Figural horn (possibly rhino) hilt

[kai]

Hello Alan,

the high quality hilts made by m'ranggis use patterns and models that have been in the craftsman's family for generations. Certainly, these vary, but they vary in accordance with what one m'ranngi's family carves, as opposed to what another family carves.

Do you possibly have any examples (carved during the last 100-200 years by traditional mranggi families) of these archaic styles/patterns that appear to be characteristic of the "Kunstkammer" keris? While I realize that traditional pre-WW2 (or possibly even extant) hilt carving is (often) based on very old patterns, I have gained the impression that the early hilts had features that got obsolete (possibly culturally inappropiate or, less likely, merely out of fashion) in the following centuries.

As Gustav (and Karsten) already pointed out, there are only a few extant examples that appear to be early collected. If you know of any similar ones from later periods, this would certainly be really important for the current working hyotheses.

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Kai, here are a couple of examples which i am sure have been carved within the last 100 years. To my eye you can still see aspects of the lingam/yoni symbolism in the tumpals carved here.
I am also including a front shot of the older example i showed earlier for a comparison of the tumpals used there. I am uncertain of the actual age of this hilt.

[kai]

Hello David,

here are a couple of examples which i am sure have been carved within the last 100 years. To my eye you can still see aspects of the lingam/yoni symbolism in the tumpals carved here.

Yes, these 2 do qualify as modern. Very similar workmanship, indeed.

While it is evident that these are offspring of the old style hilts, it's not about the similarity (nor quality of workmanship) but rather differences in detail.

I am also including a front shot of the older example i showed earlier for a comparison of the tumpals used there. I am uncertain of the actual age of this hilt.

Thanks, a really nice one! This "man in green" style makes it even more difficult to place (and the wear doesn't help either to discern details).

We need close-ups from all sides of this hilt for analysis. It might be older than you think...

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Originally Posted by kai

Yes, these 2 do qualify as modern. Very similar workmanship, indeed.
While it is evident that these are offspring of the old style hilts, it's not about the similarity (nor quality of workmanship) but rather differences in detail.

Well, i only posted these hilts because Gustav seemed to be implying that the lingam/yoni symbolism is not to be found in the tumpal of "modern" versions of these hilts. While stylized i maintain that symbolism is indeed present in these examples. I have seen many other more modern versions where it is not.

Originally Posted by kai

Thanks, a really nice one! This "man in green" style makes it even more difficult to place (and the wear doesn't help either to discern details).
We need close-ups from all sides of this hilt for analysis. It might be older than you think...

I don't really want to detract from this thread too much by posting a series of images of this hilt. While worn it does seem to also incorporate the lingam/yoni into the tumpal. However, i have posted all sides of it before so you can check this thread out if you want a closer look. I am aware that it is pretty old.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=buta+hilt

[Gustav]

As Jean and Kai pointed out, the devil is in the details. The details of eyes, eyebrows, ears, hair, fingers and so on are extremely important. I never would judge the age of a hilt by only one indicator, yet the total allows an opinion.

I am very sorry, yet I am reluctant to go into the smaller details, because I have no interest to participate in or to sponsor the indonesian Keris business.

Regarding more recent carvings (thank you David), I would say, the presentation of Lingga-Yoni symbolism differs from the old depictions on Bungkul of a hilt. I would even say, in more recent times this symbolism mostly is not understood by the carver, just the ornaments depicted, or the degree of "hiding" a symbol is a completely other one.

Regarding the symbolism within Tumpal, there is another important component, the Lotus blossom. "In the esoteric vajrayana-buddhism it signifies the female principle or the female genitals (as a substitute for the hindu yoni - Liebert, Iconographic Dictionary of the Indian Religions). In fact, the state of dissolution of Yoni-Lotus motif / the state of Tumpal motif as general arrangement for ornaments on Bungkul is a very important indicator for the stage of development and thus the approximate age of a hilt.

