for years:- there really is no "standard" terminology, yeah, there can be terms that are overall, pretty generally used, but to say one thing is right & another thing is wrong, is now, & probably always has been not really in synch with the real world.

HH with his "pamor tepen" points this up too. To my mind it is absolutely incorrect, it is not something I've ever heard used for pamor wengkon, & when we consider the Javanese meaning, it is just out & out wrong. But HH was real big in the collector world, so who am I to argue with him? He might have made it up himself, or he might have heard it somewhere or other & liked it.

I reckon we need to stay fairly open minded where keris terminology is concerned.

Gavin Nugent · 9th January 2024, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

This is, of course, a completely different dhapur, .

.
Personally I'm not a fan of the overall profiles at the base and gonjo, I do really like the contrast and pamor within this blade though, very smart looking.
Appreciation for what the artist has done with the metals and finish is deserved.

It looks somewhat like a long flowing Wayang profile seen within the top layers of spiral turns in that central block. Something one may consider auspicious.

JustYS · 10th January 2024, 09:34 AM

Thank you Jagabuwana.

Thank you for your answer Alan, it seems that my Dhapur copy is incomplete.

In Luk 7 section I only have: Sempana Panjul, Carubuk, Sempana Bungkem, Sepokal (A), Murda Malela, Kidang Soka, Jaran Guyang, Panji Semedi and Naga Keras.

What a gorgeous Keris David.

Gustav · 10th January 2024, 10:28 AM

Regarding Pamor Wengkon:

Winter, who came from an old family of translators at the Keraton of Surakarta, uses the name Pamor Wengkon in his 1871 book, apparently for a true Pamor Wengkon.

Groneman uses the name Pamor Tepi for a Mlumah border, inside of which there is contained another Pamor. He doesn't mention a "pure" Wengkon. Groneman's information comes mainly from Yogyakarta.

Jasper&Mas Pirngadie mention Pamor Tepi exactly the same way as Groneman, they possibly took it over from Groneman, as they did with Winter's Wengkon, mentioning the source.

Actually HH in his book uses both terms, Tepen and Wengkon.

The possibilities are

1) name Pamor Tepi was used only for Wengkon containing another Pamor within its border, perhaps only in Yogayakarta;

2) name Pamor Tepi was used in Yogyakarta, Pamor Wengkon in Surakarta for the same Pamor, including "pure" Pamor Wengkon.

9th January 2024, 04:42 PM	#4
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,047	This is, of course, a completely different dhapur, but i am adding it here for another example of a modern era keris with pamor wengkon. If i am not mistaken i believe this would qualify as wengkon isen as it is wengkon with another pamor contained within its border. I believe this has a fairly well controlled wengkon. Attached Images

9th January 2024, 12:10 AM	#1
JustYS Member Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 128	Thank you Gavin. Thank you Alan for your explanations. No worries Kai. I dont know who crafted the pendok, but I dont think it was crafted by Pak Dayadi. It was crafted very recently. Another question regarding dhapur of this Keris (similar to Condhong Campur but missing one lambe Gajah). From the copy Dhapur 1920 book that I have, it exists dhapur Condhong Campur (A), but I could not find Condhong Campur (B). Anybody knows if it exists another variant of Condhong Campur or the (A) in my copy was a typo error?

9th January 2024, 05:59 AM	#2
jagabuwana Member Join Date: Jan 2018 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 277	Happy new year JustYS and all reading. A very nice keris indeed. Thank you for sharing.

9th January 2024, 07:26 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,736	YS, I have the same publication, on P.24 we have the straight version of Condong Campur (A), underneath that text in faint almost invisible print we have: (B)= keluk 7, hal. 54. So we have a look at page 54, and hey presto --- a 7 luk version. If we look at EK, the characteristics of Condong Campur vary a bit, and the 7 luk version is not mentioned. If we look at KJ (ie, HH) we find that HH lists a CC lurus & a CC luk 7. The simple fact of the matter is that all this stuff about what is and what is not correct terminology is only good if we quote the source that we have drawn upon. As with many things in Jawa, & I guess Indonesia in general, things are not graven in stone.

9th January 2024, 07:27 PM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,736	I have not heard of pamor wengkon isen. It does not appear in EK, nor in KJ. In fact in KJ, HH calls pamor wengkon "pamor tepen", another term I have not heard used in Solo. The word "isen" comes from "isi" = "contents", "isen" is normally used as "isen-isen", again meaning "contents", so "wengkon isen" is actually a description, not a name. HH's name for pamor wengkon, ie, "pamor tepen", I find to be very peculiar, because "tepen" means "a decorative border". In Solo, I have only ever heard pamor wengkon referred to as "pamor wengkon", and when another pamor is found within the border of the wengkon it would be referred to by its name, in the case of David's fine example, this would be "pamor wengkon and kuta mesir", again, a description, not a name, but a description that names the two component pamor motifs. Keris terminology varies all over the place, broadly, it is not fixed, and I personally believe a lot of keris terminology these days has been made up to cover lack of knowledge or to satisfy the needs of a person or group.

9th January 2024, 11:41 PM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,736	David, when I saw it used as a name, & not as a descriptor, I googled it, and I got a lot of hits, so, within the collector community it now apparently in common usage. My point in commenting at all was just to reiterate what I've been saying for years:- there really is no "standard" terminology, yeah, there can be terms that are overall, pretty generally used, but to say one thing is right & another thing is wrong, is now, & probably always has been not really in synch with the real world. HH with his "pamor tepen" points this up too. To my mind it is absolutely incorrect, it is not something I've ever heard used for pamor wengkon, & when we consider the Javanese meaning, it is just out & out wrong. But HH was real big in the collector world, so who am I to argue with him? He might have made it up himself, or he might have heard it somewhere or other & liked it. I reckon we need to stay fairly open minded where keris terminology is concerned.

10th January 2024, 09:34 AM	#9
JustYS Member Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 128	Thank you Jagabuwana. Thank you for your answer Alan, it seems that my Dhapur copy is incomplete. In Luk 7 section I only have: Sempana Panjul, Carubuk, Sempana Bungkem, Sepokal (A), Murda Malela, Kidang Soka, Jaran Guyang, Panji Semedi and Naga Keras. What a gorgeous Keris David.

10th January 2024, 10:28 AM	#10
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,202	Regarding Pamor Wengkon: Winter, who came from an old family of translators at the Keraton of Surakarta, uses the name Pamor Wengkon in his 1871 book, apparently for a true Pamor Wengkon. Groneman uses the name Pamor Tepi for a Mlumah border, inside of which there is contained another Pamor. He doesn't mention a "pure" Wengkon. Groneman's information comes mainly from Yogyakarta. Jasper&Mas Pirngadie mention Pamor Tepi exactly the same way as Groneman, they possibly took it over from Groneman, as they did with Winter's Wengkon, mentioning the source. Actually HH in his book uses both terms, Tepen and Wengkon. The possibilities are 1) name Pamor Tepi was used only for Wengkon containing another Pamor within its border, perhaps only in Yogayakarta; 2) name Pamor Tepi was used in Yogyakarta, Pamor Wengkon in Surakarta for the same Pamor, including "pure" Pamor Wengkon.