Another Surakarta Keris

[JustYS]

Another Kamardikan Surakarta Keris for your comments.

Happy New Year to all.

[kai]

Hello YS,

Thanks for posting - looks like a recent piece to me.

I don't think this blade should be hold to keraton standards. One general question regarding the wengkon pamor though: Would the sogokan/kruwingan carving biting into the wengkon layer be considered a flaw for high-end keris? Or would an even exposure be the main goal aimed for?

Regards,
Kai

[A. G. Maisey]

Kai, Jaga did say that it is kamardikan, so yeah, it is recent, & he did not claim that it is "high end", Javanese high end starts a lot further up the dollar ladder than I think this keris might have cost Jaga.

But this keris is certainly within Surakarta parameters.

The dress is very fine, the blade has been made to a high standard.

Exposure of pamor within the sogokan is something that depends upon the method used to weld the blade, it has nothing at all to do with any evaluation of quality, however, the exposure of pamor within the body of the blade is something that would have been better avoided if possible.

The absolute ideal for pamor wengkon is that the wengkon line follows the blade edge & pamor is not exposed in the kruwingan, however, this ideal is seldom met. Back in the 1980's & 1990's it was pretty well known that only one currently working pande was consistently capable to meeting this very high level of excellence. The ideal is not even exposure of the pamor, except when that pamor is wos wutah wengkon, the ideal when the pamor is only wengkon is non exposure of the pamor in the kruwingen. Very few makers have ever been capable of this. Jayasukadgo could achieve this standard, but Jayasukadgo work is very, very distant from any kamardikan work, & in fact from the work of most other makers of any era.

All blades need to be appraised in accordance with the standards that apply to the particular classification of blade.

If we are talking Kamardikan & we are talking Surakarta Karaton, then only two makers really qualify for appraisal of their work in accordance with those Karaton standards, those two makers are Empu Suparman Supowijoyo, and Pande Keris Seni Pauzan Pusposukadgo.

Yes, since the passing of Susuhunan Pakubuwana XII a couple of other makers have been accepted as members of the Surakarta Karaton hierarchy, but it is perhaps wise not to get involved in discussion about this.

[Gavin Nugent]

As my knowledge on the subject is only superficial, all I can add that from a visual appreciation, to me, this is very beautiful and very well balanced in all aspects....and that pendok, I love it!

Well done and congratulations, one for future generations, thanks for sharing.

[JustYS]

Hi Kai,

Yes I know it is recent, hence I said Kamardikan.

I might have confused you by saying Surakarta Kamardikan, but I have under no illusion that my Keris is Keraton Surakarta Keris quality, what I meant is (like Alan also said), it has Surakarta parameters.

This Keris was made by probably the last still active “anak-anak” ASKI or at least from his besalen.

Hi Alan,

I think you might have confused me with Jagabuwana…..hehehe

Could you please kindly explain what is the difference between pamor wengkon wow wutah and pamor wengkon isen?

Thank you.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yeah, I did --- get confused I mean.

Like they say:- speed kills.

Where the only pamor visible is the line that follows the edge, this is Pamor Wengkon, most pamor wengkon blades are made without any carved characteristics, like kruwingan & etc, they are usually dhapur brojol, or at best Tilam Upih.

When a blade is made with Pamor Wengkon, & it has deep kruwingan & etc, it is a blade that has been made in a way that went out of use a long time ago, by providing a body of plain iron, then inletting a steel edge, and laying down the pamor to follow the edge & then placing plain iron over it. When a blade has been made this way, there is no side to side layer of pamor, & you can go into it as deep as you like and not find pamor. But as I said, people have not made blades like this in more than maybe 200 years, it was simply too hard.

When a blade is made with a wengkon, sometimes that wengkon will be overlaid with another pamor, which is usually Wos Wutah, but depending on the skill of the maker, other more complex pamor motifs might also be used.

Gavin, yes, that pendok is an extremely fine piece of work.

[kai]

Thanks for all your responses!

Apologies, YS, for my terse comment (I was trying to refer to later kamardikan, probably around turn of the century?) and for sidetracking things with my more general question.

Yes, the fittings are crafted in very fine quality. I suppose the pendok got crafted by pak Dayadi. Congrats, YS!

While pamor wengkon may look simple, I realise that is extremely tough to get perfect. Thus, I was trying to obtain clarification on the goal any high-level smith would be expected to strive for. Thanks, Alan, for answering my question and adding details on bladesmithing methods!

Regards,
Kai

[JustYS]

Thank you Gavin.

Thank you Alan for your explanations.

