A Balinese Keris for Analysis
 

Here is another one for you guys to analyze. Normally, when I see a scabbard of this type I instantly think "tourist" piece, but this one as a serious heft to it, and the hilt reminded me of Balinese "cundrik" hilts. There patinated wear to the hilt and scabbard.

Sometimes you have to learn the hard way, so, your thoughts?

Blade:- Bali

Scabbard:- Bali, 20th century dancer's dress

Selut:- Bali

Hilt:- East Jawa

not bad individual component parts, but wrongly combined.

Alan, the hilt is far too large for any Javanese keris.

Hi Charles. This is a lovely Balinese keris.
On the sarung, does it appear that it was made for this blade specifically. Certainly it was made for a blade with gonjo wilut so it seems possible. I have not seen many dance keris sheath made for gonjo wilut, but if this sheath was made specifically for this keris than i can't see calling it a mismatch.
As for the hilt, i have a Bali keris that was once in the Frey collection that has a somewhat similar hilt. It too has led to some head scratching, but since this keris has been known to exist in this form since at least the early 1970s it is not some mismatched dealer special. It is, like yours, certainly an unusual hilt for a Bali keris though. So i am not going to dismiss you example as a mismatch too quickly, especially if, as you say, this hilt is too large for the usual Javanese/Madurese blade.

Hello Charles,
The hilt looks large because of the wrong balinese selut fitted to it but this type is originating from East Java/ Madura indeed.
Regards

Thanks David. The blade and sheath are a perfect fit, with the mouth of the sheath following the curvature of the ganja. The hilt is maybe like an E. Java keris hilt on steroids, but particularly its girth would not match a Javanese hilt, much like the example you have shown. It would simply overwhelm and take the balance out of the aesthetics of a Javanese ensemble.

I think my pics just do not properly convey the size of the hilt. Its selut is a perfect fit.

These pics may help show the comparative size of the hilt, but I am not even sure these pics do the dimensions justice.

I would said this keris is awesome except the warangka (personal opinion). I would love to own this keris with a beautiful polished bilah.

Hello Charles,
Attached is a Madurese kris estimated from the early 20th century with a somewhat similar type of thick hilt.
Regards

Thanks Jean. Yes a similar( and lovely) hilt, but the size is much smaller than on that Balinese keris. It's easy to tell by the way it sits on the mendek.

Hi Charles,
Pics of a Madurese hilt more similar to yours, its height is 10 cm. The balinese selut is definitely misplaced IMO. From my experience these pieces are relatively recent (mid 20th century).
Regards

Charles, I suggest that you remove the hilt from the keris.

I believe that you will find that this hilt is sitting on top of the selut, not fitted to the selut.

Any selut is effectively a ferrule, it is supposed to fit around the base of the hilt, and was originally used to prevent the hilt splitting. On the keris under discussion I believe you will find that the hilt simply sits on top of the selut.

The hilt itself is an East Javanese style, it can also be found in Madura, and Madura itself is a part of East Jawa, and it can be found along the North Coast of Jawa, but only a small distance to the west of Surabaya, whereas it can be found anywhere east of Surabaya. There can be no question at all that this is an East Javanese hilt.

We can forget about the size of the hilt being any sort of indicator, size is totally irrelevant in this context.

There is at least one hypothetical, but I will not address that until after the hilt has been removed from the keris.

The hilt is, indeed, sitting centered on the selut. So, you guys’ observations of it not being properly set seem to be correct. If I wanted to get a new hilt for the good blade, what kind of hilt should I get that would most correctly go with the scabbard???

Charles, this is a jamprahan sarung, in olden times, say, pre-puputan, this style of sarung was normally worn by very religious people, not necessarily priests or preachers, but usually lay people who took their religious duties very seriously.

It was usually paired with a kusia hilt. The kusia hilt style is rather rare, and these days the kusia and the kocet-kocetan style are more or less considered to be the same, which they are not quite, but the difference is very slight, off the top of my head I forget exactly what the difference between the two is, something to do with the face I think, but I'd need to look it up.

I'd say either a kusia or kocet-kocetan hilt would be the hilt of choice for this sarung.

However, since this sarung is a rather recent creation I am relatively certain that it was not intended for the original purpose of this style, so an ordinary bobondolan style that was inlet to accept the selut would also be just fine.

According to the Neka book the kocet-kocetan and kusia hilts depict two different types of bugs but the most commonly accepted difference is that the name kocet-kocetan is more common in Bali, and kusia is more used in Lombok. I attach the pic of a typical hilt in this style.
Howevever I agree with Alan that since the sarung is a recent piece, any type of hilt would match, the tourist balinese krisses are usually fitted with a Nawasari style hilt, so any togogan hilt would be a good match also.
Regards

Which Neka book is that Jean?

At your prompt --- ie, your mention of "the Neka book" (saved me searching) --- I opened up "Keris Bali Bersejarah", page 126, and I cannot find any mention of varying terminology in Bali & Lombok. That is not to say there is not, of course. There could be varying terminology if we walk from one side of the road to the other.