Regarding the material, I even doubt, if most of us would recognize it, when held in hand. The appearance of rhino horn can be very different, along with it comes the degree of polish and the age (I have the feeling, they become denser with age and you can't recognize the end grains well anymore). There is a big collection of 17th cent. chinese drinking horns in Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, and there are remarkable differences in appearance of the material. Of course, also because the chinese used horn of all three rhino species which lived in Asia. The very tip of the head of rhino hilt from Vienna (surely 17th cent., possibly much earlier) is covered with a small cap made from gold and gems, yet next to it you don't see any end grains.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for your informative response Gustav.

I understand your reasons for not wanting to expand upon what you have already written. I'm sure that some people will be disappointed by this, but I am equally sure that your decision has been taken after due consideration.

Regrettably I am presently unable to verify exactly what Liebert published in his list of Sanskrit terms, but if he mentioned only the lotus blossom as a substitution for the lingga/yoni, he was quite incorrect --- in spite of his eminence. In Tantric Buddhism (Vajrayana Buddhism) the blossom of the lotus can in some instances be interpreted as a substitution for the yoni, it is the stem of the lotus that can be interpreted as the lingga, thus, in Tantric symbolism when it is intended that the lotus be understood in a similar way to that in which the lingga/yoni is understood, the blossom must be accompanied by the stem. I am uncertain if this reading was applicable to Tantrism as it was practiced in Hindu Jawa. It may have been, but the evidence that I can recall seems to point to the more usual interpretations of the lotus, even amongst practitioners of Tantrism.

Actually, there are quite a lot of interpretations in the Hindu-Buddhist realm for the lotus, and it is not at all difficult to err when we attempt to understand exactly how a lotus in a particular place and time was intended to be understood.

Moreover, it is important to remember that the foundation symbolism in the Javanese keris is twofold:- the link to ancestor worship, and the link to the worship of Siwa (Shiva). These two ideologies join together and are expressed through the Gunungan. Any reading of the symbolism to be found in the Javanese keris must be done from a base of Javanese understanding within the applicable time frame. We cannot take mainstream religious understandings and expect that these can be used to understand the way in which beliefs, symbols and practices were understood in Hindu-Jawa. So, although we may believe that it is valid to interpret some symbol according to an understanding held in a different place, and at a different time, we must question this belief if it does not fit comfortably with the beliefs and practices that were current in Jawa prior to Islamic domination.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are we not discussing this matter in terms of 16th century Jawa?

When did the Islamic domination of Jawa really start to get rolling?

Perhaps we should ask ourselves if any mention of Tantrism is at all relevant at that time in Javanese history.

When we consider the iconography of Old Javanese art, there is also the necessity to take into account the interpretations of individual craftsmen, particularly so when we realise that keris and other dagger hilts in early Jawa were sometimes, possibly often, carved by their owners, not by craftsmen dedicated to the work.

[Gustav]

[QUOTE=A. G. Maisey]

Thank you for your illuminating and considered response Gustav.

I do understand your reluctance to share your knowledge with us, and I am certain you have brought tears to the eyes of many who were so eagerly awaiting your revelations.

QUOTE]

Alan, why such attitude?

I know, that you don't need any answers (as the thread "The Size of the Keris" clearly showed), and if, then only as a stage to demonstrate for another time your superior knowledge, superior ability to articulate and some other abilities.

Your posts in this thread are implying, that you most probably don't pay much attention to iconographical elements of 16th/17th cent. javanese figural hilts, to possible correspondences in East Javanese and Ming art, developments and dissolutions of these elements in later hilts, to the analysis of these elements.

Well, it's also a way.

Instead, in your last post, you deny that Tantric symbolism is still present in 16th/17th cent. javanese figural hilts. If the hilt carvers of today share your view, it's understandable, why the copies of old hilts are mostly quite well distinguishable.

