[A. G. Maisey]

Pamor names are an interesting subject.

Is this pamor Lar Gangsir?

Well, yes, sort of.

It pretty much depends on how old you are and where you went to school.

Between 1970 and about 1990 I was taught to name this pamor and its many variations as ganggeng kanyut, that was in Solo.

Sometimes there was disagreement between knowledgeable people as to whether a pamor was ganggeng kanyut or whether it was kenongo ginubah. I cannot ever recall hearing "lar gangsir" at that time.

In 1988 the "Ensiklopedi Budaya Nasional" was published. This was the forerunner of EK. There was a lot of input into both EBN and EK by people aligned with Ngayogyakarta.

Bambang Harsrinuksmo did do the rounds and talk to other people, but the Jogja point of view became dominant in both books.

Pak Bambang published a lot of little booklets prior to publication of his masterworks, and in Solo, all of these little booklets, as well as his masterworks generated a lot of discussion, disagreement, and downright adverse comment. Much of this could probably be taken with a grain of salt:- Surakarta and Ngayogyakarta viewpoints vary considerably, and I have sometimes felt that there is often disagreement simply for the sake of disagreement.

In EBN Pak Bambang lists kenongo ginubah and ganggeng kanyut, and provides line drawings. He does not list lar gangsir. In EK he lists kenongo ginubah, ganggeng kanyut and lar gangsir, again with line drawings. I personally find it very, very difficult to give these illustrated pamors the same names given them by Pak Bambang --- and I am not alone in this.

In 2005 Haryono Haryoguritno's masterwork, "Keris Jawa" was published. This book was years in production and it has set the benchmark for what a book about the Javanese keris should be. Nobody can deny it is a wonderful piece of work. In addition it is probably the very best reference we have available for the classification of the keris. This book is a must have for any keris collector.

However, that does not mean that everybody agrees unconditionally with everything that is found between its covers.

In the 1960's and 1970's in Central Jawa, there was very little interest in keris, only a very few people had much interest in keris collection and study, and the Keris Revival had no yet taken off. Yes, new keris had been made by the mid 1970's, but this revival was still only a seedling, the tree did not really start to blossom until the late 1980's.

During the 1980's several men in Central Jawa became known as pandai keris or empu, the Madura movement came back to life, and that planted seeds in other parts of East Jawa, by the 1990's modern keris production was a fact of life.

The Javanese art community tends to regard the Javanese keris as the highest expression of Javanese plastic art, that is, the art of sculpture. There are many reasons for this, and those reasons are inextricably interwoven with Javanese culture and society.

However, because the keris in Jawa is regarded as an art work, that has legitimised its position as a store of wealth, which is of course one of the historic attributes of the keris in Jawa.

One of things about works of art is that it is sometimes very difficult to establish legitimate provenance, because of this, works of art have universally become a way in which to launder money. Maybe even better than casinos and retail trade.

Some elements of Indonesian society have no less need to launder wealth than do similar elements of society in other countries.

This has been a major driving force in the growth of the keris market between 1990 and the present time. As any market grows, guidebooks for the basic rules of the market are required. In the case of the keris those guidebooks are primarily Ensiklopedi Keris and Keris Jawa.

In essence, these two books provide an easily referenced source of information that assists in the classification and comparative appraisal of Javanese keris. Between them these two books provide a lexicon that permits collectors, investors and others to communicate.

But in terms of historic authenticity, just how accurate is that lexicon?

I would suggest that we can accept the classifications contained within EK and KJ as classifications that are almost universally understood at the present time, but that those classifications do not necessarily reflect a universal historic understanding.

So, after that long ramble, let's return to Semar's "Lar Gangsir".

Yes, I agree, Lar Gangsir, but with this qualification:-

"This pamor may be known as "Lar Gangsir" after 2005."

If we wish to be understood by those with whom we wish to communicate, we need to try as best we can to use a mode of communication those people will understand. So, if I wished to name this pamor to somebody who had begun to take an interest in the keris during the last 20 years or so, I would most likely describe it as "Lar Gangsir". However, if I wished to name this, or a similar pamor to the people I know in Solo, and whom I have known for nearly 50 years in some cases, I would name it as "ganggeng kanyut".

Incidentally, the perceived pamor adeg at the tip of Semar's blade is only a distortion of the pamor puntiran, caused by insufficient protection during forging.