![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 103
|
![]()
Dear Marco,
Before we define the real and fake kendhit, it would be better if we define the proper wrangka’s cut first. The properly cut sheaths/warangkas should have slightly angled wood grains/fibres, about 45 degrees, usually ascending from left to right if we look at the ‘face’ side of warangkas. Traditionally, it is called ‘ngiris tempe’ (slicing the tempe, in the ordinary way of slicing, certainly) or ‘mayat miring.’ (So, Mas Ganjawulung, ‘mayat’ not necessarily means corpse, but might also means ‘roughly 45 degrees angled.’ Mayat might also used to define the ‘condhong – leleh’ of the keris blade). Another alternative to ‘mayat miring’ is slightly vertical grain. The sheath maker should decides the proper angle according to the ‘pelet’ (in Timoho wood) or the grain’s pattern (in Trembalo, Sandalwood, or any other woods) for the best artistical/aesthetical appearance. These grain directions are also the best from technical point of view. Other alternatives, such as ‘mlumah’ (‘lay down’/’sleepy’, that is, the horizontal grain), is not acceptable in traditional standar. A special exclusion is for ‘gembol’ wood, that is, the wood which come from the lowest part of the trunk, on the ground level, just before the root. It has a very twisted grain, so ones cannot easily define the grain’s direction. The Cahaya’s picture, left side, is an example. Regarding this wood, the sheath maker would be more concern to the holes it bears, as the gembol wood usually has many holes. Now it comes to the real and fake kendhit. To meet the traditional sheaths cuting standard (mayat miring or vertical grain), a real kendhit pattern should be perpendicular to the wood grain. In the other words, the pelet direction should cross the grain direction. It should also pass through the warangka, as Ganjawulung said. But as the dark pattern (pelet) in timoho wood tends to grow following the wood grain direction, a straight and perpendicular pelet would be quite rare. The same condition also apply to the ‘sembur’ pelet, which is, in fact, rarer than kendhit. Thus, which one is considered as the fake kendhit ? 1. The kendhit pattern which is parallel to the wood grain (so we have a kendhit pattern on ‘mlumah’ sheath). Remember, the kendhit pattern may also go through the warangka in this circumstance 2. The kendhit pattern which was made by drawing it (certainly a fake). 3. The kendhit pattern which was made by patching the wood with pelet from another wood. Some minor patches in kendhit pattern would be acceptable, but if the majority of the pattern come up from patching, well, it can’t be classified as a real kendhit, can it? Quote:
![]() Actually, IMHO, the mendhak on the Marco's second hilt isn't Jogjakarta's style mendhak. If I'm not mistaken, it is Surakarta's 'bejen'. The first one is Mendhak kendhit. See carefully at the 'ungkat-ungkatan' (the tumpeng/gunung/ cone-shape between the ball/stones) wish may help boedhi adhitya Last edited by Boedhi Adhitya; 26th May 2007 at 08:39 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 928
|
![]()
Dear Mr. Boedhi
A great explanation! Thanks a lot |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
![]() Quote:
I am still in my opinion, that the second Marco's mendhak is Yogyakarta's style mendhak. According to me, it is not the "parijata" type mendhak of Solo, but "mendhak uwer" with type "bejen". My mistake was, that I mention the part of the mendhak that called "menir" or very small balls surround the bottom/top of mendhak. Pls correct me if I'm wrong. Would you please compare the two type of mendhaks from these pictures. (1) mendhak "parijata" (with bigger balls if you compare with uwer bejen of Yogyakarta in the (2) picture below. Anyway, thanks alot Mr "dictionary" Boedhi... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,228
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
![]() Quote:
You may read in Mr Haryono Guritno's book (Keris Jawa). Please see page 281 on mendhaks. He mention mendhak/uwer Yogyakarta pola Bejen, mendhak/uwer Yogyakarta pola kendhit, and also mendhak/uwer Yogyakarta pola Robyong... On page 278, Mr Guritno also mention clearly, "Mendhak atau uwer, merupakan bentuk cincin ... " etc (Mendhak or uwer, is a form of ring...) Mr Guritno also mentioned about the difference between Surakarta's mendhak and Yogyakarta's mendhak. According to Mr Guritno, mendhak (Surakarta) and uwer (Yogyakarta) ... etc Ganjawulung |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: East Java
Posts: 137
|
![]()
Hai dear all...
Sugeng enjang, Mas Boedhi... ![]() I just want to make this thread more interesting... so I try to give my opinion by some pictures. I hope can explain more clear about what I mean. Indeed that the mendak have many variations. And many people also called as usually used at their region. So that why sometimes we hear different name of a mendak ![]() Mas Boedhi, I think the mendhak on the Marco's second hilt is Mendak Meniran Jogja. That because this mendak has no beads. Mendak Benjen have beads (stones) ![]() Rgds, Last edited by Mans; 27th May 2007 at 10:49 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: East Java
Posts: 137
|
![]()
Oh ya, also want to post some pictures of wrangka with different motif as per title of this thread...
--------------------- p.s.: wrangka kendhit now belong to my friend ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,047
|
![]()
David, the words "uwer" and "mendak" are both Javanese words, and use of either is probably legitimate in a Javanese context to refer to the keris fitting, however, I cannot ever recall hearing a Javanese person use the word "uwer" when talking about a mendhak. In my experience I have only ever heard the word "mendhak" used by Javanese people.
Again in my experience , the words I hear used in Bali to refer to the ring between the hilt of a keris, and the gonjo of a keris, are "uwer", and "cin-cin" ("ring", Indonesian); I have never heard "mendhak" used in Bali. Bambang Harsrinuksmo notes that the word "uwer" is mostly used in Bali, but also used in parts of Jawa Haryono Haryoguritno seems to consider that "uwer" is a valid alternative to "mendhak", and in a book of the nature of his publication, it would be only natural to try to cover your bases. However, it would not be a good idea to go wandering around Solo asking dealers what sort of uwer they have available--- you'd be likely to be offered a piece of rolled up palm leaf, a bit smaller than your little finger. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 49
|
![]() Quote:
Sorry Bos... ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|