[RobT]

Thanks for all your responses. I am gratified that my first thread has engendered interest and am sure we will gain understanding as a result. To that purpose I will try to reply to your comments and questions thus far.
BluErf: The creature has what appear to be wings. Whether the diagonal striations on the wings are meant to depict feathers or are just decorative I can't say. I can say that my first overall impression was bat, not bird and judging by the responses to this thread I am not alone in that. The legs are definately human as tom hyle's reference to thighs and shins points out. The feet are mammal, not bird shaped with four claws showing.
VANDOO: Your maintenance tips are about as far as I intend to go for now. I'm pretty conversant with amber in both translucent and opaque forms and I'm sure the ukiran is neither. I might try a hot pin on the inside of the peksi hole. Thanks for the mendak offer, I may take you up on that when I know more about the piece. I am in complete agreement with your fruit bat observation and since some fruit bats are called flying foxes, I thought the ukiran might be an akso in flying form. (Provided such a creature exists in the folklore.)
nechesh: The tail reminded me of Hanuman also but the rest of the creature doesn't. All the images of Hanuman I can recall seeing give the general impression of benevelent strength. I don't get that feeling of good from my hulu. Strength yes, good maybe sometimes yes, maybe sometimes no. I have to check out the flying monkeys from Oz. (Strangely enough my friend who has the movie, was talking about them in a different context just the other day.) In regards to Hanuman, it should be noted that the flying monkeys are the servants of the Wicked Witch and are most likely styled to look the part. I would be surprised to see a similar aspect on a heroic character. If the hulu is made of a natural material, it's nothing I'm familiar with as a collector of blades from Africa, the middle and far east, and eastern Europe. I have taken the hulu off but have seen nothing that would give me a clue as to its makeup. Although I have some realgar, blade etching will wait until I have perfected my technique on a few blades of lesser quality and condition. Thanks for the link to the Pura Goa Lawak cave. I had heard about the the cave and the ceremonies surrounding it from an Indonesian shopkeeper in Montreal but he couldn't recall the name of the cave.
tom hyle: Sorry the pictures aren't coming up for you. They're all there when I call up the thread. As you and others have mentioned, the fruit bat resemblance is strong. Perhaps in Indonesia, with its large number of fruit bats, it's not an atypical representation. I don't think the hulu is stone. It's almost as light as balsa wood. The dark brown could indeed have been an applied finish or an applied base coat for a finish. Whether it was deliberately removed or just wore off I can't say. As I said in my reply to nechesh, I just can't see this creature as Hanuman, for me it radiates too much malevelence. You said it yourself; "the Wicked Witch has been to Bali". The two round protrusions above the hands are the curled ends of locks of hair flanking the face. Those rows of lines around thigh and shin carry the same striations as on the bottom of the wings. I had assumed that they were continuations of the wings.
Rick: As you can see from my replys to nechesh and tom hyle, I have difficulty with the Hanuman idea. I agree with you in that all the human form phalli on bali hulu that I have seen are unmistakable as such. What about the depiction of a bat or dog member? The penis on my hulu looks appropriate for a dog or bat to me. As you say, perhaps what appears to be a phallus is in reality a waist cloth knot but aside from the necklace, I can't see any evidence of clothing on the creature and in a larger sense I get the feeling that this creature has no need for garments that preserve modesty.
Sincerely,
RobT