Planning to make a wrongko

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, the reason nobody has made comment might be because nobody has anything useful to say.

I have made wrongkos, both gambar (top part) and gandar (long bottom part). I did this 50 or so years ago, my products were near enough to the real thing, and probably could not be picked from a job that had been done by a Javanese or Malay maker. However, I always had genuine wrongkos to copy, and I have had wood carving skills from a very young age. For a long time I made rifle stocks, both for myself, and to order.

Tools are not really any sort of problem, conventional chisels, small sharp knives, various scrapers --- usually purpose made from thin steel cut to shape --- sand paper, You cannot make a gandar without a joint unless you have the specialist tool for this, called a segrek, and there is another specialist tool that is like a curved arrow-head sharpened on the edges that is used inside the mouth of the gambar. However, for the 'arrow head' tool you can improvise with chisels, and for the gandar you simply make it in two halves and glue together.

I personally don't like the lamination idea. To my mind it is an insult to the keris itself ( the keris is really only the blade, all dress can be regarded in much the same way as a man's clothes), non-traditional and garish. I do understand your reasoning for using laminated material, but again, from my perspective this line of reasoning is totally irrelevant. If your finished product is good it will enhance the keris, if it is not good it will be replaced at some time in the future. Whether it was made in South Africa or in Jawa or wherever doesn't really matter. My opinion only, and may not be the opinion of some other western based collectors.

You need to make the wrongko so that the pesi is centered above the middle of the gandar. That is ideal, but even wrongkos made in country of origin frequently do not achieve this.

I do not understand what you mean by "engrave the wrongko".

The sides of the Bugis wrongkos that I have seen usually have a very gentle concave surface from the vertical groove towards the back, the surface of the wrongko in front of the groove is curved to blend into the rounded front. The groove itself seems to echo the position of the line of the back of the gandar on a lot of wrongkos.

I'm not particularly interested in Bugis keris, and there are a lot of people who are more familiar than I am with the details of Bugis keris dress, but what I can say is this:- I have a number of Bugis keris and the buntuts all vary a bit. I doubt very much that there is a universal standard for the buntut on a Bugis wrongko,if you have an example, copy it. The problem I used to find with buntuts was getting a neat joint, a butt joint is useless, you need to make a tongue on the end of the gandar and inlet it into the buntut, bit like a mortice & tenon joint but ovoid.

But if you have a usable gandar why not use it? I would.

The better Bugis wrongkos normally use a middling hard wood with strong chatoyancy. You probably will not be able to get anything like this, and for a beginning carver, soft wood is a lot easier to handle than hard wood. Most mahoganies carve well, stay with what you have already started.

[David]

I cannot disagree with anything Alan has said here and agree that people probably had not responded to you since there wasn't much they felt the could say.
I will say that illustrations would be very helpful to instigate discussion here, either with photographs of sarungs you are thinking of emulating or drawings or initial photographs of the sheath you are actually creating.
The stem of the sarung that came with this keris (that you show in another thread) is fairly useless and not of any particular value as is, so i agree with Alan that you might as well make use of it when constructing your new sheath.
I would suggest that you spend quite a lot of time looking at photos from different angles on Bugis style sheaths. This is especially important if you do not have an example in hand if you would like to get the porportions and nuances as close to acceptable as possible. Remember that the Bugis are not limited to one small area of Indonesia and their sheath styles do have subtle differences as you move from one area to another.
If you start posting images of your project i would image you will get more feedback as you progress.

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, I just had a look at the gandar that David mentioned.

It appears to have lost the tongues at the top for attachment to the gambar.

To fix this problem you make a couple tongues out of bambu , inlet the inside of the gandar and glue the new tongues in with 5 minute Araldite. You use bambu because you can make the tongues as thin as you need and there is still strength in the material. Don't forget to score the inletting and the tongue to improve adherence of glue.

On this old gandar it is obvious that the buntut was not attached by use of a tenon on the end of the gandar, but I believe you will find a mortice where a tenon from the buntut fitted into the gandar.

If you have acacia woods available in South Africa, you might find that you can match colour and grain approximately with that material. If not, don't worry about it, finish the one you've started on.

[Jean]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The better Bugis wrongkos normally use a middling hard wood with strong chatoyancy. You probably will not be able to get anything like this, and for a beginning carver, soft wood is a lot easier to handle than hard wood. Most mahoganies carve well, stay with what you have already started.

To me a good Bugis wrongko should have the gambar made from kemuning and the gandar from angsana like this specimen.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes Jean true, but you are a connoisseur, our friend Johan is a beginning wood carver with no experience of keris, apart from which, I will stand naked on the Town Hall Steps playing a trumpet if he can source quality exotic woods such as kemuning and angsana in the location where he lives.

At this point I would most gently suggest that whatever he thinks is OK is what he should use.

I can tell you from long, hard experience that working with woods such as the ones in your presented example is not something for beginners, woods like this require a lot of skill and a touch of magic to get to required form and finish.

[Johan van Zyl]

I have read everything you all have written here, with great appreciation. Your comments deserve more attention than I can give it with one reading, so I will ruminate on them so as to be able to further decide on the steps to take in my woodworking project. Yes, Alan, my term "engrave" was very poorly chosen; I should have written "shape" or "sculpt" or better still, "carve".

