New Made keris, dhapur Mundarang

A. G. Maisey · 25th June 2009, 10:16 AM

It is far too difficult to comment on age from photos Ferry.

Yes, sometimes it is possible if you see certain distinct stylistic characteristics, but in the case of your keris I would not presume to comment on age unless it were in my hand.

Ferry, in respect "the keris community in Indonesia".

Which keris community?

Over the time I have been visiting Indonesia I have noted that there is not one single, homogenous keris community, but rather a number of keris communities. The people within these communities sometimes may share a common opinion about some things, but on many other things opinions will vary from community to community and even between individual people within a community.However, variation can usually be modified within a keris group by presence of the well documented Javanese heirarchical principles, with the end result that a concensus is reached within that community which has been determined by the heirarchy within the community.

I feel that perhaps I have failed to make myself clear.

My point is not that the ricikan of this keris do not agree with the ricikan for mundharang as noted in the Surakarta Pakem.

My point is that the ricikan as noted in the Surakarta Pakem is the documentation of what is acceptable by Surakarta Karaton standards.

Keris art is karaton art.

The karaton has the obligation and the right to define the standards that apply to its art.

This keris does not conform to Surakarta Karaton standards, even though stylisticly it is a Surakarta keris..

That is my point.

However, it is still a fine keris, and if you tell me that it does comply with the requirements for a mundharang according to some authority other than the Surakarta Karaton, I of course accept that.

It is not necessary to actually hold a karaton keris to be able to apply the presence of ricikan to determine a dhapur. A dhapur must comply with certain set parameters, and cannot move outside those parameters, if the dhapur is given in accordance with the pakem that is the point of reference.

However, if we disregard what is set down in a pakem, of course we can all form our own opinion as to what is correct and what is not.Regretably, my own instruction did not permit me that latitude:- I was told that where a karaton standard exists in respect of something, that standard must be followed.

Ferry, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions.

I have already said that I personally hold no opinion in respect of this keris. My knowledge and experience is insufficient to allow me to challenge that which is set down in a Karaton Pakem, and that which my teacher accepted as immovable.

However, I acknowledge completely your right to hold whatever opinion you wish.

Ferry, I've just noticed something in this keris of yours that I did not previously see,

Tell me, what shape is the blumbangan?

Is it boto adeg or is it more or less square?

It is difficult to be sure about this from a photo because a slight difference in angle can alter the result in the photo.

25th June 2009, 10:16 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	It is far too difficult to comment on age from photos Ferry. Yes, sometimes it is possible if you see certain distinct stylistic characteristics, but in the case of your keris I would not presume to comment on age unless it were in my hand. Ferry, in respect "the keris community in Indonesia". Which keris community? Over the time I have been visiting Indonesia I have noted that there is not one single, homogenous keris community, but rather a number of keris communities. The people within these communities sometimes may share a common opinion about some things, but on many other things opinions will vary from community to community and even between individual people within a community.However, variation can usually be modified within a keris group by presence of the well documented Javanese heirarchical principles, with the end result that a concensus is reached within that community which has been determined by the heirarchy within the community. I feel that perhaps I have failed to make myself clear. My point is not that the ricikan of this keris do not agree with the ricikan for mundharang as noted in the Surakarta Pakem. My point is that the ricikan as noted in the Surakarta Pakem is the documentation of what is acceptable by Surakarta Karaton standards. Keris art is karaton art. The karaton has the obligation and the right to define the standards that apply to its art. This keris does not conform to Surakarta Karaton standards, even though stylisticly it is a Surakarta keris.. That is my point. However, it is still a fine keris, and if you tell me that it does comply with the requirements for a mundharang according to some authority other than the Surakarta Karaton, I of course accept that. It is not necessary to actually hold a karaton keris to be able to apply the presence of ricikan to determine a dhapur. A dhapur must comply with certain set parameters, and cannot move outside those parameters, if the dhapur is given in accordance with the pakem that is the point of reference. However, if we disregard what is set down in a pakem, of course we can all form our own opinion as to what is correct and what is not.Regretably, my own instruction did not permit me that latitude:- I was told that where a karaton standard exists in respect of something, that standard must be followed. Ferry, we are all entitled to hold our own opinions. I have already said that I personally hold no opinion in respect of this keris. My knowledge and experience is insufficient to allow me to challenge that which is set down in a Karaton Pakem, and that which my teacher accepted as immovable. However, I acknowledge completely your right to hold whatever opinion you wish. Ferry, I've just noticed something in this keris of yours that I did not previously see, Tell me, what shape is the blumbangan? Is it boto adeg or is it more or less square? It is difficult to be sure about this from a photo because a slight difference in angle can alter the result in the photo.