![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 272
|
![]()
hallo Heinz
thank you for your comment but this is no sengkelat but dapur ; Lung Gandu tangguh Modjopahit regards semar |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 124
|
![]()
Hello Semar
Of course, you are right: no sogokan = Lung Gandu. Best regards, Heinz |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,015
|
![]()
Do we have two lambe gajah?
Is the blumbangan boto adeg? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 124
|
![]()
Interesting questions, Alan. What dapur do we have if there's one lambe gajah only? I have a keris luk 13 without sogokan and with one lambe gajah -- I always thought that the dapur is Lung Gandu ...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,015
|
![]()
Simple answer?
I don't know. This whole business of dhapur, pamor, tangguh has so much variation that it becomes often a matter of which school one attended. My school has been, and is Surakarta. My textbook for dhapur is the well known Surakarta pakem. In that , there is no provision for a dhapur that possesses the features of lung gandhu but has only one lambe gajah. In other words, if this keris has only one lambe gajah it is diluar pakem according to this reference. But that does not necessarily mean that some other pakem will not define lung gandhu with only one lambe gajah.However, this keris has suffered quite a bit of erosion, perhaps in the hand it is possible to see the remnants of two lambe gajah. I would very much like people to try to get into the habit of quoting the reference for a dhapur when they say that a blade is such & such a dhapur. If I say that a blade is dhapur whatever, that is my opinion, and I do not have the knowledge nor the authority to determine a dhapur. No, not at all. I rely on a text.This being the case, I should say that the blade is such & such a dhapur in accordance with this or that pakem or other reference. Similarly with tangguh. If we give an opinion in respect of tangguh, it might be as well to say how we came to form that opinion. If I say a blade is, for example, Madura sepuh, I could reasonably be expected to quote a few of the indicators that have helped me form my opinion. If I am challenged in respect of that opinion, I should be able to quote all of the indicators I have used, and the source of the knowledge. Alternatively, I could perhaps say that I have been advised by Pak Soandso that in his opinion the blade is Madura sepuh. The whole field of keris classification relies upon very, very minute differences and nuances. I sometimes I think it was invented to allow unending conversation and discussion.In some cases discussion could go on for days without a firm position being reached. In the interests of clarity, it would assist our discussion of things like tangguh , dhapur etc., if when we say that some classification or other applies, we give the source of our opinion. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 124
|
![]()
Thank you, Alan. When trying to determine a dapur I use the book "Dhapur", "Ensiklopedi Keris" plus several other books and booklets. Unfortunately, these sources don't always agree when it comes to details.
In the case of my keris, the dapur designation "Lung Gandu" is not mine but the seller's. It is indeed a well worn piece. Even in hand, it is difficult to tell whether there were originally two lambe gajah or not. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,015
|
![]()
Yes, you have hit the nail on the head.
In almost everything to do with the keris there is no solid, incontrovertible position that one can take and never get an argument. There are a multitude of opinions, and many people believe that the opinion they hold is the correct opinion. This is one more reason for providing the reasons and foundations for an opinion when it is given. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|