Keris and Rembrandt

[Dmitry]

Look at the blade in Samson's eye.
I find this reference to a keris fascinating. It's probably the earliest depiction of this weapon, but I could be wrong, of course.
No doubt it was brought to Holland by a Dutch East India Company employee from Java, or some such place. Artists always have all kinds of stuff laying around for props...

[asomotif]

Hello Dmitry,

Check out this thread :http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7774&highlight=rembrandt

Best regards,
Willem

[Dmitry]

Hello Dmitry,

Check out this thread :http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7774&highlight=rembrandt

Best regards,
Willem


Hello!

Story of my life - a day too late, a dollar too short. :)

Still, fascinating stuff.

[asomotif]

Yes, very interesting that he used all kinds of exotic weapons in his paintings.

Maybe somebody still has to add something ?
Or maybe someone knows other painters that depicted exotics arms and armour. (Rubens ? )

[ganjawulung]

It seems a nine (9) luks keris. Kidang Soka? Sempana? Or seven (7) luks keris. Carubuk? One luk had already inside Samsom's eye... But it seems quite clear that the hilt used was Cirebonese "buta hilt". Look at the hand position of the buta... (pls zoom in)

GANJAWULUNG

[A. G. Maisey]

I have not seen the original of this painting, in fact, I have not even seen a good quality print of it.

All I have seen is the image in front of me on my computer screen.

I've Photoshopped that image through several magnifications and all I can see is a nondescript lump protruding from the mailed hand, and a very small section of flamboyant blade.

Based upon what I can see I would describe this dagger as simply one with a flamboyant blade.

I cannot see a keris anywhere.

[stekemest]

I know the original painting. It is in fact a keris, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to describe it in detail. Rembrandt was a collector of ethnographica, and he certainly painted a piece he owned himself.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for this clarification, Stekemest.

So, in the original, it is possible to see the ganja and the assymetric base of the blade?

[Gustav]

Very probably I see there just what I used to see all the time I know this picture.

I thought, it were possible to see a difference between sirah cecak and buntut cecak, also a big pejetan (and wavy gonjo).

[stekemest]

Yes. This part is quite dark though, and it is hard to see all the details. I can try to get a better picture of this part.
The painting can be seen in the Städel Museum in Frankfurt. If anyone intends to go there, send me a message. :)

[Rick]

Here

[David]

Yes, i think this is clearly a keris and i hope that from the enlargements made you see this as well Alan. From the look of what i can see of the hilt i think it's a fair bet that it is the same keris Rembrandt depicts in this painting. From what i know he owned a couple of examples which he used as models for his paintings.

[David]

Here is another Rembrandt, a self-portrait, which is most commonly titles "Self-Portrait as an Oriental Pontentate With A Kris". Here we see an asymmetric blade and a rather vague Kacang Kembang, but the blade itself is a very unusal one and i have a feeling that some artistic license was taken here to create a fanasty keris based upon examples he had or had seen. :shrug:

[Rick]

Okay, this begs the question ;

In the blinding of Sampson what does the use of a keris represent ?

In what light was the keris viewed by European culture in that time ?

[David]

Good question Rick. It is, after all, the blade that does the "evil" deed of blinding him.
I don't know if this will look any clearer, but i found this better than average version for clarity and blew it up as much as i dared. I am sure that the original color is off, but hopefully it will clearly show this to be a keris.

[ganjawulung]

Was the sheath Banten "sandang walikat"? If yes, then Cirebonese "buta hilt" would match with Bantenese walikat.... Just guessing. For comparison, (picture) is Bantenese warangka but not sandang walikat. Banten warangka, could seem as if symetrical, although the blade inside doesn't need to be symetrical.

Just one cent opinion...

GANJAWULUNG

[Gustav]

Okay, this begs the question ;

In the blinding of Sampson what does the use of a keris represent ?

In what light was the keris viewed by European culture in that time ?

Probably the art keris was used was evident very early to the europeans - there is a report of a man named Henry Middleton from 1605, where a javanese sailor stabs to death with a "cryse" a dutch official, an eye-witness and another javanese, which resembles later reports about running amok or amuk.

I guess, becouse such situations, very quick and probably unexpected use of keris is beying connected with the fierce character of the javanese and bugis (Careri in 1695 says, orang laut draw their "crisis" out of the sheaths for the slightest reason), and has become also character associated with keris.

