What is the meaning behind this gandik type?

[Bjorn]

I have come across this gandik type twice now and am curious as to what exactly is depicted here. The lower figure reminds me of a rhinoceros while the upper figure may represent a predator of some sort, a tiger perhaps?

Does anyone know what is depicted on this gandik? Does it represent a scene from a story, epic, myth or legend? What are the meanings associated with this depiction? What is this gandik meant to tell the person viewing it?

PS: Both keris I have seen it on are from Bali.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yuuzan, if we look at older keris we find a very limited number of figures incorporated into their design. The figures that are most frequently met with in older, traditional keris are the naga in various forms, the singo barong, the Bhoma, and I guess we need to include the deer as well, even though that did seem to come a little later.

As we move through time various other figural motifs appear, sometimes we can attribute a meaning to them, sometimes possibly only the maker or the original owner can attribute a meaning. Then there are motifs that have different meanings for different people and places, for example, a flying elephant when associated with a Surakarta keris is supposedly in recognition, or memory, of the move of the karaton from Kartosuro to Surokarto. But for other people in other places it may have a different meaning. Of course, an elephant cannot be read in the same way as a flying elephant, and that elephant motif can be read in several different ways.

As keris become more recent we find meditating figures(puthut), buffalo, tigers, lions, manglar monggo, garudas, in fact a whole menagerie of motifs. A nice foundation for a collection could perhaps be to collect only keris with figural motifs --- what we call "picture keris".

However, once we move away from tradition and from motifs that have a known religious connection, we move into no-man's-land. In most cases the only person who could really say with certainty what a particular figure represents in more recent keris is the maker.

To clarify what I think of as "tradition", I need to explain that within this context of keris development I think in terms the last 1000 years. The foundation tradition lays within the Hindu-Buda period, I regard more recent keris as those which developed under the Islamic domination.

[Bjorn]

Many thanks, Alan.

I was hoping this representation also came from the Hindu-Buddhist era but it seems it's more likely a depiction of a very local story or simply of the maker's own design.

It has always surprised me that garuda hasn't figured more prominently on keris. To me, the wing motif seems to fit so excellently on the bottom part of the blade and Garuda must certainly have been a well respected figure back then.

Regarding the deer, in the Hindu-Buddhist period, did the depiction of a deer refer to the golden deer of the Ramayana? Or did it have an autochthonous meaning to the Javanese?

[A. G. Maisey]

At the present time I think most keris orientated people tend to identify the deer with Majapahit, but it seems more probable to me that the deer in Hindu-Javanese iconography was associated with minor nobles. In Bali, which is the cultural descendant of Majapahit, the sarcophagus of minor nobles is a deer.

[simatua]

Here another figural bali keris, which was recently on sale at an Dutch auction site. I had never seen a figural gandik seen with a hanuman. Although i only see this pictures, and not the keris in life. looking at the pictures this is 19 th century keris

[Bjorn]

Alan, very interesting to hear about the deer-shaped sarcophogi. I especially love to learn details like this since it all adds to understanding the local cosmology and symbolism.


Simatua, I have recently also come across a gandik with Hanuman. Since, I have actually seen it on several keris on a collector's site. All of them depicted Hanuman in battle with a sea dragon, which refers to events in the Ramayana. The overall design was consistent on all keris: the sea dragon coiled around Hanuman's legs. The design you show above - depicting only Hanuman - is completely new for me. I love how the curve of the tail is seamlessly integrated into the design of the blade.

In my opinion, the Hanuman-dragon design is a very nice one, especially if you like Hanuman. I hope to own a good quality keris with a Hanuman like that one day.

[Amuk Murugul]

Originally Posted by yuuzan

I have come across this gandik type twice now and am curious as to what exactly is depicted here. The lower figure reminds me of a rhinoceros while the upper figure may represent a predator of some sort, a tiger perhaps?

Does anyone know what is depicted on this gandik? Does it represent a scene from a story, epic, myth or legend? What are the meanings associated with this depiction? What is this gandik meant to tell the person viewing it?

PS: Both keris I have seen it on are from Bali.

Hullo everybody!

yuuzan,
To me, it looks like a poor representation of a lion standing on a rhino. If so, it symbolises Hanyokrokusumo's conquest of the island of Java; the lion represents Hanyokrokusumo while the rhino ( Sunda rhinoceros; more often called Javan rhino by the mainstream ) represents Java.
Sometimes, instead of the rhino, it has an elephant ( Elephas maximus sondaicus ). It essentially symbolises the same thing.

BTW .....
- Naga may not necessarily mean serpent/dragon
- During Hanyokrokusumo's time, he introduced a plethora of new keris types to be awarded like medals to victorious troops. (On the other hand, he was so merciless that a lot of his troops who were unsuccessful preferred to desert rather than to return and face certain death.)

