Sumatran Jawa Demam - Anak Ayam Sejuk - Birdman/Garuda?

BluErf · 6th September 2008, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ganjawulung

Just for a little comparison to Michael's and Marco's hilts. These are Cirebon hilts -- with Jawa Demam style. Cirebon located in the northern-west coast of Central Jawa -- this old Islamic kingdom of Cirebon originated from Hindhu Pajajaran Kingdom in West Java...

Ganjawulung

I think the hilt on the left (with no visible arms) could be from the north coast area of Java. I have been informed by dealers, who were in turn informed by their Indonesian suppliers, that the hilts were sourced from these areas. So we've come to refer to these hilts as 'pasisir', or simply 'coastal region'.

I have 2 such hilts, from 2 different dealers. I can see the similarities in motif between my 2 hilts and Michael's, but I also feel that Michael's hilt is an evolved form, not from the original 'source' region. This is judging from the posture of the hilt, and some new motifs, such as the criss-cross patches, the hair, the belly button patterns (which is v common in Minang hilts) .

Marcokeris · 6th September 2008, 02:51 PM

BluErf
IMO two rare fantastic java's hits

Here another very old Cirebon (?) made by bone:

A. G. Maisey · 6th September 2008, 09:07 PM

I've been following this discussion with interest, but I have not taken part because I did not feel I had anything to contribute.

I have looked at all the images posted, I have looked at pictures of keris from North Jawa that left their place of origin prior to 1900, I have looked at keris in my own collection that have hilts of the type shown here. I have looked at the classification of hilts in Suhartono Rahardjo's Ragam Hulu Keris.

Now I feel that I have reached the point where I must raise a question.

My question is this:-

where is the evidence that this type of hilt can be classified as originating from Cirebon, or even the North coast of Jawa?

I know that Pak Gonjo has told us they are Cirebon hilts, I know that he has an interest in this area, thus I assume he can support his information.

I can accept the classification as an opinion, we can all hold opinions, be they correct or incorrect, but this classification as a Javanese hilt is new to me, and I can find no evidence to support it.

Is it possible that this form is one that was popular amongst people of Malay heritage who lived on the North Coast of Jawa, but who were not aligned with any formal administrative system(kraton) ?

I would like to look more closely at this classification.

Briefly:- where is the evidence?

BluErf · 7th September 2008, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

My question is this:-

where is the evidence that this type of hilt can be classified as originating from Cirebon, or even the North coast of Jawa?

This is an interesting question that I would very much like to find more information to. Frankly, when I was informed that such hilts came out of Java, I was rather skeptical. If not for the dealers' suppliers stating that these were sourced from the northern coast of Java, I would most likely have gone with a Sumatran attribution, given the Jawa demam form.

2 other observations:

- The pierced-through 'columnar form' of the lower mid-bodies of the hilts are very similar to other hilts (e.g. the Ganesha hilts) that we associate with Cirebon/N. Java. However, the base of these hilts is not the same as the typical Cirebon hilt in that it is more rounded and seemed to be designed to sit with a mendak; the Cirebon hilts have a flat cylindrical base that fits a selut. That said, the base is also not the same as the archetypal jawa demam bases, which should be bigger and rounder, and fit a pendoko.

- We don't see this type of hilts coming out of Sumatra (i.e. the suppliers in Sumatra were not able to find any such hilts).

I wouldn't call these evidence, just something that gets us thinking.

BluErf · 7th September 2008, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcokeris

...
Here another very old Cirebon (?) made by bone:

Hi Marco,

I would associate this hilt with Minang Kabau, not Cirebon. I see this type of hilts coming out of Sumatra all the time.

VVV · 7th September 2008, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluErf

...I have 2 such hilts, from 2 different dealers. I can see the similarities in motif between my 2 hilts and Michael's, but I also feel that Michael's hilt is an evolved form, not from the original 'source' region. This is judging from the posture of the hilt, and some new motifs, such as the criss-cross patches, the hair, the belly button patterns (which is v common in Minang hilts) .

Thanks Kai-Wee,

I also think so and that's why I was interested in reading the other forumites opinions.
On Alan's question of evidence of origin I am also quite curious, as stated earlier.
Especially as I haven't either seen them on Javanese keris from pre-1900 that was brought to Europe?