The KBB explanation of difference between Kusia & Kocet-kocetan is that Kusia does not have tusks & its face looks like the head of a butterfly, whilst the Kocet-kocetan has a face that looks like an insect with tusks or a horse with tusks.

Neka produced a few books, so maybe his explanations change depending on what he had for breakfast.

Actually, these forms do not represent bugs, or completely developed insects, they represent pupa or chrysalis, the stage before a bug becomes a bug, as such they represent change, what that change is can be interpreted in a number of ways.

About that face...
 

"Kusia" is a term I've not encountered before.
I have, however, seen photos of hilts described as "kocetan"; most have "horse heads", but a very few have "insect-like" heads. And I've read that kocetan hilts were (in pre-puputan times, if not nowadays) supposed to be owned by Brahmins more-or-less exclusively. This may or may not be true, precise, or accurate. I myself am very ignorant about religion and keris culture on Bali.
They are very striking hilts, however, and not unattractive.

Thanks for the input here gentlemen. I look forward to making the correction.

Way it worked is this Mickey:-

the jamprahan sarung was for religious people (agamawan)

the jamprahan was paired with the gagang kusia

the Brahmin caste is the caste that is concerned with religion

if we are looking for God-botherers we look amongst the Brahmins, because this is where we will find the agamawan.

The "insect with tusks" is Neka's description, not mine.

Jasper J.E., who started to gather his information at the very beginning of 1900'ties and published his book with Mas Pirngadie in 1930, states, that Kocet-Kocetan hilt was called Kusia in Klungkung.

He writes also, this hilt from could be made from black wood with golden ornaments or entirely in gold, made with the same process like Togog hilts.

Interestingly, the drawing of Nieuwenkamp from 1907 shows both forms, which are different indeed. In an older thread Fearn identified these forms as the pupa and adult beetle, two different stages of the same insect.

Accuracy of a drawing and of information generally can be always questioned.

Hello Alan,
In the Lombok reference book from Djelenga (published in 2000), he calls these hilts kusia also called kocet kocetan on page 293, but on page 317 he calls them kusia only.
And in his former (smaller) book published in 1993, he calls them kusia only (page 90). So it seems that the term kusia is more common in Lombok.
And despite what Neka says on page 126, all the hilts which he shows in his book are called kocet-kocetan and not kusia...
Regards

Pics of 2 different forms of hilt kocet-kocetan, and there are even more....

Now - of course, there are a plenty of them.

What interests me is Bali before 1908.

Hi, why so before 1908?

1908 happened the Puputan in Klungkung, the last independent Balinese kingdom. After that many things changed, and some of these things subsequently had influence on Keris dress.

Yep, Bali post 1908 was a different place to Bali pre-1908.

That is a certain.

And again pre-1950 and post 1952, and then post 1984. But the changes in this later scenario were more window dressing to satisfy the Ministry of Religion.

Yes Jean, Djelengga considered Kusia & Kocet-kocetan to be the same, just different names for the same hilt, as did I myself before KBB.

Something I have noticed in recent years, say, the last 25 years or so, is that a lot of "knowledge" is making an appearance that back in the 1970's & 1980's not even the most highly regarded of keris experts were aware of. Amazing how we discover things as time goes by. Things that have been forgotten, or maybe never even existed in times past.

Actually the two names for these hilts do exist in Balinese --- I just looked them up, I am not fluent in Balinese. Kocetkocetan is a species of beetle; kusiya is to be pale with exhaustion.

Probably the way I look after listening to or becoming involved in lengthy discussions about names of objects in Indonesian languages & places.

Noted with thanks.

Hello Alan,
What is KBB please?
I would suspect that kusia has a different meaning in Lombok Sasak language?
Regards

KBB > "Keris Bali Bersejarah"

"EK" is now common for "Ensiklopedi Keris", so I innovated.

Yes, "Kusia" could easily be a Sasak word, or Balinese dialect, or Basa Dalang, or anything else. However, when we think of Lombok, we need to think of Balinese Lombok and Sasak Lombok. Balinese Lombok was essentially an extension of Bali and used Balinese, the Sasak people are mostly Muslim, I feel it is unlikely that Muslim Sasaks would invent a name for a keris hilt worn by Balinese Brahmins.

Thank you Alan. BTW the EK describes the kocet-kocetan hilt as balinese and the kusia hilt from Lombok but it is subject to caution of course....

Agreed.

This Kocet-Kocetan example is held in the Denpasar Museum.

Gavin

This hilt is silver, it was acquired in Bali in 1974.

Some of us might call it a kocetkocetan, others might call it a kusia, some might say that kocetkocetan & kusia are the same , no difference, but then some people might be quite positive that there is a difference between a kocetkocetan & a kusia.

So if we were to belong to this last group of people who do believe that there is a difference, what might we name this particular hilt?

