pamor wengkon

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Thank you for sharing your opinion with us Pak Boedhi.

It is certain the telaga ngembeng ( membeng, membleng) is a well recognised pamor, however, in my understanding it is an accidental pamor (pamor tiban), it cannot be an intentionally made pamor, and it cannot be created by the insertion of a piece of coiled pamor.

Looking at Marco's blade I am uncertain if this effect has been created by insertion of a separate piece of pamor or not.

In the example posted by Gustav, it is clear that the lake is formed by pamor already within the body of the blade, however, the exposure of this pamor is so perfect that I doubt it is an accidental exposure.

I accept that different interpretations of pamor motifs exist, and I accept that what you have posted is your understanding of what constitutes pamor tlaga membeng.

Sorry for being late on replying your post, Pak Alan. When you travel abroad through 5 countries in 3 weeks, you may have something else as your top priorities. Packing and unpacking for sure

Well, as you've said, Tlaga Membeng is a well-recognized pamor. Thus I wonder why no one suggests it for it's name.

Tlaga Membeng simply described as several concentric circles lines pamor which reside inside the blumbangan. To make it happens, it takes two conditions : several layers of paralel pamor deep enough inside blumbangan, and a bowl-shaped blumbangan. Both are controlable. In fact, bowl-shaped blumbangan not that common, so some "engineering" must be taken to make a tlaga membeng. Yet, many peoples think it is a tiban pamor. On some might be, but on the others, I think not.

Regading "Tiban", it is a rather obscure. For example, we always think that Udan Mas pamor is a rekan pamor. But some peoples said, there is a tiban udan mas, and it is the best udan mas. And I've seen some blades with tiban udan mas pamor on particular blades. It's pattern and layering is as such that it is almost impossible to make it intentionally. On the contrary, we always think Raja Gundala pamor is a tiban ones. But I know a blade which belongs to notable keris expert in Surakarta which carries obviously made intentionally by the smith, and it is an old blade. Yet, the owner still called it Raja Gundala. Thus, I see tiban as an option. Surely, you don't have tiban blarak sineret or tiban ron gendhuru.

When I first make a post in this thread, I've never handled Marco's blade before. But last week, Marco showed me the blade, and I asure you it is not made by inserting a piece of coiled pamor. And anyway, tlaga membeng pattern isn't the coiled one. As I've written before, it is made by precise cutting of blumbangan into a bowl shaped, and the bottom of the bowl just touching the wengkon layers (which is parallel to the blade), thus exposing it as a several concentric circle lines.

Penangsang II,
As far as I understand it, tayuh is never really an important factor to appraise keris according to Yogyakarta Court Standart. The first is historical background behind the blades. Then, the workmanship.

I hope I make myself clear.



Best Regards,

Boedhi Adhitya

[A. G. Maisey]

Pak Boedhi, although telaga ngembleng is a well known pamor, possibly it depends upon where one lives as to how well known it is. I myself was reluctant to suggest it, because on my screen I simply could not see sufficient detail to know if I was looking at a puser or at telaga ngembleng.You have now confirmed that this effect in Marco's blade has not been formed by the insertion of a coil, and I thank you for that.

In respect of the classification of any particular pamor as exclusively an accidental, or an intentional pamor, I have no particular inclination to debate this point. Opinions in this matter vary. I personally am receptive to all opinions of this nature, and do not favour one over another.

As with many things in life, it all depends upon which school one attended.

My understanding remains that telaga ngembleng is an accidental pamor, but this is only because the bulk of opinion that I have encountered in respect of this pamor motif has been that it is an accidental pamor, and may not be intentionally formed.

As I noted in my earlier post:-

I accept that different interpretations of pamor motifs exist, and I accept that what you have posted is your understanding of what constitutes pamor tlaga membeng.

In these matters we are all permitted our own opinion.

[David]

Sorry to revive this old thread, but i was searching for something else and happened upon it and it raised the question in my head. If this pamor motif on this keris is not kul buntet, what would folks be calling it? Thanks!

[Gustav]

.

[A. G. Maisey]

David, I read this as a square, or at least as intended to be a square, thus it is Kuto Mesir, or Kutu Masir.

In terms of talismanic value it can be regarded as being similar to Kul Buntet, but as having a stronger force.

[SidJ]

That is a superb looking keris at #26! Do you have the full image?

[David]

Here you go Sid.