[A. G. Maisey]

That's a very interesting interpretation Amuk Murugul!

You have noted that "it is just my view".

Does that mean that you have provided us with your opinion, or can you quote a source for this interpretation?

I do have a couple of very minor problems with this interpretation, but I am hopeful that you may be able explain these minor discrepancies .

Hanyokrokusumo, or as he was more commonly known, Sultan Agung (Sultan Agung Adi Prabu Hanyokrokusumo) was the ruler of the Central Javanese kingdom of Mataram from 1613 to 1645 ( not everybody agrees on these dates, and some authorities have them varying by a year at either extreme of the period of reign).

Sultan Agung did extend the influence of Mataram into East Jawa and Madura, but he failed to subdue Blambangan, and he never really had much success at all in dominating either Batavia or Banten. He tried a couple of times to drive the Dutch from Batavia, but he failed both times. So, although he did come to influence a large part of the Island of Jawa, at no time did he ever achieve the conquest of Jawa.

I am unaware of the rhinoceros having any place in Javanese iconography. It may have a place in Sundanese iconography, I do not know about this, but in Javanese iconography I cannot find a place for it. Nor can I find a place for the rhinoceros in mainstream Hindu iconography. It is not possible for the rhinoceros to be understood as the elephant. The elephant has the same value as the naga, and in some interpretations one may be understood as the other, but the poor old rhino just doesn't get a look in anywhere.

It is true that the word naga can have a couple of different meanings, but in the context of Jawa, Bali, the keris and the associated belief systems the word Naga refers to one of the three major Nagas, Anantaboga, Basuki, and Taksaka. These three Nagas are incarnations of Brahma, Wisnu and Siwa, and if the three Nagas are merged into only one Naga, that Naga is known as Basuki. Thus, when we consider the relationship of the keris to the Naga, there is a very solid and demonstrable association between the Naga Basuki and the keris, most particularly so when we are thinking in terms of the keris pusaka, the function of which is to bind, as the character of Sri Naga Basuki is as a binding agent.

However, putting all that stuff to one side, there is one little problem that I have with the interpretation that you have given us Amuk, and that is this:- Sultan Agung was a a 17th century Javanese ruler; the keris under discussion is a fairly recent Balinese keris. I just cannot understand why any comparatively modern Balinese would want to incorporate symbolism relevant to a Javanese ruler of several hundred years ago into his keris.

Your interpretation is, as I have said, interesting, but I do feel it needs a little bit of close examination and clarification if we are to accept it as plausible.

EDIT:- There was one other thing I wanted to mention, but I'd forgotten the details, so I let it go until I could find a reference. I've had a look and I still cannot find what is in my mind, so I'll give you what I can remember and somebody might be able to fill in the gaps.
The Dutch wanted to set up a trading station in Bali, and during the negotiations with the Raja of Klungkung, who is the senior Balinese ruler, a request was made for the gift of a live rhinoceros. They were using the harbour at Kuta in those days as the point of entry to South Bali, and the rhino was brought to Kuta and then gifted to the Raja in 1839. This was not an early effort to save the rhino, because a few years later in 1841 or 1842 the rhino was sacrificed as a part of a cremation ceremony.That's as much as I can remember, but somebody may be able to find more on this, and there might be some connection with the use of a rhino as keris motif.