Keris with „sickleshape-blade“ for comments

[David]

I can see that Jean.

[A. G. Maisey]

I think I'm going to disagree with this "dhapur keris" idea.

A dhapur is set down in a pakem.

A pakem is a guide that has been established by some sort of authority, usually a kraton, and that pakem sets down the ricikan for the particular dhapur.

Just because a keris has a blade shape that is curved like a jambiyo blade does not mean that it can be called "Dhapur Jambiyo".

Until we can find a pakem that sets forth the requirements for a keris to be named as "Dhapur Jambiyo" I feel that it would be wise to refer to this particular object in a different way than by using the word "dhapur".

My personal take on it is that we have jambiyo-like keris, or a keris-like jambiyo.

Until an agreeable pakem surfaces we do not have a Keris of Dhapur Jambiyo.

We simply do not have the required authority to hand out dhapurs as it suits us.

In my post #13 I mentioned esoteric and spiritual reasons for regarding something as a legitimate keris. Clearly that measure cannot apply in this case.

[Henk]

I agree with Alan. I do remember that the collector who showed me such a keris called it a bent keris and a rarity. He certainly didn't refered to a dapur.

[JBG163]

From a javanese friend :

"dhapur Kuku bima"

[A. G. Maisey]

I would most gently suggest that "Dhapur Kuku Bima" is an invention of the trade, or of Indonesian collectors from the modern era. I very much doubt that this dhapur will be found in any legitimate pakem.

[thomas hauschild]

Have the piece now in my hand. Some close ups from the blade.

Best Thomas

[David]

Sorry for taking so long to follow up on responses. Thanks for posting these newer photos.
From my personal perspective i would certainly call this a keris and can see in your newer pics that it is indeed a well crafted piece that was certainly (or almost so since certainty is dangerous in the keris world ) say that the curve is original and made with intention.
I do, of course, agree with Alan on the question of dhapur names. As Alan says, dhapur is set down in pakem and i don't think you will find this one in any known pakem. Of course, it is the penchant of collectors everywhere to name, tag and catalog every aspect of the things they collect and keris are no different. So be it disdainful or not, i suspect that people will continue to apply dhapur names to keris for which none should actually apply. As Alan says, the "invention of the trade". And for many if you cannot put a name to every aspect of the keris you cannot possibly understand that keris. But i will disagree that we have a jambiyo-like keris, or a keris-like jambiyo. Why? Because just as a wavy blade of any sort is not automatically a keris as so many uninformed folks seem to think, every blade with a curve like this is not a jambiyo. I just don't think that the curve alone is enough to justify the comparison and think you were being much more accurate describing it as "sickle-shaped".
I also don't think we can necessarily disregard the possibility of esoteric and/or spiritual reasons for regarding this as a legitimate keris. Given that it seem to be clearly old and intention work i do not believe we can ever truly know what the intention of the maker and/or original owner was for this dagger.
For the record it is something i would gladly add to my own collection if i were to have encountered it first.

[Amuk Murugul]

Hullo again Thomas!

Just to follow up on my previous response:
The following central Java description may relate to your post :

dapur jambeya:straight blade, pejetan, tikel alis, tingil.

Sticking point: Just how curved can a blade be to be accepted as "straight"?

Best,