It is a beautiful silver hilt.

Btw, is kocetan considers a form of grasshopper, locust as I have impression the head does looks like a grasshopper. And Kusia considers as a beetle with the legs form?

Just adding to the confusion ;)

Hello Gustav,

These are longicorn beetles (family Cerambycidae). I believe Nieuwenkamp just shows the pupa and the imago (adult) for illustrative purposes since the adult beetles are/were fairly well known to the general audience in Europe while coming across a pupa is certainly much rarer.

Both hilts in the figure clearly represent the pupa stage (and metamorphosis/transition seems to be the main religious message associated with this style of hilt): Only in the pupa stage does the wing stick out between the second and third pair of legs (i.e. partly covering the latter) and this is a consistent feature of every hilt of decent craftsmanship that I've come across. The antennae (the long "horns" of the beetle) of a cerambicyd pupa can be more or less curled (their relative length also depends on the species) and their head is very similar to the adult. [Just search for Cerambycidae AND pupa for some pics!]

Moreover, adult beetles spread their antennae to the side or in front - not backwards (the drawing was probably taken from an entomological museum specimen with folded back antennae for handling/security/space reasons).

Thus, I assume that differences in style of these hilts is not based on any biological difference but rather cultural developments and possibly loss of knowledge with later examples. There certainly seems to be a tendency with heads kinda resembling horses(?) more and more (including added non-insect ears and facial features).

Or is this another symbolism seeping in?

Regards,
Kai

Hello Alan,

Can we try to get a definition first or try to resolve, if there really is any difference in either style and/or origin/symbolism?

Gustav has quoted an early source from the colonial period which suggests that the name kusia was utilized in Klungkung; with Klungkung earlier occupying quite a chunk of Lombok, it does't not come as a surprise that this name was also known/utilized on Lombok, too. Are there possibly other Balinese kingdoms in which another name (or names) might had been utilized? (BTW, is kepompong also a Balinese word?)

I'm not really interested in any name game but would love to hear if there really are any stylistic differences that can be associated with any cultural/symbolic differences (or any related symbolism in Balinese religion or folklore) rather than reverse engineering from current collectors' POVs.

Regards,
Kai

There are multiple variations of the kocetkocetan/kusia hilt, the symbolism is of transformation:- man > spirit > rebirth; evil > good; good > evil; child > adult.

Read different authors, speak to different people you will get different interpretations.

Whether something is kocetkocetan or kusia or whether they are both the same is subject to opinion too. BBK makes the differentiation subject to the presence of tusks.

The overall style is Balinese, Balinese occupation of Lombok was an extension of Balinese culture, Balinese in Lombok used the Balinese language for communication. The Sasak people did not adopt Balinese style, the Balinese people did not adopt Sasak style. How can "kusia" be associated with Sasak people?

The word "kepompong" is Indonesian, it means "pupa" or "chrysalis".

The pupa form of an insect symbolises the time of change.

Just because some source of information is older does not make it correct. In fact, insofar as the societies of SE Asia are concerned, old information provided by anybody must be looked at very carefully, and in reality, the same applies to recent information. If you ask a question of people in many of these societies you will get anything other than an accurate response.

The word used for the same object can vary constantly in Bali, just as it can in Jawa. Move from one place to another, usage & dialects can change. This is not unique to only SE Asia.

Hello Alan,

I did not mention Sasak culture/language/whatever?

If kepompong is Indonesian only as expected, it is clearly modern usage.

That the word kusia was known in Klungkung for such a type of hilt in the early 20th century seems to be a rather convincing bit of trivia that would be rather hard to get wrong. This seems to suggest that it isn't limited to Lombok (as expected from the close ties for the Balinese population on [parts of] both islands).


Ok, let's assume that this is based on a genuine Balinese source. So, what do tusks signify/symbolize in Balinese religion/culture?

Regards,
Kai

Kai, I most sincerely apologise for taking an approach in my post #38 that was not limited only to you.

The discussion relating to this hilt form has drawn a number of factors into consideration, and although my response was addressed to you, the way in which I phrased that response was intended to cover the field of discussion.

I acknowledge that this was an error on my part, and I have now corrected that error, as well another error that gave EK as the source for the "tusk" differentiation.

I'm sorry, but I am not able to assume that the point of differentiation made in BBK is either correct or incorrect, I only wish to comment that this point of differentiation has been put forward.

As to "tusks" having any cultural significance in this context I cannot say. The word used that is translated as "tusk" is not a tusk as a native English speaker might consider a tusk to be. As I noted, the use of "tusk" (ie, "taring") is Neka's, not mine.

Perhaps, as with many concepts that relate to the keris, and indeed, to many cultural or religious matters in other cultures, it might be necessary to adopt a way of thinking that permits some sort of understanding of exactly what a particular representation of something might represent. Insofar as Javanese & Balinese societies are concerned, the interpretation can easily encompass more than a single one.