Kris handles showing royal 'mascots'?

VANDOO · 3rd July 2012, 05:36 PM

AH HA! A CHANCE FOR MY SPECIALITY CONJECTURE

MANY STORIES STARTED BEFORE HISTORY AND WERE ONLY PRESENT IN ORAL TRADITIONAL STORIES. THESE ARE EMBELLISHED OVER THE CENTURIES SO IT IS POSSIBLE HANUMAN MAY NOT BE BASED ON MONKEYS BUT ON EARLY HONINIDS LIVING DURING THOSE TIMES. IF THEY WERE INTELLEGENT THEY MAY BE IN HIDEING FROM THEIR VERY AGRESSIVE AND SAVAGE CUZINS. IF NOT INTELLEGENT THEY ARE LIKELY EXTINCT AND LIVE TODAY ONLY IN LEGENDS AND STUDIES OF OLD BONES.

A. G. Maisey · 3rd July 2012, 11:26 PM

Cinna, the original "hunchback" post was made by a gentleman with the ID of "Ganjawulung".

This gentleman is not a native English speaker, but he is a very educated and widely traveled man, note that he placed "hunchback of Java" in inverted commas. Such usage in written English can be taken to mean that he is alluding to something other than a literal interpretation of the phrase. In fact, I feel he may have been drawing a parallel with "the Hunchback of Notre Dame" and creating a visual joke.

In traditional Javanese and Balinese figural hilts, the purpose is most likely as a protective figure --- ancestor as a god, wayang character, actual god, etc. Usage of such figural iconology was available to all people within the community.

The dwarfs kept in the past by Javanese, and perhaps other South East Asian rulers were a royal attribute, as such it would be unfitting for the general populace to use such figures as keris hilts. I myself cannot recall ever having seen a Javanese, nor a Balinese, keris hilt that could reliably be identified as a representation of a dwarf or some unusually formed person.

During the PBX era in Surakarta, there was a fad for the creation of figural keris hilts as miniature sculptures that were displayed as cabinet pieces. Perhaps they may have occasionally been used as keris hilts at times of freedom from dress rules --- picnics and such --- but the very strict requirements of dress within a Javanese kraton hierarchy would have prevented a figural hilt form such as were produced for cabinet display from ever being used by the only people who could use them, that is, members of the upper levels of the kraton hierarchy.

When we consider questions such as you have raised here, it is important to recognise the place within society that the keris occupies, and its purpose. It is not simply a decorative item, nor an item of dress. It is subject to quite strict rules.

Cinna · 4th July 2012, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Ganjawulung" [ . . . ] may have been drawing a parallel with "the Hunchback of Notre Dame" and creating a visual joke..

I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The dwarfs kept in the past by Javanese, and perhaps other South East Asian rulers were a royal attribute, as such it would be unfitting for the general populace to use such figures as keris hilts. [ . . . ] the very strict requirements of dress within a Javanese kraton hierarchy would have prevented a figural hilt form such as were produced for cabinet display from ever being used by the only people who could use them, that is, members of the upper levels of the kraton hierarchy.

This is fascinating information, many thanks! - Cinna

Cinna · 4th July 2012, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VANDOO

AH HA! A CHANCE FOR MY SPECIALITY CONJECTURE

MANY STORIES STARTED BEFORE HISTORY AND WERE ONLY PRESENT IN ORAL TRADITIONAL STORIES. THESE ARE EMBELLISHED OVER THE CENTURIES SO IT IS POSSIBLE HANUMAN MAY NOT BE BASED ON MONKEYS BUT ON EARLY HONINIDS LIVING DURING THOSE TIMES. IF THEY WERE INTELLEGENT THEY MAY BE IN HIDEING FROM THEIR VERY AGRESSIVE AND SAVAGE CUZINS. IF NOT INTELLEGENT THEY ARE LIKELY EXTINCT AND LIVE TODAY ONLY IN LEGENDS AND STUDIES OF OLD BONES.

Hi Vandoo — I like how your mind is working on this question. Yes, more things are possible than we currently have hard evidence for, and we should stay open if possible. . . Cinna

3rd July 2012, 11:26 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Cinna, the original "hunchback" post was made by a gentleman with the ID of "Ganjawulung". This gentleman is not a native English speaker, but he is a very educated and widely traveled man, note that he placed "hunchback of Java" in inverted commas. Such usage in written English can be taken to mean that he is alluding to something other than a literal interpretation of the phrase. In fact, I feel he may have been drawing a parallel with "the Hunchback of Notre Dame" and creating a visual joke. In traditional Javanese and Balinese figural hilts, the purpose is most likely as a protective figure --- ancestor as a god, wayang character, actual god, etc. Usage of such figural iconology was available to all people within the community. The dwarfs kept in the past by Javanese, and perhaps other South East Asian rulers were a royal attribute, as such it would be unfitting for the general populace to use such figures as keris hilts. I myself cannot recall ever having seen a Javanese, nor a Balinese, keris hilt that could reliably be identified as a representation of a dwarf or some unusually formed person. During the PBX era in Surakarta, there was a fad for the creation of figural keris hilts as miniature sculptures that were displayed as cabinet pieces. Perhaps they may have occasionally been used as keris hilts at times of freedom from dress rules --- picnics and such --- but the very strict requirements of dress within a Javanese kraton hierarchy would have prevented a figural hilt form such as were produced for cabinet display from ever being used by the only people who could use them, that is, members of the upper levels of the kraton hierarchy. When we consider questions such as you have raised here, it is important to recognise the place within society that the keris occupies, and its purpose. It is not simply a decorative item, nor an item of dress. It is subject to quite strict rules. Last edited by A. G. Maisey; 3rd July 2012 at 11:49 PM.

3rd July 2012, 05:36 PM	#1
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	AH HA! A CHANCE FOR MY SPECIALITY CONJECTURE MANY STORIES STARTED BEFORE HISTORY AND WERE ONLY PRESENT IN ORAL TRADITIONAL STORIES. THESE ARE EMBELLISHED OVER THE CENTURIES SO IT IS POSSIBLE HANUMAN MAY NOT BE BASED ON MONKEYS BUT ON EARLY HONINIDS LIVING DURING THOSE TIMES. IF THEY WERE INTELLEGENT THEY MAY BE IN HIDEING FROM THEIR VERY AGRESSIVE AND SAVAGE CUZINS. IF NOT INTELLEGENT THEY ARE LIKELY EXTINCT AND LIVE TODAY ONLY IN LEGENDS AND STUDIES OF OLD BONES.