No worries Kai. I donÂ’t know who crafted the pendok, but I donÂ’t 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]

Happy new year JustYS and all reading.

A very nice keris indeed. Thank you for sharing.

[A. G. Maisey]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Gustav]

And in Gronemans article in van Duuren's redaction, p.81, after excerpt with Winter's Pamor designs, which include Wengkon, there is a mention of Tepen:

"In an enumeration of seventeen pamor motifs from a collection of manuscripts owned by Resident Couperus, I found another four new names:

(...)
2. tepen, possibly an edge pamor without anything else.

That would mean, Pamor Tepen likely is an old Yogyakarta name for Pamor Wengkon (Couperus was Resident in Yogyakarta).

[A. G. Maisey]

I have always found it useful to know what a word actually means when I try to understand something.

The words that Gustav has given us are worth a second look.

The word "tepi" means the edge, border or boundary of something --- a pretty good restaurant in Peliatan in Bali called "Bebek Tepi Sawah" = "Duck at the edge of the Rice field".

The word "tepen" comes from "tepi" and it means to have decorative edging. It is not a noun.

HH does use both "wengkon" & "tepen" , he does not list either wengkon or tepen in his list of pamors, but underneath a picture of wengkon pamor that he names as pamor "Tepen" & then brackets (wengkon) after it. The way this presented on P.201 of KJ it seems to me that he prefers "Tepen" but refers to "wengkon" so others will know what he is writing about.

But we need to look closely at the word "wengkon".

The word "wengkon" comes from "wengku", this word has two ways of being understood, firstly as a frame, ie, "picture frame", & secondly as "power".

The word "wewengkon" = "a large territory of power", by "large", we are thinking in terms of a region or province, for example "Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta" = "The Special Region of Jogjakarta"

In Balinese the word "wengkon" is a contraction of "wengku-an", & this means "a region or province".

In Old Javanese we find "wengkon" as "wengka (wengko)", meaning "a district or region", the word probably comes into Old Javanese from Kawi, perhaps originally taken from Sanskrit.

"Tepi" also occurs in Old Javanese, but this word appears not to have acquired the derivative of "tepen" at that point in time.

In Surakarta the Pamor Wengkon is used in keris & tombak that are/were given to a newly appointed Bupati, by the Susuhunan. The purpose of the gift is/was to serve as a constant reminder to the Bupati that he has power (& responsibility) for the province or region that he has been appointed to govern.

When we understand the meanings of the word "wengkon" it is not at all difficult to understand the reason for its name:- it is a physical representation of both the province that the Bupati has responsibility for, & his power over it.

The keris is regarded as royal art, thus if the pamor wengkon is the name of this pamor in the Karaton Surakarta, then in Surakarta this must be accepted as the correct name for the pamor.

However, as I have mentioned in other places, keris terminology is not fixed, so if somebody else wants to use a descriptor as a name for the pamor motif, then of course, they may, but by doing so they ignore the traditional understandings of the name "Pamor Wengkon".

The way these understandings were explained to me was that the wengkon itself represented the protection of the Bupati, & the area within the wengkon represented his province & people whom he must protect.

Sorry for being so long winded, but there are lots & lots of misunderstandings associated with the keris, and regrettably they all require about as many words --- or more --- than I have used here, to be clarified.

[David]

No need to apologize for a long explanation. You have explained the meaning of pamor wengkon to me before and this explanation of the meaning of the word "wengkon" make a lot of sense to me. So i am sure i will continue to use that name as it ties it into the purpose for the use of this particular pamor.
I agree that names are constantly changing in keris terminology and that often it is at the cost of deeper meanings.

[Gustav]

Just a question: is Wengkon or Adeg Wengkon the Pamor of Keris given to newly appointed Bupati in the past?

Adeg Wengkon is Adeg Wengkon also in KJ book.

[A. G. Maisey]

Adeg Wengkon, according to what I was told by those who were more knowledgeable than myself, is a misnomer, in fact, Adeg Wengkon should be called Tejo Kinurung, but that is only when the line of border pamor is unbroken, if it fails to meet in the point area, then it becomes adeg tiga.

Tejo Kinurung is a pamor that was/is favoured by karaton & government employees, it is not the pamor that was given to newly appointed bupatis. However, going back a few years --- maybe twenty odd --- it was a popular belief amongst some collectors that the so-called "adeg wengkon" pamor was actually given to the bupati to protect that bupati, whilst others had the idea that the adeg was representative of the populace of the province and it was the populace that the border was protecting.

