Raksasa

[tunggulametung]

Originally Posted by VVV

Here are four other variations.
The first two are the more obvious Rakshasas, both with friendly smiles.
The third is the more hidden "Putra Satu" and the last one could be a Yaksha?
I haven't seen a female Rakshasi on a keris hilt, only male.

Michael

Michael, I remember the so considered Yaksha hilt in Kampungnet forum. If I may learn from you, what makes you think that the character is Yaksha? I remember that this hilt has a tail like design on its back, and always thought that its a wanara, a monkey like Hanoman etc. But I think the answer is on the leaf and flower being caried, the mudra or the gesture.

Drd, I think we may consider the stylized uppermost (lotus?) flower on its back as the garuda face, the rest is probably purely decorative. But since you mention that its a modern piece, probably the maker don't know what he's doing, I mean the phylosophy behind it, just like the rest of us.

[VVV]

Originally Posted by tunggulametung

Michael, I remember the so considered Yaksha hilt in Kampungnet forum. If I may learn from you, what makes you think that the character is Yaksha? I remember that this hilt has a tail like design on its back, and always thought that its a wanara, a monkey like Hanoman etc. But I think the answer is on the leaf and flower being caried, the mudra or the gesture.

Here is the hilt from the left, back and right side too.
As you can see there are several flowers with stalks on the hilt,
more than "usual", so I suspect that there is a reason for it?
Also it looks to me like vines and branches of a tree.
What he holds in its hands is a puzzle but maybe it could be a Kayon?

A Yaksha, translated as a ghost in Dictionary of Hindu Lore and
Legend, are connected to the creative forces of a deity.

"It eventually became a collective noun for mysterious semi-divine
beeings, who can assume any form at will, living in forests, trees,
caves and jungles and play a prominent role in Indian mythology and
folklore. They were said to inhabit the sacred tree in each village
and to protect the prosperity and well-being of the community."

It also says that some of the yakshas

"...were assimilated into main deites, such as Shiva, as exemplified by his epithet
Virupaksha, which originally was the name of a yaksha."

But I am open to ther suggestions?

Michael

[A. G. Maisey]

It can be very entertaining to look closely at keris hilts, and other folk carvings from various parts of Indonesia, and to try to discover just exactly what the carver was trying to portray.

Possibly at some point in history it may have been possible to examine a carving , analyse its minute detail, and produce a logically supportable opinion of the subject matter of the carving, including the, for example, five petalled flower held in the left hand at an angle of 22.75 degrees. Perhaps we may even be able to explain the reasons for the flower being held at 22.75 degrees, rather than at 21 degrees, or at 25 degrees.

The artistic conventions of Jawa, Bali, and other parts of maritime SE Asia dictate that certain things represented in a work of art will indicate that other things be understood by that representation. Fangs indicate an essentially evil character, a demon; hairiness indicates lack of refinement, bulging eyes indicates crudity, the long straight nose indicates refinement----and so and so on. We can see all of this in the wayang representations, however, to understand exactly what each portrayal of a particular characteristic means, we need to be educated in the way to understand these meanings.

In wayang, it is relatively easy to learn the distinctions between characters, and this is intentional, because wayang is an entertainment made for the common people, and it would defeat its purpose, if it had been allowed to become abstracted to the point where only the dalangs could understand it.

However, when we move from the arena of easily understood popular art to the expression of ideas, hopes, and characters that have a purpose other than pure entertainment, or perhaps instruction, we move into a different world.There is an inter-relationship between all the cultures of maritime SE Asia and this inter-relationship displays certain recogniseable traits that form a common thread through the cultures. One of the cultures that is closest to its roots is the Iban culture. Until quite recently this culture existed in a form that used art as a social mechanism. In very simple terms, women wove to establish hierarchical position within society, men took heads to establish hierarchical position within society, however, it was understood that not all men could be brilliant takers of heads, so the alternative hierarchical indicator was artistic ability. These indicators established position within society, and the suitability of couples for breeding. The entire fabric of art and aggression was about preservation of the tribal group.

