Is it Raja Gundala?

[Pangeran Datu]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

......
However, strictly, it is incorrect to describe a blade in the context of one culture, in this case Lombok, in terms constructed to apply to a blade in a different cultural context. For one thing, it is meaningless. In a Javanese blade the words used to describe the blade have a meaning to a Javanese person. They may have no meaning, or a different meaning, in a different language.......

It depends.
If, say, 'Culture B' originally produced blades in strict accordance with the Pakem/protocol of 'Culture A' and adopted it as their own, then, no problem. One can use the Pakem of 'Culture A' on blades made by 'Culture B', as Pakem A will be identical to Pakem B
If, however, through time, either Pakem A, or Pakem B, or both evolve or change altogether, with respect to one another, then we strike trouble.
One first needs to be able to decide which Pakem has changed (or, indeed, if BOTH have changed). Then one may be able to proceed with some 'historical forensics' to determine the current relativity of one Pakem to the other.

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

......
Djelenga uses as a synonym of "dhapur" the words "bentuk" which means "shape" in Indonesian, and "angun-angunan" which is a word in Javanese, but does not make sense when used as Djelenga uses it, so obviously has a different meaning in Lombok.Since Djelenga is from Lombok, I believe he would know the correct terms to use for a Lombok keris, and he seems to demonstrate that "dhapur" is not to be used instead of "bentuk" or "angun-angunan".....

My understanding of the ancient (in your case, Jawa Kuna?) meanings:

Dapur = group/family/tree
Bentuk = shape/form/appearance
Angun-angunan = pattern/template

Given the ancients' pliant nature and penchant for symbolism , I can understand how the above terms may be used interchangeably for general classification (cf. biological taxonomy).

Cheers.

[brekele]

Uhh! The subject is getting hot and harder for me
I better listen explanations from those Docters Keris.

But Dave, the blade I posted is not recently maduranese creation. ( )
Common Dave!
But it's oke, I guess you and me don't have good eyes like Super(p)man.

Thanks Marcokeris for book's shop informations.
Those books are nice but those CDs are made me skyping a friend in Bali.

[David]

Thanks Alan, for this post on language as applied to the keris. It is really a facinating subject. I tend to agree with you that English, when possible, is a better choice in this context, though i actually prefer "hilt" to "handle".
Still, i am interested in learning traditional terminology whenever possible so i don't mind when people use such terms as long as they are willing to explain them. But there does seem to be a general "lazy" acceptance among keris collectors to default to Javanese terminology regardless of the origin of the blade. I agree that this is inappropriate.

Originally Posted by brekele

But Dave, the blade I posted is not recently maduranese creation. ( )

Perhaps, Brek, you can share with us exactly where and when you believe this blade originates. Frankly the eyes of a "superman" has very little to do with such opinions. Photographs are never a very good way to judge a keris and people can be very easily fooled by them, even Superman . Also, smiths in Madura have become quite expert not only at mimicing other styles and time periods of keris making, but have great skill at making blades look old. I am basing my suspicions on this knowledge and the feeling that this keris doesn't look quite right to me in material and finish to be from Bali or Lombok. I could very easily be wrong about this, as there are too many factors out of hand and i am simply unable to judge accurately from an internet photo. But i am sincerely interested in hearing why you are so sure my suspicions are incorrect. How old do you believe this keris is and where was it forged?

[A. G. Maisey]

Yeah, "hilt" is possibly more correct than "handle", when used in connection with an edged weapon. I guess you could probably put my preference for "handle" down to a bit of reverse snobbery.

[David]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yeah, "hilt" is possibly more correct than "handle", when used in connection with an edged weapon. I guess you could probably put my preference for "handle" down to a bit of reverse snobbery.

[brekele]

Dave, yes of course i can share with you about where and when i believed this blade is ASLIES (ASLIES=ASLI+YES). Sorry for using my own word, because your word ORIGINATES wasn't in dictionary.

Friend of mine brought this blade by the time Lombok's coffee morning is not finish yet. The blade was dirty, first exprescion in head was stranged about this blade and then suspicion for few seconds. About 2 minits later my feeling was changed and starting to belived that the blade is old (80%).
And then someone clean that blade.
After cleaned then of course i believed the blade is old.
Dave, i looked again...from Pasikutan, i guess this blade is tangguh nom-noman
(Bali).
Also according to blade's material + feeling of my NEW KNOWLEDGE about keris.
(Finally, surely answer is came out by other keris forum in Indonesia).

Dave, i knew some of keris dealers from Madura based in my hometown Surabaya (Jawa). I hang out with them and learn.
So, I knew their blades Dave.
Many blades are good too (hi...just my taste).

BTW, Dave....honestly i like to read words of those doctors keris .
but you just broke them up
Ya, It's oke. I knew you are the bos in your own forum beside Rick.

[David]

"Originate" means place of origin; where is it from? Do you think this keris was made in Lombok, Bali, Jawa....? You say that it is "from Pasikutan", but "Pasikutan" as i understand it is a form of measurement, not a place (from the tip of the finger to the elbow), so perhaps this is just a mistake you made in translation. I don't think we can successfully apply the concept of tangguh to this blade, especially if it did not originate from Jawa. Still a nom-nomon keris would be considered by many to be a relatively recent keris, wouldn't it?
As i already stated, you might well be correct about this blade, and you are certainly welcome to your opinion. I still remain suspicious, especially given the very unusual blade form, one i have never seen before with this mixture of features. This is a tendency i have noted in some modrn keris making, combining features to form new "dhapur" which have led us to a major question in this thread: What do we call it?
I am a bit confused by your last remarks. I am glad you are enjoying "reading the words of the doctors keris" , whoever they are , but i have hardly done anything to discourge the conversation in this thread. You posted these keris and i have been addressing my comment to them in an attempt to answer your questions, but the wide range of discussion here, especially tangents on language and usage, have been welcomed and encouraged by me. I have done nothing to break them up. I am sorry if you do not like or disagree with my personal observations, but they are what they are. If you have any problems with my moderator skills please feel free to discuss them with me in private messaging.