The function of a wengkon understood as a border is protective, where it encloses any other pamor, then the other pamor is read as the thing being protected, where it does not enclose another pamor then it is protecting the enclosed area of the blade which is then read as the wengkuan>wewengkon>wengko, ie, the province. The function of a bupati is the governance & protection of a province or region, so it is the line of pamor that then represents the bupati.

When a wengkon encloses a line of standing (adeg) pamor, it is enclosing and protecting against disaster, curses, black magic & so on.

When PBXII was still with us keris & tombak of exceptionally high quality were given on loan to newly appointed Bupatis, these pusakas were not often returned to the kraton upon the passing of the Bupati to whom they had been loaned, they were usually retained by his family, and then found other homes.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Adeg Wengkon, according to what I was told by those who were more knowledgeable than myself, is a misnomer, in fact, Adeg Wengkon should be called Tejo Kinurung, but that is only when the line of border pamor is unbroken, if it fails to meet in the point area, then it becomes adeg tiga.

Tejo Kinurung is a pamor that was/is favoured by karaton & government employees, it is not the pamor that was given to newly appointed bupatis. However, going back a few years --- maybe twenty odd --- it was a popular belief amongst some collectors that the so-called "adeg wengkon" pamor was actually given to the bupati to protect that bupati, whilst others had the idea that the adeg was representative of the populace of the province and it was the populace that the border was protecting.

The function of a wengkon understood as a border is protective, where it encloses any other pamor, then the other pamor is read as the thing being protected, where it does not enclose another pamor then it is protecting the enclosed area of the blade which is then read as the wengkuan>wewengkon>wengko, ie, the province. The function of a bupati is the governance & protection of a province or region, so it is the line of pamor that then represents the bupati.

When a wengkon encloses a line of standing (adeg) pamor, it is enclosing and protecting against disaster, curses, black magic & so on.

Alan, is this relatively new information that you have received from "those more knowledgeable" than you?

[A. G. Maisey]

No David, the tejo kinurung thing goes back sometime in the 1980's, but since everybody believes that adeg wengkon is OK, I go with the flow, I don't see it as my job to give lessons with every variation in names, for one thing, I would not have time, for seconds I do not want to get into long debates/discussions for no real purpose.

In fact, most of the understanding and information I have is dated back before year 2000. Pak Parman got his promotion in 1995, Pauzan moved on in 2014, Hardjonagoro bought a ticket out in 2008. All the people from whom I learnt moved on some time ago, and all I have to learn from new people is how much their ideas have changed & been added to since my friends & teachers left us.

Names vary, anybody who has any understanding of keris knows that, so we use whatever suits the occasion.

But this is a discussion group, Gustav raised a valid question in discussion so I gave an answer that maybe filled the gap.

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Adeg Wengkon, according to what I was told by those who were more knowledgeable than myself, is a misnomer, in fact, Adeg Wengkon should be called Tejo Kinurung, but that is only when the line of border pamor is unbroken, if it fails to meet in the point area, then it becomes adeg tiga.

Tejo Kinurung is a pamor that was/is favoured by karaton & government employees, it is not the pamor that was given to newly appointed bupatis. However, going back a few years --- maybe twenty odd --- it was a popular belief amongst some collectors that the so-called "adeg wengkon" pamor was actually given to the bupati to protect that bupati, whilst others had the idea that the adeg was representative of the populace of the province and it was the populace that the border was protecting.

The function of a wengkon understood as a border is protective, where it encloses any other pamor, then the other pamor is read as the thing being protected, where it does not enclose another pamor then it is protecting the enclosed area of the blade which is then read as the wengkuan>wewengkon>wengko, ie, the province. The function of a bupati is the governance & protection of a province or region, so it is the line of pamor that then represents the bupati.

When a wengkon encloses a line of standing (adeg) pamor, it is enclosing and protecting against disaster, curses, black magic & so on.

When PBXII was still with us keris & tombak of exceptionally high quality were given on loan to newly appointed Bupatis, these pusakas were not often returned to the kraton upon the passing of the Bupati to whom they had been loaned, they were usually retained by his family, and then found other homes.

Alan, I asked that question about Adeg Wengkon or Wengkon being given to newly appointed Bupati, because some time ago you wrote:

"In olden times the Susuhunan of Surakarta would usually give a keris with adeg wengkon to newly appointed bupatis. This was symbolic of the bupati's duty of care to the people for whom he was responsible. The wengkon was the protective power of the bupati, the line of adeg was symbolic of his people."

