New Bali Sarung and Handles

[alexish]

I hereby enclose pictures of new Balinese sarung and handles for comments.

I have two questions.

1. The majority of figural Balinese hilts are in the form of Raksasas. Are those hilts that are in the form of Dewas, gods or kings reserved for royalty or nobility?

2. Is a hilt that is in the form of a Naga or Singa (as seen in the picture) traditionally Balinese, or influenced by Madurese/Sumenep motifs?

[A. G. Maisey]

This dress is of much finer quality than the "Viking" and the "Anglo" dress, in fact the quality of workmanship is good enough to be Balinese workmanship. However, once again, it does show unmistakable indicators of a Sumenep place of origin. It is very, very far from anything resembling culturally or societally correct Balinese dress. It is quite nice art work. It is not correct Balinese dress in any sense.

The majority of Balinese keris handles are of the bondolan , or a similar functional form. Balinese figural handles come in many forms, I don't think any of these forms can be classified as "raksasa". Any figure that shows fangs can be regarded as demonic, but how it is classified after that is often quite difficult to determine.

The word "singa" means "lion". The hilt shown which I suspect is meant to be taken as a lion is not able to be interpreted as a lion in a Balinese sense, nor in a Javanese sense. The nearest I can come to an interpretation of this carving is that it is a Javanese/Madurese interpretation of a Chinese dragon.

The choice of a keris hilt is always subject to certain considerations in a keris bearing society. The question of who can wear what, where and when is not something that can be easily answered. I could maybe cover the Bali scenario in perhaps 2000 words. This is not really the place for that.

None of the carving I am seeing in these posts is culturally correct.

It is pretty nice carving, all of it. Totally acceptable as art/craft work, but not acceptable in any way as keris dress. A keris is an item of dress that is worn in a prescribed way and in a prescribed setting. It must follow certain rules, just as its wearer must follow certain rules. None of the keris in this elaborately carved dress do follow those rules, No member of any Indonesian cultural group could wear them without generating laughter, and perhaps offence. But they would look pretty nice on the wall behind a bar in some Western country.

[alexish]

Alan, thanks for your insightful comments. I was told by a fellow collector that Balinese kings and nobility can wear figural hilts that represent gods, heroes or kings, while this is not allowed for commoners. Is that generally true?

[A. G. Maisey]

I don't think that this question can be answered shortly and in a simple way David, that's the reason I did not attempt to answer it previously, however since I'm being pressed, here is the short version.

Firstly we must define the period, and the situation.

Lets say it is 2017, OK, now what is the situation?

Who is the person?

What is his status in the situation?

Bear in mind that there are varying hierarchical positions that depend upon the value system being used.

What are his personal feelings and personal objectives in this situation?

Now, having answered all those questions can we say that he is, or is not permitted to wear a togogan danganan in the form of a dewa/dewi, a mythological figure, or a royal figure?

Maybe, but even if "maybe" this can only be expressed as a possibility, not an iron clad rule. Too many variables.

What might be more important is the quality and material of the hilt.

Can he wear a gold, gemset hilt?

Maybe, if he is rich enough and if his hierarchical position doesn't make this ridiculous --- and again, depending on the hierarchical system of evaluation being used.

Even now, today, as I just wrote:- 2017, the variables are so many that it is just about impossible to make any iron clad declaration.

But let's go back to an earlier time, say 1850. Did the same thing hold good? Off the top of my head I don't know. If I wished I could research it, but to what end?

However, I could very comfortably say this:- prior to the Dutch takeover, only a person who was in a suitably high hierarchical position could wear a gold, gemset hilt. In fact, only such a person could afford to wear such a hilt.

However, is, or was a person other than a "noble" not permitted to wear a simple wooden togogan hilt? I do not believe so.

We cannot make absolute statements about these things, we need to set the framework for the response:- time, place, situation, person, and all of the attached qualifiers.

In the Balinese context, just exactly what is meant by "kings and nobility" ? This itself is maybe not a real easy question to answer. The gentry in traditional Balinese society are the Brahmana, Satriya and Wesia, the other people are Sudras. But a Brahmana cannot be a ruler, a ruler must be a Satriya,

So if a Brahmana wishes to rule he needs to change his caste and become Satriya. Prior to the Dutch takeover, caste mobility was possible. The Dutch tried to stop this and fix everybody in their own place forever. This generated a lot of anger and discontent.

Then there is the dadia.All members of the triwangsa, the three gentry castes, can trace membership of the dadia to which they belong to a common Mojopahit ancestor. The hierarchy with the dadia is relative so that the eldest son of the eldest son of the eldest son, stretching back to the common Mojopahit ancestor is the highest person in the dadia hierarchy. All the other members have their relative place determined in the same way.

Apart from the dadias and the castes you also have the clans (warga). A clan can cut across another status boundary. The biggest clan is the Pasek clan and within the Sudra caste the Pasek clan has higher status than others, but then there is the special case of the Pande clan and the Bandesa clan.

I have been told that even most Balinese are not all that clear on how to determine correct status position within any group of people, and you cannot ask this question. They ask by asking "where do you sit". The person who sits in the highest position in any meeting, say a banjar meeting has the highest status in that meeting, but it may take expert enquiry and determination to establish that status.

In have still not answered the question, have I? But maybe now you understand the reason why I will not or cannot answer short of a long, well researched slab of text.

Its just not that simple.

[alexish]

I hereby enclose more pictures of new Balinese sarungs and handles for comments.

[mariusgmioc]

While I know very little about Balinese kerises, the ones in the photos seem very much like the classic "tourist keris"... albeit of somehow better workmanship.

You make the asumption that the majority of Balinese keris hilts are in the form of Rakasas/demons. However, from all what I have seen, both on internet and in Indonesian museums, the most prevalent figural form for Balinese keris hilts is by far that of god Bayu or at least somebody resembling him (see link below). I have also seen quite many supposedly representing Arjuna. So, I seriously doubt that your asumption is correct.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...balinese+keris

[rasjid]

I myself always tried to have the newly made material from their local origin carvers and if necessary with the help from local friends also if we can not reach directly or conveniently communicate.
We have a lot of good carvers and export their handycraft to overseas but that doesnt mean that the quality at their top level always. This is normal for any art objects i believe. Same here with the new rongko. Skill is one aspect, raw material and time or quality made is another thing. We have to know what to look for within our knowledge / information at that time of purchase, if we really commit to own it. Then learn from there

just want to clarify here:
1. Tourist object: cheap n low grade material n simple carving if there is carving.
2. Good quality carving (anybody can mostly agreed) and maybe good raw material or maybe basic /standard material rongkos. Maybe like pictures shown here in this thread.
3. Good carving / style and follow the local standard or Pakem with kraton era - i dont want to argue here but just for discussion as well known from Museums or maybe at some collectors item in the field with known sources.

So my guess maybe Allans point i would consider into point#3

i attached Also my version of newly made Bali rongko

thanks
rasjid

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by rasjid

just want to clarify here:
1. Tourist object: cheap n low grade material n simple carving if there is carving.

In my perception a "tourist keris" is not necessarilly low grade material and workmanship but something made as much eye-catching as possible, without any respect to the centuries old tradition of keris-making, and addressed to an undiscerning buyer who buys solely based on exterior aspect/artistic appeal.