Now, the motifs used by women in their weaving, and by men in their carving were established motifs, but to understand the meaning of the motifs, and how they could be read to understand the story told by the cloth, was something that required great knowledge and experience. A woman moving from one tribal group to another, may have broadly recognised the motifs, but she would have required tuition from weavers within that new tribal group before she could understand the nuances of the cloth.Moreover, a great weaver or carver could create a new form, and only that carver or weaver would know the meaning.

As for the men, the hilts of their swords were carved by the owner of the sword, and the purpose was purely to display the man's virtuosity in rendering an elegant representation of an established motif. The sword handle was on display for all to see, and to know that its carver, although perhaps not a great taker of heads, was certainly a great artist, and thus worthy of consideration as a mate for a daughter. However, it is also probable, that a man carving a sword hilt for his own use would have attempted to incorporate some esoteric elements into that carving.

Both the carving, and the weaving were indicators of intellect. The other elements of head taking, and rice growing, were indicators of ability to protect, and ability to provide.The resultant hierarchical society ensured that breeding would only take place between suitably matched couples, thus in turn ensuring continuance of the group.

As societal groups developed in the various parts of SE Asia, jobs that were once carried out by individual members of the society for societally related purposes, became the jobs of specialists, so weaving moved from having a societally logical foundation, to being something that was done by specialists, for payment.

The same thing happened with carving. Men no longer carved their own weapon hilts to demonstrate artistic ability, but they paid specialists to do this job. It could be argued that the societally logical reason was not lost, as only a successful man could afford to pay for the work of a great artist, thus demonstrating his position within society, and his suitability as a mate.

However, once the carving of objects, including keris hilts, became the job of a specialised group within the society, these artists moved away from the conscious expression of a mystical element in the carving, which would probably have been integral to a carving done by a man for his own use, and developed the artistic elements of the carving, those elements which elevated the artist's standing within his profession, and thus allowed him to charge more for his work.The ability to understand elements of the representation within the confines of the motif that were only able to be understood in the past by carvers and weavers with great knowledge and experience, was now lost. The new carvers and weavers were simply artists, or perhaps craftsmen and craftswomen, who worked at the reproduction of a motif, and embellished that motif to demonstrate virtuosity.

Whereas in the situation where a tribal weaver or carver produced a work, and often that work could only be fully understood by the creator, now we had a situation where even the creator of the work could not understand what it was he was creating.His purpose was to maximise artistic effect, within the bounds of the motif, and in accordance with his ability.

At the present time in Jawa, Bali, and Madura there are a number of extremely talented carvers. They produce carvings, including keris hilts , that are excellent craftwork, and often brilliant art work, but these individual carvers do not understand what it is that they are producing. They no longer work within a tribal framework where each motif variation can have an attached meaning, and where even in that tribal framework, the attached meaning was sometimes understood only by the carver.

The question to be answered is probably this:- at what point in time did the carving of a keris hilt cease to have an esoteric element incorporated into it, and become pure artistic expression?

This question is of course meaningless unless it it is framed within the historical structure of the relevant society, thus in Jawa this point could be argued to have occurred with societal dominance by Islam, whilst in Bali the point in time will be a different one.

Now, if we wish to discuss the interpretation of keris hilts, may I suggest that we first place the keris hilt under discussion into a time frame, and then ask ourselves if it is acceptable, or logical to try to attach an interpretation to it.

I agree that we can broadly classify virtually all keris hilts within one form or another, but to interpret those those hilts in order to give meaning to the features represented in the hilts is something that was probably even beyond the carver of the hilt.

[tunggulametung]

Michael,

Thank you for sharing the reason about why you guess this hilt is a representation of Yaksha, acceptable in many ways.

However if I may, I personally suggest Hanuman as an alternative for some reasons like the tail-like stalk over the back to the right shoulder. To my limited experience, Hanuman/Hanoman/Anoman usually being described with similar tail position in Indonesia, the loose lion-like tail is more to India. I notice there are some fur-like strokes on the face, similar to a monkey face.

Seems like the character is seated, cross-legged. What he holds is really a puzzle, it can be purely decorative, has certain meaning, or simply the key to the character. But at least I can temporary suggest flower and leaf as an alternavite to kayon (tree of life) as a symbolism to offering to the God. I can find a crown-like design too above his head. And Hanuman is much more popular character than Yaksha, that I haven't heard related to keris before.