There is also one european epigraph on a sheath of a keris from Dresden collection, 17.cent., which says: "...brings fortune or misfortune". So some of the "keris mythology" were probably also evident to the europeans.

Interesting are the mentions of figural keris hilts, as depictions of devil (Levinium Hulsius, 1606).

[Gustav]

Was the sheath Banten "sandang walikat"? If yes, then Cirebonese "buta hilt" would match with Bantenese walikat.... Just guessing. For comparison, (picture) is Bantenese warangka but not sandang walikat. Banten warangka, could seem as if symetrical, although the blade inside doesn't need to be symetrical.

Just one cent opinion...

GANJAWULUNG

The sheath on the picture is not sandang walikat (nobody has said that), but an old (probably broken) ladrang form, seen also in old european collections. It is very close to the Banten wrongko you posted, all preserved examples are Gandar Iras.

[asomotif]

Here is a picture of his "Kunstcaemer"

At this moment I have no Idea if the items on display are genuinely from rembrandts time...

[David]

Hmmm....well i do see a keris on the wall in the middle next to a bust. It would be cool if this stuff actually was his personal affects. :)

[Gustav]

Two days before Rembrandt's death he was visited by genealogist Pieter van Brederode, who has made a record of antiquities and curiosa in his collection. So, despite his very bad financial situation, Rembrandt should have possessed (after many auctions he was forced to make) some objects till death.

There surely will be some information in museum about his estate. The diaries of Pieter van Brederode are also published, 2006. But I think, it's nearly impossible there would be some original objects from Rembrandt's household or collections.

[A. G. Maisey]

This is alike to failing to see a forest because the trees got in the way.

I can see that keris clearly and in detail now.

Last night I looked again and again and focussed intently on the hand.

I did not see that the mailed hand was grasping the blade, I sub-consciously had that hand gripping the hilt.

Helps to look at things when you haven't just finished 12 hours in front of a computer screen.

[ganjawulung]

Examining the "Rembrandt's Keris" in his painting of "The Blinding Samson" (1636), of course is not like examining a Banten keris in Jensen's Krisdisk -- for instance. Or like watching this "blade-gripping a seven luks Carubuk" like this too (picture). So, IMHO, it is not important -- whether Rembrandt was painting a Carubuk or Banten keris in his "Blinding Samson", or a Kidang Soka in Maduran walikat sheath.

This was "Rembrandt's Keris", of course. No matter what dapur it was. It was his expression at a certain mood in a certain time in the past. Why gripping the keris not in the keris' hilt, this was of course his liberty in expressing certain idea. For me, it is more interesting to look back at the biography of this one greatest painter in Europe.

Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn (you may browse anywhere) -- (July 16, 1606 until October 4, 1669) was living in the period of the golden era of the famous multi-national corporation VOC (Vereenigde Nederlandsche g'octroyeerde Oost-Indische Compagnie). No wonder, if he owned some "Indonesian thing" in his life. Many building, and even the city of Batavia (Jakarta now) was built during this VOC period. (The National Museum of Jakarta still exists, until now).

In the journey of his life in painting -- The Blinding Samson was expressed in his "Amsterdam Period" (1632-1636) where he used more biblical and mythological theme in his paintings.. But in dramatical way.

So, not important whether this "keris like object" was a Carubuk, Kidang Soka or whatever dhapur. It was "Rembrandt's keris".... It is a painting. Not a photograph.

GANJAWULUNG

[Rick]

Yes, it is a painting; famous one .

Still, what does the use of a keris represent in this classic 16?C painting .
Is it allegorical ?

Why should Sampson be blinded by a keris as the chosen weapon ??

[David]

I did not see that the mailed hand was grasping the blade, I sub-consciously had that hand gripping the hilt.
Makes perfect sense to me Alan. Because your mind wasn't connecting to the fact that the hand is holding the blade in a completely unpractical manner you just weren't seeing it correctly.
Ganja, yes, in many ways this is "Rembrandt's Keris", but it is most certainly modeled after a keris he actually held in his possession. As such it is as much a "real" item that can be identified as is a photograph, that is a 2 dimensional depictions of an actual 3 dimensional object.
Rick, i think perhaps Rembrandt chose to use various exotic arms simply because they were exotic. We might be thinking too deeply if we are searching for a allegory here. :shrug: :)

[ThePepperSkull]

Agreed with David. I think it's a case of a cigar just being a cigar. Rembrandt was an enthnographic arms collector and included various ethnographic arms in his paintings.