Nevertheless, in your post #7 you are asking me to expand on comments about:

1) some indicators, which are typical for early figural hilts and doesn't appear on later Pasisir figural hilts, and this particular hilt has many of them

2) symbolism within the Tumpal, and the state of development of the reversed Tumpal under the feet of the figure

3) one very important feature, in which modern replicas of these hilts mostly fail.

I must say, you have always been very reluctant to answer such kind of direct questions in the past, and I have learned, that such questions, and especially from you, mostly are provocations. And they also once more let me think about your proximity with hilt carvers.

To the hilt - in my initial post I wrote: possibly 17th cent. and possibly rhino horn. Judging by the execution of iconographical details (unfortunately not by the proper javanese indicator of age) it could be one. There most probably will be no possibility to be certain about the material, yet - if it is an old one, it would be something very rare even if made from Kerbau horn, because there are only three other figural 16th/17th cent. javanese hilts published, and perhaps a couple more in private collections.

I suppose, the blade it came with doesn't really belong to the context, because of the amount of glue used to secure this ensemble. I also wouldn't expect such work from Indonesia, unless it was done by a blind person under time pressure.

[Gustav]

[QUOTE=A. G. Maisey]

Any reading of the symbolism to be found in the Javanese keris must be done from a base of Javanese understanding within the applicable time frame. We cannot take mainstream religious understandings and expect that these can be used to understand the way in which beliefs, symbols and practices were understood in Hindu-Jawa. So, although we may believe that it is valid to interpret some symbol according to an understanding held in a different place, and at a different time, we must question this belief if it does not fit comfortably with the beliefs and practices that were current in Jawa prior to Islamic domination.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are we not discussing this matter in terms of 16th century Jawa?

When did the Islamic domination of Jawa really start to get rolling?

QUOTE]

In the book "Art of Indonesia/Pusaka" (Periplus 1998, there are many editions of this book) there is an article by Suwati Kartiwa with K.R.T. Hardjonagoro. On page 173 a wall plaque is depicted, dated 1711. The text says: "In Cirebon, one of the oldest cities in Java, wooden plaques hang on house walls near the entrance door to protect the household from evil influences. Cirebon art combines motifs from various sources: the figure on this example has an elephant's head like the Hindu god Ganesa, and stands on a cloudlike ground reminiscent of south Chinese art of Ming Dynasty." So it is well possible the people at that time were aware of the function of Ganesa as master and remover of obstacles. See also plate LXIII from van der Hoop, Indonesische Siermotieven.

There are many such examples of elements (and conceptions) of hindu art living further in the art of 16th/17th cent., especially in coastal cities, yet also elsewhere. There are the famous wall plaques from Keraton Kasepuhan in Cirebon. A relief from Mosque in Mantingan depicts a completely scroll-covered ape and a crab, which corresponds to the Setubandha episode from Hikayat Seri Rama. Museum Nasional has a gold plaque depicting this episode, dated 14th/15th cent., East Java. An interesting coincidence - the scroll covered body could be the same tendence of "hiding" a figure exposed on old hilt of David http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=buta+hilt. As I understand, for some people this is a sign of somewhat later stage in development, yet we are able to found figures with limbs merging into foliage already in the art of Majapahit (Eggebrecht, Versunkene Königreiche Indonesiens, 1995: cat nr. 149, Museum Nasional, Inv. Nr. 422b).

We have many symbols from Candi Sukuh depicted on gateway of mosque in Sendang Duwur such as the Garuda wings and the "Rainbow" arch with Kala and two deer heads substituting Makara.

In fact, I think the coastal cities with their elements of Muslim Chinese art influenced art of Majapahit for some time bevor the collapse of Majapahit, and symbols/motifs and their meanings from the art of Majapahit lived forth for some time in coastal cities after Majapahit ceased to exist. There almost never is a "pure" state of something. This, of course is nothing new, yet important in context of these figural hilts.

Of course at some time some elements ceased to be understood as symbols, became just motifs, and then disappeared. This development could in some cases be a possibility for a rough estimation of age.