|
|
|
26th May 2007, 03:58 AM
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
Kendit Rante?
I have a kendit sheath, but not better than Raden's. I hope, this one is a "kendit rante" (chain-belted) sheath. Or at least, "kendit wurung" according to Bambang Harsrinuksmo's Ensiklopedi.
Kendit rante, believed to be good for people with profession of prosecutor, police... But if kendit wurung, then it will only be good for hope, hope, and hope of good fortune... The keris also has a kendit pamor in the middle of the blade. Please look at the close up this Majapahit era keris which bears dhapur "jangkung mayat" with three luks or the jangkung of the dead body... Oh, but I'm still wanting to live longer... Ganjawulung |
|
|
|
26th May 2007, 11:10 AM
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 928
|
Two others gayaman with kendit inside
|
|
|
|
|
26th May 2007, 04:47 PM
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
Hi Marco,
The sheath, I prefer the first one. The kendit is quite perfect. But the hilt, I would rather choose the second (tayuman) one, 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.. |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2007, 05:43 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 928
|
About kendit:
My dear Yogya friend, a person mention many times in first and second Enciclopedia Keris, told me that there are two kinds of kendit : real kendit and fake kendit: if i have uderstood well, the difference depends on the cut of the piece of timoho's wood relatives to the black timoho's stains in the wood itself. Silakan could Ganya or some other forum's friend explain in the correct way this difference? Thanks |
|
|
|
|
26th May 2007, 07:39 PM
|
#5 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: J a k a r t a
Posts: 991
|
Fake or true Kendit?
Marco, true kendit is easy to prove. Just look at the keris hole, whether the black stripe of kendit goes through the wood or not. Very simple isn't it? The black colour of true kendit will even goes through the back side of the sheath.
|
|
|
|
|
26th May 2007, 08:13 PM
|
#6 | |
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
27th May 2007, 11:27 AM
|
#7 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 928
|
Dear Mr. Boedhi
A great explanation! Thanks a lot |
|
|
|
|
27th May 2007, 03:16 PM
|
#8 | |
|
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... |
|
|
|
|
|
27th May 2007, 07:57 PM
|
#9 | |
|
Keris forum moderator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,211
|
Quote:
  , 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? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
27th May 2007, 08:28 PM
|
#10 | |
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