[kronckew]

Agreed with David. I think it's a case of a cigar just being a cigar. Rembrandt was an enthnographic arms collector and included various ethnographic arms in his paintings.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b9/MagrittePipe.jpg
:)

edited:

(translation:"this is not a pipe.". this is also not a kris. this isn't a keris either.)

[Gustav]

C'est un kris?

[kronckew]

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s231/kronckew/keris.jpg
this is not a keris, it is an image of a keris

p.s. - this is not a kris either. this is an image of a kris. :)
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s231/kronckew/Moro%20Kris/MoroKris003_DCE.jpg

of course, in classical thaumaturgy the image IS the object, it's the sympathetic magical law of similarity.....

[A. G. Maisey]

Kronckew in your most recent post you have made the most beautiful and most accurate statement I think I have ever seen in this discussion group:-

this is not a keris, it is an image of a keris


I thank you most sincerely for reminding us that when we look at an image on a computer screen, no matter how expertly that image has been prepared, it is still not the real thing, it is only something that acts upon our mind to conjure our own understanding of the real thing.

[kronckew]

:) a.g., you have most eloquently put into words the intent of my posts. words are also images.

...and sometimes provoke more thought than a graphic ever could. sometimes a word is worth a thousand pictures as it allows your imagination to fill in the gaps...

i remember reading 'the talisman' in my youth, and there was, i believe, a chapter where king richard (the lionheart) meets saladin (Salah-ed-Din Yusef ibn Ayub), richard cuts an iron bar in half with his sword to impress him, and saladin responds by cutting a silk scarf in half by just floating it down onto the stationary edge.

how many pictures of that sword are in our minds now....

and the image in oil paint of the essential keris in sampson's eye will also be engraved somewhere in our hearts evermore...

[drdavid]

Please excuse my whimsy but this thread has taken me to one of my favourite images by Yoshitoshi



' a finger points at the moon but the finger is not itself the moon'
(Gesshu 17th C)

drd

[kronckew]

ah, great minds think alike. :)
http://www.majorlycool.com/media/1/20080630-great-minds-think-alike.jpg

[Gustav]

In his Krisdisk Jensen gives an interpretation about a connection between subject of Samson and keris.

Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669) has in two
paintings pictured a kris. The first painting
represents “The Capture of Samson” (Judges 16:19)
and is painted in 1629. The picture shows Samson
sleeping with his head in the lap of Delilah. She is
pointing at his hair to tell the enemy entering the
room that his strength is sitting in his hair. Samson
wears a kris with a Yaksha-/Raksasa hilt type 1 and a red painted old Ladrang type of sheath.
The Dutch had in 1596 entered the Indonesian area and began to bring krisses of this type home to Holland.
The Europeans found them very exotic and Rembrandt, who collected oriental weapons, has presumably
purchased one.
The other painting illustrates “The Capture and Blinding of Samson” and is painted in 1636. At the painting a
soldier is blinding Samson with a kris with a long, strong and waved blade. It is most possible the same kris
as the one pictured in the first picture.
I do not think that it is accidental that Rembrandt twice connected the kris with the capture of Samson. It is
most probable connected with the fact that the Europeans thought the kris was a demonic weapon. Many
sources relate that the blade is poisonous (perhaps because of the arsenic that was used to blue the blade).
It was a view harboured by the snake symbolism of the blade (the blade symbolizes a Naga, snake, the ruler
of the underworld). This idea was made clear by the waved snake-like blade, which most of the krisses the
Europeans brought home to Europe had and which Rembrandt´s kris had as well. Now the snake is
according to the Jewish and Christian tradition connected with Satan as the tempter and seducer, a
connection which is further accentuated by the demonic Yaksha-/Raksasa hilt of the kris. Because of that it is
probable that Rembrandt has equipped Samson with a such a kris. It symbolizes that Samson wears a
seductive and treacherous weapon in his belt - a weapons which turns against himself and literally blinds
him, like he was blind to the seductive treason of Delilah.