Michael

BluErf · 7th September 2008, 01:53 PM

I'm also open to the idea that these mystery jawa demam hilts could have been relatively recent back-flows (i.e. last 100yrs), from Sumatra back to Java, and modified. Hence, no such examples were seen in Europe. It could be that there are some Malay communities in Java have created such hilt forms, as Alan has pointed out. But this is all speculation now, I guess.

Marcokeris · 7th September 2008, 03:28 PM

BluErf
This Cirebon hit seems to have the same pattern of the second of your hits .

A. G. Maisey · 8th September 2008, 01:05 AM

Marco, this motif of swirling vines, what we call "lung-lungan" seems to be pretty widespread across Jawa, Bali, Sumatra---maybe all of S.E. asia. You see multiple variations, and speaking for myself, I have an enormous amount of difficulty in distinguishing between them---they all look so similar.

BluErf · 8th September 2008, 03:38 PM

Hi Marco,

Yes, the motifs are indeed very similar. But also, the columnar body form - this is something which I associate with N coast of Java.

Hi Alan,

I agree that these motifs are found throughout the region. But perhaps they could be differentiated through variances in the composition and combination of the motifs, as well as the aesthetics of it. Perhaps I could also take an analogy of the Terengganu keris sheath form and the Riau keris sheath form - both are very similar, except for subtle differences. But when we internalize those differences, it becomes clear (at least most of the time) which group a specimen is likely to belong to. But to internalize those differences, one would need to either see hundreds, if not thousands, of specimens, and/or have the guidance of an experienced craftsman/teacher. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have the luxury of either for the hilts in question.

A. G. Maisey · 9th September 2008, 12:00 AM

Yes Kai-Wee, what you say is true, however, although a person who has very detailed knowledge in this area of motif form and application may be able to broadly identify certain motifs as belonging to certain areas, there can be enormous differences from craftsman to craftsman within an area, thus to take the work of, say, ten or 15 craftsmen from one major grouping and then identify the work of all as belonging to that major grouping can sometimes be more than just a little difficult.

As I write this, I am not thinking in terms of hilt forms, or wrongko forms:- these seem to be fairly well known, and although we get the occasional variation upon which we are unclear, it is probably possible to group these things fairly accurately.

I am thinking in terms of motifs only, which may be applied to a very broad range of objects, and applied by all levels of craftsmen, from palace employees to housewives.Motifs which can appear in fabrics, in household decorative items, in items of personal adornment.

Certainly, here we tend to focus on a single form of cultural artifact, the keris, but that artifact does not stand separate to all other items within a culture, nor to the culture itself.Thus, if we are to use motif as an identifier of place of origin, we need a better than encyclopedic knowledge of all variations throughout a broad area.

I for one do not have the knowledge to come to a supportable conclusion on origin of this particular hilt form, using only the tool of analysis.

My approach and focus is far more simple:- physical evidence.

Pre-1900 photographs of people wearing keris with this type of hilt, Cirebon kraton records of this type of hilt, early collected examples with providence of this type of hilt ---this type of thing. Something we can accept as evidence that these hilts did indeed belong to the Cirebon administrative area.

Because we tend to see certain specific forms of dress being prescribed for wear in a kraton environment, it would be reasonable to expect that if this form is indeed a Cirebon form, records, either physical or documentary would exist within the Cirebon heritage.

If the evidence cannot be found in kraton records, but we still suspect that it could be Cirebon, then perhaps we are looking at a folk variation. The North Coast of Jawa has had a very strong Malay component to its population for many hundreds of years. It could be that this hilt form is a variation of a Malay form, which has adopted or adapted the tightly packed foliate embellishment of Madura and the indigenous north coast to its own basically Malay form.

We could hypothesise about this matter till the cows come home, and here I am hypothesising as freely as any, however, what we need here is solid evidence, rather than guesses. I do not believe we can answer this question by application of logical analysis.

6th September 2008, 02:51 PM	#2
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	BluErf IMO two rare fantastic java's hits Here another very old Cirebon (?) made by bone: Attached Images Last edited by Marcokeris; 6th September 2008 at 03:51 PM.