Pak Maisey, thank you for your insight, I'm agree with you. Above are simply a personal opinion which may 100% incorrect. But I think it is natural for human to find answer to the things that he don't understand. By the way, who do you think the character is? To me, this particular piece is cleverly done and I really think that the carver knows what he's doing.

[A. G. Maisey]

Tunggalametung, when I write things such as I have just written, I almost never present a personal opinion. I most usually present in a very abbreviated form information that I have gleaned from a number of sources. Often, I have no personal opinion on these things, simply because I have insufficient knowledge to be able to form a valid and supportable opinion.Where I do give an opinion I will normally identify it as an opinion and try to give sufficient evidence to support that opinion.

Now, in respect of my opinion of the subject depicted in the handle under discussion.

What I can see is a handle that falls within a category of North Coast Jawa, or perhaps Madura, handles that carries distillation of form into floral and foliate substitutions.

It is probable that this handle was intended to represent some being, however, did the carver know what being it was supposed to represent, or was he following an earlier pattern and adding his own embellishments?

Can we date this handle with reasonable certainty?

Having dated it, can we say that the carver was working from an earlier handle of similar pattern?

Or can we assume that he was working from an earlier handle with a less abstracted form?

Or can we accept that he created this handle form anew from an idea that he himself originated?

Or did he follow the instructions of a client?

I could probably go on creating questions that I for one am unable to answer, but I think that perhaps even these few questions might demonstrate the rather futile task we set ourselves when we attempt to interpret things that we have little hope of understanding.

I have a collection of a very large number of keris handles. I do not know exactly how many I have, but I do know that I have well over 100 handles made of ivory. When these handles are sorted into groups bearing similar characteristics, it is possible to identify recurring themes, and observe variations. Moving from end to end of the range in variation can produce figures at either end of the range that bear little resemblance to each other.

I have spent considerable time with present day carvers, and have watched the way in which they work, and asked why they included certain features in their carvings at certain points. Sometimes the answer will be that it was done because the material demanded it.

Yes, this is a reasonably well carved handle, but I regret that my level of psychic ability is insufficient for me attempt a guess at what the carver may have been intending to represent, or indeed, if he even had an understanding of what it was that he was carving.

[tunggulametung]

Thank you again Pak Maisey,

I'm agree that northern coastal or Madura artistic touch is there, and much probably being the origin of the hilt in my opinion too.

Interesting questions that you suggest. Yes, I believe we cannot give exact answers to those, and guessing without sufficient evidence could bring us to misleading perception , I get your point, that's very wise. Please let us know when one day you come across with any informations about this style.

To Michael, I hope that someday you can find a reference or better explanation about your keris hilt. I do hope that this one is not the one created with no meaning except for its decorative looking, or carved following to the material demand .

[VVV]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

...It is probable that this handle was intended to represent some being, however, did the carver know what being it was supposed to represent, or was he following an earlier pattern and adding his own embellishments?

Can we date this handle with reasonable certainty?

Having dated it, can we say that the carver was working from an earlier handle of similar pattern?

Or can we assume that he was working from an earlier handle with a less abstracted form?

Or can we accept that he created this handle form anew from an idea that he himself originated?

(snip)

I have a collection of a very large number of keris handles. I do not know exactly how many I have, but I do know that I have well over 100 handles made of ivory. When these handles are sorted into groups bearing similar characteristics, it is possible to identify recurring themes, and observe variations. Moving from end to end of the range in variation can produce figures at either end of the range that bear little resemblance to each other...

Alan,

Please note that I wrote that it "could be a Yaksha?".
Of course it's hard to say that it definately is one.

What IMHO speaks against some of your, otherwise valid, arguments above is that specifically this hilt seems to be quite unique in its form/pattern.
Do you f.i. in your large hilt collection have two hilts that overall resembles this one in style?
I haven't found any in the museum archives that I know of. The closest one in style is the Java-Kalimantan-flower-holding-old-magic-hilt pictured in for instance the Budaya Indonesia book on page 211.