[Laowang]

From Janson, History of Art (Abrams, 1986), regarding the Blinding of Samson:

"Rembrandt had developed a full-blown High Baroque style. He here visualizes the Old Testament as a world of oriental splendor and violence, cruel yet seductive... Rembrandt was at this time an avid collector of Near Eastern (sic) paraphernalia, which serve as props in these pictures."

I would hesitate from imputing too much symbolism to the choice of the keris, outside of its contribution to 'oriental' splendor. The interpretation in the KrisDisk is uncharacteristic of Rembrandt and his social milieu.

At this time, Holland was newly independent and prosperous, and art was a commodity hotly collected by wealthy merchants. Paintings were commodities produced for the market; the overall atmosphere of a piece like this would have contributed to its value as such. Still lifes from the period often have animals, flowers, or fruit from outside of Europe. Unlike paintings of Old Testament subjects from earlier periods in European art history, paintings in this period were being produced for wealthy secular clients, not the church.

Also, if the kris were viewed as a satanic emblem, it is unlikely Rembrandt would have held one in his self-portrait as an Oriental potentate.

[Rick]

Well said . :)

The weapon the other soldier is holding over Samson in 'The Blinding' is a Bhuj; is it not ? :shrug:

[Gustav]

I would hesitate from imputing too much symbolism to the choice of the keris, outside of its contribution to 'oriental' splendor. The interpretation in the KrisDisk is uncharacteristic of Rembrandt and his social milieu.

At this time, Holland was newly independent and prosperous, and art was a commodity hotly collected by wealthy merchants. Paintings were commodities produced for the market; the overall atmosphere of a piece like this would have contributed to its value as such. Still lifes from the period often have animals, flowers, or fruit from outside of Europe. Unlike paintings of Old Testament subjects from earlier periods in European art history, paintings in this period were being produced for wealthy secular clients, not the church.

Also, if the kris were viewed as a satanic emblem, it is unlikely Rembrandt would have held one in his self-portrait as an Oriental potentate.

Of course the view of Jensen regarding keris in both paintings is a speculative one. It is a try to understand why this exotic weapon is appearing in the paintings whose subject is the story of Samson.

There is no statements of Rembrandt himself regarding depictions of keris in his paintings, so it can stay only a speculation, a speculative opinion.

It is important to understand, that the opposite opinion - this exotic weapon is merely a decoration without any background- is a speculation or a speculative opinion at least at the same degree, and even more: this is a very contemporary speculation in it's character, possible in this way only since the raise of modern, pluralistic society, in whose eyes the older european culture is slowely becoming the same exoticism as some South-East Asian culture: merely a decoration.

It is absolutely wright to draw parallels between the appearing of still life paintings and rising bourgeoise society in Europa. But exactly the still life paintings from 17. century are the richest displays of allegory - which was really an art and science per se - most of them having "Vanitas" as the main subject. Indeed, the 17. cent. was the golden age of Allegory, both in catholical and non-catholical European countries.

To see the objects merely as decoration in still life and other paintings is a way to see things, which have nothing to do with european culture before 19. cent.

Regarding the self portraits of Rembrandt (more than 90), some of them belong to the most sarcastical and self-ironical visual statements from this age.

[Laowang]

Gustav, you raise some interesting points that made me think a little bit more about the role of the keris in these paintings, of Rembrandt himself, and of art in this period. I also checked a couple more specific sources out of curiosity: Schama, Rembrandt's Eyes (Knopf, 1999) and Westermann, Rembrandt (Phaidon, 2000). Let me start furthest from the keris, and move back toward it.

Much art of this time employed allegory, but that doesn't mean all art did. While vanitas was a common theme in still lifes from the period, not every still life used it as a theme. Certainly a painting featuring a skull, rotten fruit, an hourglass, or watch, was a clear allegory of humanity's mortality, but not every still life does so. One shouldn't assume every component of every painting is loaded with symbolic portent. This same time period saw the birth of Dutch Realism in genre painting, portraiture, and landscape.

Regarding Rembrandt's still lives, the general scholarly consensus is that they were studies of emotion, and personae. He portrayed himself angry, happy, upset, etc., with curly hair, with facial hair, with a cloak, as an oriental potentate, etc. In the case of the still life with the keris, the keris helps create the persona.