7th September 2008, 03:28 PM	#8
Marcokeris Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 928	BluErf This Cirebon hit seems to have the same pattern of the second of your hits . Attached Images

6th September 2008, 09:07 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	I've been following this discussion with interest, but I have not taken part because I did not feel I had anything to contribute. I have looked at all the images posted, I have looked at pictures of keris from North Jawa that left their place of origin prior to 1900, I have looked at keris in my own collection that have hilts of the type shown here. I have looked at the classification of hilts in Suhartono Rahardjo's Ragam Hulu Keris. Now I feel that I have reached the point where I must raise a question. My question is this:- where is the evidence that this type of hilt can be classified as originating from Cirebon, or even the North coast of Jawa? I know that Pak Gonjo has told us they are Cirebon hilts, I know that he has an interest in this area, thus I assume he can support his information. I can accept the classification as an opinion, we can all hold opinions, be they correct or incorrect, but this classification as a Javanese hilt is new to me, and I can find no evidence to support it. Is it possible that this form is one that was popular amongst people of Malay heritage who lived on the North Coast of Jawa, but who were not aligned with any formal administrative system(kraton) ? I would like to look more closely at this classification. Briefly:- where is the evidence?

7th September 2008, 01:53 PM	#7
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	I'm also open to the idea that these mystery jawa demam hilts could have been relatively recent back-flows (i.e. last 100yrs), from Sumatra back to Java, and modified. Hence, no such examples were seen in Europe. It could be that there are some Malay communities in Java have created such hilt forms, as Alan has pointed out. But this is all speculation now, I guess.

8th September 2008, 01:05 AM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Marco, this motif of swirling vines, what we call "lung-lungan" seems to be pretty widespread across Jawa, Bali, Sumatra---maybe all of S.E. asia. You see multiple variations, and speaking for myself, I have an enormous amount of difficulty in distinguishing between them---they all look so similar.

8th September 2008, 03:38 PM	#10
BluErf Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,180	Hi Marco, Yes, the motifs are indeed very similar. But also, the columnar body form - this is something which I associate with N coast of Java. Hi Alan, I agree that these motifs are found throughout the region. But perhaps they could be differentiated through variances in the composition and combination of the motifs, as well as the aesthetics of it. Perhaps I could also take an analogy of the Terengganu keris sheath form and the Riau keris sheath form - both are very similar, except for subtle differences. But when we internalize those differences, it becomes clear (at least most of the time) which group a specimen is likely to belong to. But to internalize those differences, one would need to either see hundreds, if not thousands, of specimens, and/or have the guidance of an experienced craftsman/teacher. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have the luxury of either for the hilts in question.

9th September 2008, 12:00 AM	#11
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,048	Yes Kai-Wee, what you say is true, however, although a person who has very detailed knowledge in this area of motif form and application may be able to broadly identify certain motifs as belonging to certain areas, there can be enormous differences from craftsman to craftsman within an area, thus to take the work of, say, ten or 15 craftsmen from one major grouping and then identify the work of all as belonging to that major grouping can sometimes be more than just a little difficult. As I write this, I am not thinking in terms of hilt forms, or wrongko forms:- these seem to be fairly well known, and although we get the occasional variation upon which we are unclear, it is probably possible to group these things fairly accurately. I am thinking in terms of motifs only, which may be applied to a very broad range of objects, and applied by all levels of craftsmen, from palace employees to housewives.Motifs which can appear in fabrics, in household decorative items, in items of personal adornment. Certainly, here we tend to focus on a single form of cultural artifact, the keris, but that artifact does not stand separate to all other items within a culture, nor to the culture itself.Thus, if we are to use motif as an identifier of place of origin, we need a better than encyclopedic knowledge of all variations throughout a broad area. I for one do not have the knowledge to come to a supportable conclusion on origin of this particular hilt form, using only the tool of analysis. My approach and focus is far more simple:- physical evidence. Pre-1900 photographs of people wearing keris with this type of hilt, Cirebon kraton records of this type of hilt, early collected examples with providence of this type of hilt ---this type of thing. Something we can accept as evidence that these hilts did indeed belong to the Cirebon administrative area. Because we tend to see certain specific forms of dress being prescribed for wear in a kraton environment, it would be reasonable to expect that if this form is indeed a Cirebon form, records, either physical or documentary would exist within the Cirebon heritage. If the evidence cannot be found in kraton records, but we still suspect that it could be Cirebon, then perhaps we are looking at a folk variation. The North Coast of Jawa has had a very strong Malay component to its population for many hundreds of years. It could be that this hilt form is a variation of a Malay form, which has adopted or adapted the tightly packed foliate embellishment of Madura and the indigenous north coast to its own basically Malay form. We could hypothesise about this matter till the cows come home, and here I am hypothesising as freely as any, however, what we need here is solid evidence, rather than guesses. I do not believe we can answer this question by application of logical analysis.