I am also a bit sceptical to that everything changed after "societal dominance by Islam".
To me it's obvious that a lot of old Hindu beliefs and rituals still is practiced on Java today. They even have kept their old Sanskrit names!
Christendom has dominated southern Europe for quite some time but over 1000 years afterwards you still could see motifs and symbolism from the old Greco-Roman religion. Up here in North of Europe still 1000 - 1200 years after we got "christened" (in the 9th C) the same could be noticed regarding traditions and symbolism of the old Norse religion. Like a typical Swedish Midsummer celebration.
Some symbolism, traditions and beliefs seems to survive a very long time after a new religion has gained dominance. In my experience this is especially valid within magic, talismans, protective and fertility needs etc.

Michael

[A. G. Maisey]

Agreed Michael, it could be a yaksha.

In fact it could be anything.

Perhaps the carver knew what it was.

Perhaps he did not.

Perhaps it was an abstraction of an abstraction .

Perhaps it was an original creation.

To clarify a point Michael, I have put no arguments in my comments. I am not pushing any barrow here, I am simply attempting to place on record the situation in respect of interpretation of SE Asian art, as it appears to be understood by a number of people who know vastly more than I do about the subject. What I have gathered is that it is often rather futlie to attempt to interpret things that we do not understand, indeed, can have no hope of understanding. Most especially when people within the same time frame and from the same cultural background cannot understand those things if they lack the specialist knowledge that will allow them to understand.

There is no need for you to be a bit sceptical that everything changed after societal dominance by Islam.

Of course everything did not change.

And I have at no time suggested that everything did change.

What I said about Islam was this:-

This question is of course meaningless unless it it is framed within the historical structure of the relevant society, thus in Jawa this point could be argued to have occurred with societal dominance by Islam, whilst in Bali the point in time will be a different one.

I have used this as an example, not as a definitive. The point at which the societal shift took place could as easily have been with the organisation of Javanese society into into city states; it could have been with the shift of power from Central Jawa to East Jawa, it could have been with any number of things, and I am not suggesting for one moment that I have any idea when this point may have been reached. I have no idea when professional carvers appeared on the scene in Jawa and began to produce art works rather than talismanically potent personal adornments that served a societal purpose.

What I am suggesting is this:- to hypothesise upon the identity of an abstracted figure from a time long past, and from a society that is only partially understood, even by authorities respected as expert on that society and its history, organisation and beliefs is an entertaining pastime, but hardly a useful one, and has the potential to mislead, rather than to provide substantial answers.

It is always very tempting to attempt to build constructs on those things we do not understand.

We see all this artistic variety and abstraction in Javanese keris handles, and we would not be human if we did not try to affix identities to those hilt figures.However, the truth could be vastly different from our hypotheses, and at this remove it is impossible know with any certainty what that truth may be.Most especially is it impossible in the case of representation bearing a set of unique characteristics that prevents it being aligned with known and acknowledged forms.

[VVV]

Originally Posted by tunggulametung

...However if I may, I personally suggest Hanuman as an alternative for some reasons like the tail-like stalk over the back to the right shoulder. To my limited experience, Hanuman/Hanoman/Anoman usually being described with similar tail position in Indonesia, the loose lion-like tail is more to India. I notice there are some fur-like strokes on the face, similar to a monkey face...

Tunggulametung,

Thanks for your clarification on my pictures. It's always hard when you don't have the hilt in your hands and I am afraid that the tail resemblence is because of camera angles. Below are 2 other pictures were you can see that it only looks like a tail when seen from the side and not from the back.

On the position, cross legged or not, I find it hard to tell? Usually the meander border pattern is at belt level?

On the Yaksha attribute I was inspired by Karsten Sejr Jensen who classify old hilts with dominating vegetative elements as Yakshas. And if not as Rakshasas.

Originally Posted by tunggulametung

...To Michael, I hope that someday you can find a reference or better explanation about your keris hilt. I do hope that this one is not the one created with no meaning except for its decorative looking, or carved following to the material demand .

Thanks

I don't think so either in this case.
I reply to Alan's post below.

Michael