In the same post you explained, that Tejo Kinurung and Adeg Wengkon are two completely different Pamor:

"Adeg tiga (adeg telu, tri adeg) and tejo kinurung are all essentially the same pamor, the difference, if there is one at all, between adeg tiga and tejo kinurung is only in the spacing of the lines of pamor, but those lines of pamor are made in the same way with multi folds of pamor set between heavier layers of iron, and turned side on to produce a pamor miring motif with the three lines of pamor at 90 degrees to the core.

However, adeg wengkon is a completely different pamor to these and it is one of the most difficult pamors to make well. Adeg wengkon consists of a layer of (usually) unfolded pamor material laid against the core, and then the iron with one centrally placed strip of pamor miring laid over the core + pamor layer. Repeated both sides of blade. The result is the wengkon as mlumah, and the single adeg as miring."

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...5&postcount=22

I also remember to have read about Keris with Pamor Adeg Wengkon being given to newly apointed Bupati in your catalogues.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention Gustav, I had been expecting somebody to mention this variation, & indeed, several people have already mentioned it to me, not in this forum, but in private correspondence. It is quite flattering to find people paying such close attention to my writing, whether that writing is intended for general public consumption, or for marketing purposes, or for other reasons.

There are a couple of different elements involved in giving you an adequate reply to your comments, so please bear with me.

In my post #24 I wrote this:-

"Names vary, anybody who has any understanding of keris knows that, so we use whatever suits the occasion.

But this is a discussion group, Gustav raised a valid question in discussion so I gave an answer that maybe filled the gap."

In all areas of belief, and I guess, also of knowledge, there are layers of understanding. New information given is, in my experience, only given when the questioner demonstrates an ability to understand that information. This principle definitely applies in respect of the keris, and if we consider other fields, including fields that are distinctly orientated to Western World Culture, perhaps the same principle applies.

Gustav, you raised a pointed question, one specific, clearly stated question. By doing this you demonstrated that you were perhaps ready to move to a different level of understanding.

I provided an answer to your question that would not have been suitable in the context, nor at the time when my previous comment was made. Here is the thread in which I made this comment, the thread dates from nearly 14 years ago, and what I said about these pamors was made as comment, not in response to a question, let alone a pointed question.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11904

I was aware of this thread when I responded to your question in this present thread, but I gave you the response you deserved in any case.

In 2010, and for some time prior to that, the bulk of keris literate people with whom I was in contact seemed to hold the belief that adeg wengkon was the pamor given to newly appointed bupatis, and that this was a universal practice. Where there is a widespread generally held belief, & I hold a different belief, I tend to try not to create controversy by making contentious statements in passing discussion, particularly when I cannot support my statement unless I use more words than the situation calls for. When I consider something is sufficiently important to go deeper, I will do so, as I have in my response to your pointed question.

In that 2010 post my comments on the difference between pamor tejo kinurung & pamor adeg wengkon were directed at the method of manufacture, not at symbolism.

As to the use of the two terms "adeg wengkon" & "tejo kinurung", the common term in everyday usage for this pamor is adeg wengkon, however, I have heard both terms used for the same physical example by the same person, in the same conversation. I do not know why this highly respected person changed from one name to another, it is possible that the variation in usage was simply a convention of Javanese speech where use of a word could cause a less harmonious sound, but this is speculation.

While we are talking about name differences we might like to consider that some people prefer to name tejo kinurung as adeg tiga or adeg telu, then we have others who prefer sodo saler tepen for adeg wengkon.

Gustav, what I write, & also what I say, depends upon the situation, context, time & place, & sometimes the person who asks the question. I do not have only one line of thought on most things. In some fields an element of belief or of knowledge can have only one, fixed unquestionably correct interpretation. In the field of keris belief, & of keris knowledge, this idea of fixed interpretation does not, and cannot, exist.

Many years ago I asked Panembahan Harjonegoro (Alm.) why it was that you could get a different answer regarding the tangguh of a keris, from the same person if you asked that person on various occasions spaced well apart, for an opinion on the tangguh of the same keris.

His response was that Javanese people do not think logically, nor in a fixed pattern, they think emotionally and the answer given to any question will be dictated by emotion & context. Thus, when the respondent is having a good day, a particular keris might be tangguh Mataram Sultan Agungan, but if he is having a bad day the same keris could be tangguh Koripan. Maybe if he is having a really great day, that same keris might get elevated to tangguh Majapahit. Similarly, since Javanese people are fueled by emotion, they do not like to cause others to feel uncomfortable, so often an answer to a question will be what the responder believes the questioner wishes to hear.

My comments & responses vary in a similar way, probably not so much directed by emotion, but directed by context & situation.

Please accept my apologies if this rather flexible way of thinking is not to your liking.