I have also mistakenly used the word wrongko for the top part of the scabbard. Of course, the entire scabbard is warangka = wrangka = wrongko. I note that Alan uses "gambar" for the top part. This points to another area where I might brush up on my sometimes faulty terminology. Dredging up my voluminous keris notes, I see that I have "gambar" as a Javanese word as well as an Indonesian word, meaning picture or illustration.

Some writers equate the Malayan "sampir" with "wrangka". If by this, reference is made to the boat which the top part of the scabbard is supposed to represent, then this might contribute to misunderstanding. Popular books on the keris seem not to use "gambar" often, but if this is the strictly correct usage for the top part, then that is what I also want to use.

Concerning the boat representation, some writers compare the gambar with the traditional Pattani fishing boat of old, others just call it Chinese. And others simply say it points to the SEA communities as a seafaring people.

Sometimes I find it hard to put my keris notes down...

[A. G. Maisey]

Johan, I would suggest if I may that you do not get too involved with terminology. I tend to use Javanese terms when I do not use English, and other terms can apply in each different keris bearing society. It doesn't really matter what you call any of the wrongko parts as long as we all understand what is meant. Speaking only for myself, I'd be perfectly happy to see everybody using only English. Words are used to transfer ideas and the English language is a very good tool for this purpose.

The entire scabbard can be correctly referred to as wrongko (warangka), or just the top cross section (gambar) can be referred to as wrongko. It is not a good idea to argue with anybody about what is and is not correct.

I have a deep and abiding dislike of this endless discussion involving names and classifications in the absence of attached meanings. To my mind the whole collector discussion on keris is often slanted in entirely the wrong direction.

As for that business about wrongkos being inspired by boats and ships, well, I guess anybody can believe what they will.

[Johan van Zyl]

Replying to Alan only, for the moment, I think I might understand your position, however having said that, I find myself asking more questions about this very same thing. Which means that you could possibly help me understand better. Let me put my problem this way: an ardent collector of edged weapons (kerisses or some other traditional weapon), needs to delve into all available facts pertaining to his area of interest, including the history, the tradition, the terminology and the symbolism of the weapon.

Some like to delve deeper than others. Surely a study of names and classification is part of this parcel. I'm sure you do not discourage this. But then I quickly include what you yourself have added: "...and the attached meanings".

So what I think you mean is that a collector can certainly go to great lengths to study the items in his collection, but do it honestly and with due consideration for the symbolism's meaning. I had understood it to be a very good example, to wax lyrical on the boats the gambar is supposed to represent. The garuda of the Bugis keris' pistol grip is another tantalising example.

I also accept that a discussion can arguably sometimes slant in the wrong direction, but my experience does not tell me which these slants may be. I know one must not bring in commercialism here, or disguise kerisses to look older of more valuable.

Interestingly, I have purposely steered away from names and classifcation in the Afrikaans article I wrote on my Javanese keris for submission to my collector society newsletter. I refrained from using a single Javanese or Malayan name for any of the keris components. I also do not even call it a keris, but a kris. I thought it would sound strange to call the hilt an ukiran (for instance) and not meaningfully justify my use of the Javanese word.

I'm progressing with my home-made wrongko (the whole scabbard) and can soon offer a pic or two when the job does not look so disgustingly rough anymore...!

[David]

Originally Posted by Johan van Zyl

Replying to Alan only, for the moment, I think I might understand your position, however having said that, I find myself asking more questions about this very same thing. Which means that you could possibly help me understand better. Let me put my problem this way: an ardent collector of edged weapons (kerisses or some other traditional weapon), needs to delve into all available facts pertaining to his area of interest, including the history, the tradition, the terminology and the symbolism of the weapon.

Some like to delve deeper than others. Surely a study of names and classification is part of this parcel. I'm sure you do not discourage this. But then I quickly include what you yourself have added: "...and the attached meanings".

So what I think you mean is that a collector can certainly go to great lengths to study the items in his collection, but do it honestly and with due consideration for the symbolism's meaning. I had understood it to be a very good example, to wax lyrical on the boats the gambar is supposed to represent. The garuda of the Bugis keris' pistol grip is another tantalising example.

I also accept that a discussion can arguably sometimes slant in the wrong direction, but my experience does not tell me which these slants may be. I know one must not bring in commercialism here, or disguise kerisses to look older of more valuable.

Interestingly, I have purposely steered away from names and classifcation in the Afrikaans article I wrote on my Javanese keris for submission to my collector society newsletter. I refrained from using a single Javanese or Malayan name for any of the keris components. I also do not even call it a keris, but a kris. I thought it would sound strange to call the hilt an ukiran (for instance) and not meaningfully justify my use of the Javanese word.

I'm progressing with my home-made wrongko (the whole scabbard) and can soon offer a pic or two when the job does not look so disgustingly rough anymore...!

Frankly Johan, shots of your sheath in progress can be very educational for both you and the viewer (who might be considering a similar course). By the time you show us just the finished product it will be too late to add any helpful suggestions to your process.