Origin of the Jawa Demam hilt form

[David]

Good line of questioning Jonng. I have always been told that the name refers to the posture of the abstract figure. One arm goes across the belly and the figure is bent over as if sick to his stomach. But i suppose this jester could just as easily be a bow.
I am not convinced that the Jawa Demam is related to the squatting figures. The body positions appear quite different to me. In the squatting figures the hands are generally on the knees and they are, of course, squatting which i don't believe is the intended body position of the Jawa Demam.

[BluErf]

I'm not sure if we will ever get satisfactory answers to this question.

Anyway, here's a hilt I got off ebay a while back. Very interesting form. Dave has a specimen which may even predate this, but I can't find pics. Maybe it is in Spirit of Wood.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by BluErf

I'm not sure if we will ever get satisfactory answers to this question.

Anyway, here's a hilt I got off ebay a while back. Very interesting form. Dave has a specimen which may even predate this, but I can't find pics. Maybe it is in Spirit of Wood.

Very interesting handle, the hands rest on the knees. Never seen before by a Jawa Demam.
M. Kerner write in his book "Keris-Griffe aus Museen und Privatsammlungen" about basic position I and basic position II. Position II is when the figure crossed the arms over the breast like the Jawa Demam and position I when the hands rest on the knees like the Cirebon handles and he guess that the position I is the more old form.
sajen

[jonng]

Hi David,

That the gesture is a bow is I think probable (and could have evolved later?). That the "arm goes across the belly and the figure is bent over as if sick to the stomach" is to me a bit difficult to accept because I cannot see any in my collection or those that have been put up here having the arm going across the stomach. All of them seems to have the right arm going across the chest (or do I see them wrong?!).
Have the carvers made some mistakes in their carving or interpretation some time in the past? If not, regarding posture I often see these two:
1. squatting or sitting on something (very low) with both knees up, right elbow slightly over or resting on the right knee.
2. semi-kneeling/ half squat position, right knee up with the right elbow resting on it and left knee on the ground.
The right arm looks to be above the stomach in all these forms. Of course I could have seen them all wrong so I'm really grateful this thread came up.

Jonathan

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by jonng

Hi David,

That the gesture is a bow is I think probable (and could have evolved later?). That the "arm goes across the belly and the figure is bent over as if sick to the stomach" is to me a bit difficult to accept because I cannot see any in my collection or those that have been put up here having the arm going across the stomach. All of them seems to have the right arm going across the chest (or do I see them wrong?!).
Have the carvers made some mistakes in their carving or interpretation some time in the past? If not, regarding posture I often see these two:
1. squatting or sitting on something (very low) with both knees up, right elbow slightly over or resting on the right knee.
2. semi-kneeling/ half squat position, right knee up with the right elbow resting on it and left knee on the ground.
The right arm looks to be above the stomach in all these forms. Of course I could have seen them all wrong so I'm really grateful this thread came up.

Jonathan

Hello Jonathan,

from the same book is this reduced drawing of this position. So the left knee is not on the ground. The leg is more or less straight. When you see the handles from the North-East coast of Java it is correct.
sajen

[erikscollectables]

Here some from my collection.
Sorry for the poor quality of the pics.
This was all I could do at the moment...

Regards, Erik

[David]

Originally Posted by jonng

That the gesture is a bow is I think probable (and could have evolved later?). That the "arm goes across the belly and the figure is bent over as if sick to the stomach" is to me a bit difficult to accept because I cannot see any in my collection or those that have been put up here having the arm going across the stomach. All of them seems to have the right arm going across the chest (or do I see them wrong?!).
Have the carvers made some mistakes in their carving or interpretation some time in the past? If not, regarding posture I often see these two:
1. squatting or sitting on something (very low) with both knees up, right elbow slightly over or resting on the right knee.
2. semi-kneeling/ half squat position, right knee up with the right elbow resting on it and left knee on the ground.
The right arm looks to be above the stomach in all these forms. Of course I could have seen them all wrong so I'm really grateful this thread came up.

Jonathan, i am not asking you to accept that the arm goes across the stomach or the chest as i am not making a case for either. It doesn't seem to me that you can really be sure way or another considering the abstractness of the hilt form. My point is that at some time, someone apparently saw the arm as being across the stomach in a stooped over posture, ergo the name Jawa Demam, the "sick Javanese". At least this is what i have been told. This does not in any way prove what the original intent of the body posture may have been. If it is possible we might want to try to nail down when this name for this hilt form first came into fashion and explore what other names, if any, may have been used for it.

[A. G. Maisey]

G.B. Gardner, Keris and Other Malay Weapons, 1936.

The Jawa Demam.

The legend is as follows:-

A certain raja called his pandai besi and ordered him to make a keris hilt that was unlike any other, or lose his life. The keris maker could not think what to do , but as night came on, it grew cold and the raja who had a fever (demam) pulled his sarung up, and hugged himself to keep warm. Then the keris maker carved a hilt in his likeness. This, at any rate is the story; but I think the use of a figure is to give luck to the keris.

[David]

Alan, is this name found in any writings that you know of previous to Gardner?

[A. G. Maisey]

Off the top of my head, no, David.

Stone calls these figural demon-like hilts "raksha". I can't remember reading these terms in any other early writings. Might be a good idea to have a look at Raffles. The Ying Yai Sheng Lan --- 15th century--- refers to "--- human or devils faces---", so the Chinese percieved them as such also.

You could also call some of these "raksasa" style hilts "buta".