Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Keris Warung Kopi
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 26th May 2007, 08:13 PM   #1
Boedhi Adhitya
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 103
Default

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:
Originally Posted by ganjawulung
Hi Marco,

.. with "mendak" (hilt ring) of "meniran" type. Yogyakartanese hilt, is better without selut. Simplicity, is the philosophy of Yogyakarta. Contrary with Solonese, which is more "gebyar" or glamour than Yogyakartanese..
Mas Ganjawulung, I believe the proper name in Jogjakarta’s style mendhak you previously referred as "meniran" type is ‘mendhak lugas’ (lugas = plain, that is, without stone). Mendhak with one tier stone is ‘mendhak kendhit’, and three tiers is called ‘mendhak robyong’. A one tier mendhak with alternatively white-and-red stone (diamond and ruby) is called ‘nyonyah nginang’ (a lady chewing pinang/sirih) and those with diamond, ruby and emerald (white, red and green) is called ‘rujak wuni’ (rujak=a fruit salad). IMHO, selut on the Marco’s first hilt is also reflecting Jogjakarta philosophy : simplicity

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.
Boedhi Adhitya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 11:27 AM   #2
Marcokeris
Member
 
Marcokeris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 928
Default

Dear Mr. Boedhi
A great explanation!
Thanks a lot
Marcokeris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 03:16 PM   #3
ganjawulung
Member
 
ganjawulung's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boedhi Adhitya
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)
Dear Mas Boedhi,

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...
Attached Images
  
ganjawulung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 07:57 PM   #4
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganjawulung
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...
At the risk of being refered to as Mr. "dictionary" David , i have always been under the impression that "uwer" is a Balinese term for the hilt ring. I have never heard it used in association with Javanese mendaks. Can someone explain further?
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 08:28 PM   #5
ganjawulung
Member
 
ganjawulung's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David
At the risk of being refered to as Mr. "dictionary" David , i have always been under the impression that "uwer" is a Balinese term for the hilt ring. I have never heard it used in association with Javanese mendaks. Can someone explain further?
Dear David,
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
ganjawulung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 10:35 PM   #6
Mans
Member
 
Mans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: East Java
Posts: 137
Default Type of Mendaks

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,
Attached Images
           

Last edited by Mans; 27th May 2007 at 10:49 PM.
Mans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 10:44 PM   #7
Mans
Member
 
Mans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: East Java
Posts: 137
Default Sheath Motive

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
Attached Images
    
Mans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th May 2007, 11:44 PM   #8
A. G. Maisey
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,047
Default

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.
A. G. Maisey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2007, 04:43 AM   #9
cahaya
Member
 
cahaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mans
.....
---------------------
p.s.: wrangka kendhit now belong to my friend

Sorry Bos...
cahaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.