..... just my view.

mvg,

[A. G. Maisey]

That's a very interesting interpretation Amuk Murugul!

You have noted that "it is just my view".

Does that mean that you have provided us with your opinion, or can you quote a source for this interpretation?

I do have a couple of very minor problems with this interpretation, but I am hopeful that you may be able explain these minor discrepancies .

Hanyokrokusumo, or as he was more commonly known, Sultan Agung (Sultan Agung Adi Prabu Hanyokrokusumo) was the ruler of the Central Javanese kingdom of Mataram from 1613 to 1645 ( not everybody agrees on these dates, and some authorities have them varying by a year at either extreme of the period of reign).

Sultan Agung did extend the influence of Mataram into East Jawa and Madura, but he failed to subdue Blambangan, and he never really had much success at all in dominating either Batavia or Banten. He tried a couple of times to drive the Dutch from Batavia, but he failed both times. So, although he did come to influence a large part of the Island of Jawa, at no time did he ever achieve the conquest of Jawa.

I am unaware of the rhinoceros having any place in Javanese iconography. It may have a place in Sundanese iconography, I do not know about this, but in Javanese iconography I cannot find a place for it. Nor can I find a place for the rhinoceros in mainstream Hindu iconography. It is not possible for the rhinoceros to be understood as the elephant. The elephant has the same value as the naga, and in some interpretations one may be understood as the other, but the poor old rhino just doesn't get a look in anywhere.

It is true that the word naga can have a couple of different meanings, but in the context of Jawa, Bali, the keris and the associated belief systems the word Naga refers to one of the three major Nagas, Anantaboga, Basuki, and Taksaka. These three Nagas are incarnations of Brahma, Wisnu and Siwa, and if the three Nagas are merged into only one Naga, that Naga is known as Basuki. Thus, when we consider the relationship of the keris to the Naga, there is a very solid and demonstrable association between the Naga Basuki and the keris, most particularly so when we are thinking in terms of the keris pusaka, the function of which is to bind, as the character of Sri Naga Basuki is as a binding agent.

However, putting all that stuff to one side, there is one little problem that I have with the interpretation that you have given us Amuk, and that is this:- Sultan Agung was a a 17th century Javanese ruler; the keris under discussion is a fairly recent Balinese keris. I just cannot understand why any comparatively modern Balinese would want to incorporate symbolism relevant to a Javanese ruler of several hundred years ago into his keris.

Your interpretation is, as I have said, interesting, but I do feel it needs a little bit of close examination and clarification if we are to accept it as plausible.

EDIT:- There was one other thing I wanted to mention, but I'd forgotten the details, so I let it go until I could find a reference. I've had a look and I still cannot find what is in my mind, so I'll give you what I can remember and somebody might be able to fill in the gaps.
The Dutch wanted to set up a trading station in Bali, and during the negotiations with the Raja of Klungkung, who is the senior Balinese ruler, a request was made for the gift of a live rhinoceros. They were using the harbour at Kuta in those days as the point of entry to South Bali, and the rhino was brought to Kuta and then gifted to the Raja in 1839. This was not an early effort to save the rhino, because a few years later in 1841 or 1842 the rhino was sacrificed as a part of a cremation ceremony.That's as much as I can remember, but somebody may be able to find more on this, and there might be some connection with the use of a rhino as keris motif.

[Bjorn]

Aland and Amuk,

This is turning into quite an interesting discussion and I'd like to thank you both for your views. It's certainly quite educational for me and I wish that my own knowledge was greater so that I could make a more substantial contribution to this discussion.

[David]

The owner of the image that Bjorn started this thread with asked that it be removed and Bjorn was in agreement, so i deleted it. If anyone has access to a similar one for a reference point it might be helpful to the discussion.

[Jussi M.]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

As keris become more recent we find meditating figures(puthut), buffalo, tigers, lions, manglar monggo, garudas, in fact a whole menagerie of motifs. A nice foundation for a collection could perhaps be to collect only keris with figural motifs --- what we call "picture keris".

- emphasis added -

Greetings,

this idea of concentrating ones collection focus onto "picture keris´s" only sounds good in that it would make easier to stay the course: "no picture, on the keris, I´ll pass". Thus temptations would be easier to evade as the mass to choose from would be considerably lower?

However would this be a riskier approach for the novice keris student in that there would be a higher risk of landing with a fraud than if one were to focus on the "less pictoral", more "regular", keris, pun intended? I´m talking about post original manufacture alterations provided for making the market value higher. Hallucination?

Thanks,

J.