Neither source I mentioned, nor a couple others I paged through, had much to say about Rembrandt using Christian allegory. Most scholars agree that Rembrandt was primarily interested in portraying the tragic as found in historical and Biblical scenes, and rendering that poetic idea in a dramatic fashion. You are right, however, the keris is not mere decoration, per se. It serves a symbolic function, but not as Christian allegory.

In Samson and Delilah, Schama says it much better than I ever could: "...the great potent curve of the hero's sword, unlike the weapon of the soldier in the background, deeply sheathed and hanging slackly below his buttocks. It doesn't take a higher degree in Freudian analysis to understand what Rembrandt is up to here: the narration of sexual drama through signs and euphemisms."

In the Blinding of Samson, the anachronistic combination of ethnographic weapons, European-style armor, and exotic costumes creates an imagined scene of Old Testament violence and gore; the keris and other objects are critical in creating a dramatic tableau that is convincing even though not historically accurate. The light falls from the top left of the canvas down toward Samson in a diagonal formed by Delilah's torso, Samson's leg, terminating via the mailed arm and keris at Samson's eye, and mirrored by the bhuj. The alien appearance of the keris, from a European perspective, heightens the drama of his blinding.

The keris appears to be the same in both paintings, and ties together two paintings painted eight years apart. One could certainly read it as a comment on Samson being undone by his own lust; Schama clearly believes that, and even in its original cultural milieu the keris is a phallic emblem.

Any interpretation of art certainly involves subjectivity. I do not mean to dismiss Jensen's reading out of hand. However, his reliance on a Christian allegorical interpretation, with the keris as a satanic emblem, is in contradiction with much of the established scholarship on Rembrandt.

[Gustav]

Laowang, thank you very much for your well researched input here.

You wrote:

I do not mean to dismiss Jensen's reading out of hand. However, his reliance on a Christian allegorical interpretation, with the keris as a satanic emblem, is in contradiction with much of the established scholarship on Rembrandt.[/QUOTE]

This is a circle, becouse oncemore recalls the question of Rick from the post #14: In what light was the keris viewed in the european culture of that time?

I tryed to answer on this in my post #17.

To this, after reading Jensen (post # 34), I can only add:

I don't know, from which time on the europeans (and the javanese) started to see a snake in the blade.
The image of snake in european iconography has an absolutely clear connotation, in all times after the majority of europeans become christians.

I don't know, from which point the europeans started to believe the blade is poisoned (which probably is connected with the view on the blade as snake).

There are few kerisses in early european collections having balu mekabun hilts, even fewer having early planar forms; the absolute majority have yaksha/rakshasa hilts, which are demonic depictions not only in european eyes. There are two passages in Levinium Hulsius (1606), where the keris hilts are mentioned as depictions of devil.

What is Jensen's point, and seems an interesting interpretation (a speculative of course), is that Samson is beeing blinded by his own weapon.
This view on the nature of keris also seems (my individual speculation) to be appearing in the 17. cent. inscription on a keris sheath "...brings fortune or misfortune".

Jensen:

It symbolizes that Samson wears a
seductive and treacherous weapon in his belt - a weapons which turns against himself and literally blinds
him, like he was blind to the seductive treason of Delilah.[/QUOTE]

Your source and your statement:

The keris appears to be the same in both paintings, and ties together two paintings painted eight years apart. One could certainly read it as a comment on Samson being undone by his own lust; Schama clearly believes that, and even in its original cultural milieu the keris is a phallic emblem.

These are two views on this subject. I don't think they are much opposite. They are as much opposite as the views of two sources are.

[Rick]

Thank you both for adressing the question that I raised , Gentlemen .

I have found your responses most interesting . :)

Rick

[Dmitry]

Here's another keris. I don't know who the artist is, but the style of the painting looks positively mid-1800s, Pre-Raphaelite.

[kronckew]

interesting, while the hunting horn has a cord baldric to carry it, the keris appears to be the first recorded use of velcro :) (i can't see what is holding it to it's human). it may be more apparent if viewing the original ;). where did you see that one?

[Dmitry]

I was just informed that this is a fragment of the painting by William Holman Hunt - "A converted British Family Sheltering a Christian Priest from the Persecution of the Druids", 1850.