[Megantoro]

Ra mudgengke

[David]

Originally Posted by Megantoro

Ra mudgengke

Welcome Megantoro. This is an English language forum. Could you please translate this?

[brekele]

Originally Posted by David

Welcome Megantoro. This is an English language forum. Could you please translate this?

Dave, I guess this words (ra mudgengke) came from words (ora mudeng) it means not clear and confused in Javanese languages, but ra mudgengke it could be also the Central Javanese languages for young people (slang) for something which is not in the mood for their group or Gangster.
I try to help you but if it is wrong than I appologise for it.
The guy might have another meaning for it.

[brekele]

Hi Guys, I would like to ask you something.
Do you see PICTURES on the blade? Because I saw some pictures. Kind of human sitting.
Is it Raja Gundala ?

Thanks
bre

[A. G. Maisey]

With respect Pangeran Datu, I disagree with you.

You have put forward a hypothetical argument based in logic, and from a purely logical basis, I am not able to disagree with you.But that logic is hypothetical, and measured against the reality of the keris in differing cultural contexts, it does not stand.

Even within Jawa there is disagreement as to the what the exact features are which should be present for a keris to conform to a particular dhapur, even within Jawa, it is safer to use the features contained in a keris to describe that keris, rather than to use a dhapur designation.Unless, of course, you are able to quote the pakem, thus you would describe the form as, for instance:- "sinom robyong, in accordance with (whatever) pakem".

When we move into a different culture, and we look at a keris which is not a Javanese keris, but that keris contains features that are also able to be found in a Javanese keris, then it is clearly erroneous to describe that keris from Sulawesi, or Sumatra, or Lombok in terms applicable to a Javanese keris. It is not a Javanese keris, thus it cannot be described as one. The names of the various ricikan in keris from various areas are often different from the names used in Jawa for those ricikan. Similarly, the names used to describe the keris form are often different from the name for a Javanese keris containing the same features, but with different names.The names of the various features , or ricikan, in a keris blade have everyday meanings, for instance, a "sogokan" is a long stick that you push things with, a "blumbangan" is a pond, and so on. These names of the keris features make sense to a Javanese person because he can see the connection between the name of the feature, and that thing in the real world. However, to somebody in another culture, using a different language, the Javanese names of the features could well make about as much sense as they do to a native English speaker. Thus, you will find that although the features in keris blades across several cultures could all be the same, the names of those features will sometimes vary.As the names of the features (ricikan) vary, so do the names of the forms (dhapur) carrying those features, and the word used in a local language to describe the form itself is no longer a Javanese word, but a word that is intelligible to the local user of that word.Thus, Lalu Djelengga, being from Lombok, uses (I guess) a Sasak word instead of Indonesian (bentuk) or Javanese (dhapur) when he is referring to keris from Lombok.

In respect of word meanings.

In Modern Javanese "dhapur" means "shape, form, design".

The word "dapur" does not exist in Javanese, it is an Indonesian word that means "kitchen".

The word "bentuk" is an Indonesian word that means "shape, form"; this word does not exist in Javanese.

The word "angun-angunan" is a problem. I really do not understand this word, so I am assuming it is a Sasak word which is a synonym of the Indonesian "bentuk" and the Javanese "dhapur", which is the context in which Djelengga has supplied it. In Javanese "angun", or "angun-angun" can mean a bull or it can mean wild; it is not a word found in Indonesian. Angun, angun-angun, and angun-angunan appear not to exist in Old Javanese.

I do not believe that we have any need to go back to olden times to understand what a modern author wrote in the 20th or 21st century. Lalu Djelengga gave us a choice of three words, all appearing to mean the same thing:- "bentuk" if we are speaking Indonesian, "dhapur" if we are speaking Javanese, or "angun-angunan" if we are speaking Sasak ( I assume). What he actually presents is a heading to a series of matrices which form a pakem; this heading reads:- NAMA DAN UNSUR CIRI (RICIKAN) BENTUK/ANGUN-ANGUNAN (DHAPUR).

Within the pakem supplied by Djelengga the keris form "sinom robyong" does not exist; the form "sinom" does, but not "sinom robyong".

Personally, I try to steer away from using Javanese words when I am talking about keris in English. Yes, I know, it can be very impressive to throw a whole heap of dhapurs and condong-leles and jejerans into one's discussion, if for no other reason than to remind people of one's erudition, but why use a Javanese word when there is a perfectly good English word, meaning the same thing, that everybody will understand without thinking? Why not use "form" instead of dhapur? Why not use "handle" instead of "ukiran" or "jejeran"?

I think I could precis my position on this matter by saying that I am of the opinion that we should try to maintain a degree of consistency in keris terminology which reflects the area of origin of the keris concerned, thus we would use Javanese terms for a Javanese keris, Sasak terms for a Lombok keris, and so on. Alternatively, we use English words which clearly convey our meaning to English speakers, and only use a Javanese/Balinese/Sasak word where we do not have an English word available. The only keris word I can think of that I do not have an English word available for is "gonjo".