dapur ????????????? help

[A. G. Maisey]

I thank you Semar for opening this thread.

You have provided a very good example to demonstrate the point I have made in an earlier thread in respect of the lack of relevance of the name applied to the dhapur of a keris.

Your keris has a long gandhik and ac kembang kacang, as well as 7 luk.

Two experienced keris collectors seem to have reached agreement that the dhapur is kebo teki, but with 7 luk, and as Jean has pointed out, kebo teki is listed as a straight blade in at least one pakem.

Now let us look at this question.

In the well known Surakarta Pakem we have kebo teki shown. The ricikan are:-

three lambe gajah jalen kembang kacang greneng

the gandhik is very marginally longer than a normal sized gandhik


when considering dhapur of "kebo" type, we need to also consider dhapur of "mahesa" type; mahesa and kebo have the same meaning.

In Harsrinuksmo we can find Mahesa Teki.

Mahesa Teki is cross referenced to Kebo Teki in this reference. It should be, as it has the same meaning.

Harsrinuksmo shows a keris with a gandhik perhaps 4 or 5 times the length of a normal gandhik, and with no kembang kacang, no lambe gajah, no jalen, no greneng.This is what he knew as kebo teki.

Interesting.

But maybe we can consider one of the other keris in the kebo and mahesa group as a candidate.

Harsinuksmo lists 7 keris as "mahesa something or other", and 6 keris as "kebo something or other"; some of these overlap because of cross reference.

In Harsrinuksmo one keris is shown that is similar to Semar's keris, and that is Kebo Giri, however, Kebo Giri has a straight blade.


OK, maybe the Surakarta Pakem will help us, so let's have a look at it:-

kebo lajer, kebo dungkul, kebo dhendheng, kebo teki, mahesa nempuh (3 luk), kebo tedan (5 luk), kebo dhengan (5 luk), mahesa nyabrang (15 luk).

Regrettably no blade with a kebo or mahesa designation that has similar form to Semar's keris, and additionally, no 7 luk keris that has similar form.

Several of the illustrations for the forms I have listed above are missing from the copy of the pakem I have in front of me, I do have a complete photographic record of the original of this pakem, and will look at the forms I have not yet seen as soon as I get the opportunity.

However, we are looking at a keris here that definitely has some age and appears to have been made by a competent maker.

So the question arises:-

was the maker wrong, or are the pakems wrong?

or perhaps the pakem that the maker was using has been lost?


If we become involved with the name game we are simply doing the work of a junior clerk or a storeman:- identify, label, record, pigeonhole.

The time spent on this endless and fruitless search for names could be much better spent in study of methods of manufacture and relevant social and cultural questions, or even in an attempt to try to understand the way in which keris quality is appraised.

There is an enormous amount of knowledge that can be pursued outside the mind deadening waste of time that is the Name Game.

[semar]

thank you mister Maisey

I have bring yesterday the keris for cleaning to a man here in Yogya
and he say the name of the dapur = kebo teki carubuk ????


regards semar

[A. G. Maisey]

Another good example Semar.

Dhapur carubuk is listed in the Surakarta Pakem with 7 luk, kembang kacang, jalen, lambe gajah, greneng, sraweyan.

This pakem does not list kebo carubuk.

Harsrinuksmo illustrates a keris with the same features that he identifies as carubuk, but does not list kebo carubuk.

Take your keris to 100 different people in 100 different locations in Jawa, and you could well get 100 different answers.

Take it back to this same man who has told you it is kebo carubuk, in ten years time, and you could well get a different answer.

I've been down this road, and I know it well.

Ask me what dhapur it is and I'll give you a different answer again:-

mahesa giri luk pitu

Just invented that dhapur --- the same as people in Jawa do when they don't know the answer and don't want to admit it.

[semar]

oke thank you for your comment kan you explain me what the pakem van surakarta = mister maisey ????

regards semar

[A. G. Maisey]

Semar, the Surakarta Pakem is not my Pakem.

In a matter of differing opinions, yes, I do prefer to follow this pakem, because to the best of my knowledge it is the only pakem that is still in existence and still observed by the Karaton which is the inheritor of Majapahit.

This pakem was prepared upon the orders of GKB Harya Hadiwijaya, by Sunarya, an abdi dalem of the Surakarta Karaton working in the Kridawahana office.It was completed on 24th. April 1924.

It came into the public domain about 25 years ago, at which time I had a loan of it for a week or so, and photographed it in its entirety. A few years ago it was published by the Yayasan Damartaji. Regrettably this publication was done on very poor paper, in fact it looks like reduced photocopies ( the original is in a very large format), and with an almost total lack of care, which has resulted in duplications and omissions in all of the copies of this publication that I have seen.

[semar]

thank you for your explaining mister maisey so its possibele to get still this copie`s ore the book ??????????

regards semar

[A. G. Maisey]

I don't know if copies are still available.

They were being sold in Indonesia, and also in Holland.

Possibly some member more knowledgeable in this matter may be able to advise you.