W. van der Molen
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
In: Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 159 (2003), no: 2/3, Leiden, 389-403
This PDF-file was downloaded from http://www.kitlv-journals.nl
WILLEM VAN DER MOLEN
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
The Wonoboyo bowl
One of the most spectacular finds in Indonesian archaeology during the
twentieth century is the Wonoboyo treasure.1 This find came to light in 1990
in the Central Javanese village of Wonoboyo, near Prambanan. It consisted
of a huge amount of jewellery and precious utensils made of gold, silver, and
ceramic. Palaeographic data on some of the objects point towards the early
tenth century as the time of their manufacture (Martowikrido 1994, n.d.). The
Wonoboyo treasure was brought to the attention of the wider public as part
of international exhibitions in Germany, Japan, and several other countries,
in addition to permanent exhibitions in Indonesia itself (Martowikrido and
Sutrisno 1992; Eggebrecht and Eggebrecht 1995; Treasures 1997).
One of the Wonoboyo objects is a golden bowl on which a story is depicted. There can be no doubt about the identity of the story. The scenes of a man
hunting a deer and of a woman being kidnapped point in but one direction,
the story of Rama and Sita.
Although the identity of the story is beyond doubt, opinions vary as to the
content of some of the scenes. Presently, there are two divergent views, one
held by archaeologist Wahyono Martowikrido and the other by art historian
Cecelia Levin (Martowikrido 1995; Levin 1999). I would like to contribute to
this debate by drawing into the discussion the narrative of the Old Javanese
Ramayanakakawin. In my opinion, the kakawin supports neither of the two
views, while it does contain material for an alternative interpretation. For all
that, I am not arguing that the kakawin is the source of the illustrations on the
bowl, or that the interpretation of the illustrations depends on textual
1
R.E. Jordaan, M.J. Klokke, K.J.J. Korevaart and P.J. Worsley took the trouble of going
through earlier versions of this article. I would like to thank them for their comments.
WILLEM VAN DER MOLEN is lecturer in Javanese and Old Javanese at the University of
Leiden, where he also obtained his D.Phil, degree. He has published together with Kartika
Setyawati and I. Kuntara Wiryamartana, Katalog naskah Merapi-Merbabu Perpustakaan Nasional
Indonesia, Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma/ Leiden: Opleiding Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azie
en Oceanie, Universiteit Leiden, 2002. Dr Van der Molen may be reached at TCZOAO, PO Box
9515, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands. <[email protected]>.
390
Willem van der Molen
evidence; visual and textual renderings should be seen as creative versions
in their own right. Besides, interpretation always involves more than one
possibility. It is in this respect that a comparison with the Old Javanese poem
suggests choices which otherwise might go unnoticed.
The two text editions of the Old Javanese Ramayana available for comparative purposes are Kern (1900) and Santoso (1980). The latter is supplemented by an English translation, but this seeming advantage is deceptive, as
the translation, helpful though it is as a means of quick reference, is often at
variance with the source text. Moreover, Kern's edition offers a more reliable
text from a philological point of view. In this article, therefore, I use Kern's
edition. The English translations of the Old Javanese text are my own.
My discussion is accompanied by drawings made at my request by Hans
Borkent. For a full photographic rendering I refer to the catalogue of the exhibition held in Japan.2 A complete set of excellent photos can also be found in
the catalogue of the exhibition held in Paris and reproduced in the Brisbane
and Sydney catalogue (Bianchini n.d.; Indonesian gold 1999). The other catalogues show only selected pictures. The Japanese catalogue is my sole source
for the content of the scenes; regrettably, during my last visit to the Museum
Nasional in Jakarta, I did not have the opportunity to examine the original
as it was not on exhibit.
Archaeology and art history
The scenes depicted on the body of the bowl are grouped into four segments or panels, each containing two scenes. Martowikrido's interpretation
of the eight scenes can be summarized as follows (see the illustrations in the
Appendix):
1.1 Rama makes an obeisance to his father (probably while taking leave
before going into exile).
1.2 A deer draws the attention of Sita, who is in the company of Rama and
Laksmana.
2.1 Rama hunts the deer.
2.2 The mortally wounded deer is transformed into the demon Marica.
3.1 Sita is seized by Rawana disguised as an ascetic.
3.2 Sita is abducted by Rawana, appearing as the ten-headed Dasamuka.
The bird Jatayu is being threatened by Dasamuka's spear.
4.1 Trijata kneels before Rawana. She requests him not to force Sita but to
2
Treasures 1997:116-7. I am grateful to M.J. Klokke for drawing my attention to this catalogue. It should be noticed that the photos of the catalogue are in reversed order. The captions
to the photos are in complete disarray.
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
391
let her try to win Sita over with patience. .
Sita lies on a bench being watched over by Trijata and another female
servant (after Trijata has tried in vain to mollify Sita by singing an ode
to the glory of Rawana).
Martowikrido (1995: no. 47) points out that the scenes on the bowl should be
read clockwise, in pradaksina direction. He does not explain why he thinks
1.1 should be considered the opening scene of the series. (The scenes form an
uninterrupted series, without any indication of a beginning or end.)
Three of the scenes are open to more than one interpretation, namely
scenes 1.1, 4.1, and 4.2. These scenes have no helpful clues such as the
presence of a deer in scene 1.2 and a multiheaded Rawana in scene 3.2.
Martowikrido fails to mention that there may be a problem of identification
here. In spite of his firm, description, we see on the bowl itself no more than
the following:
•
1.1 Two male figures, bare to the waist, their hair in a knot hanging down
on the neck. The figure at left is seated on a bench with his legs crossed
in front of him while holding the slip of his sash in his hand; he is looking straight in front of him. The figure at right is sitting cross-legged on
a mat on the ground, making a gesture of obeisance {sembah). .
4.1 Two figures, one male and one female. The male figure is sitting on a
bench, his left foot on the ground, the lower part of his right leg folded
under his left thigh. His right arm is stretched out towards the female
figure, his hand touching or grasping1 her left hand. His left arm rests
on the bench. The upper part of his body is bare. His hair is done up in
a knot hanging down on his neck.
. . . . . .
The female figure is sitting in front of the male figure, with her legs
tucked to her right side. Her eyes are cast down. Her arms are bent and
raised, her hands are open,with the palms turned upwards. The upper
part of her body is bare. Her hair is done up in a knot hanging down
on her neck.
4.2 Three female figures, with the upper part of their bodies bare. One of
them is lyingon a bench. Her right arm supports her head; her left arm
is stretched out alongside her body. She is lying with her back turned
towards the other two figures. Her hair is loosely tied up in a knot resting on her left shoulder.
. .
The other two figures'are depicted sitting or standing behind the
bench. Only the upper part of their bodies is visible. The left one looks
to the right one, her right arm bent and raised, with her hand open;
her left arm is hanging down. The right one looks at the' female on the
bench, her arms crossed in front of her. Bothhave their hair wound up
in a large knot hanging down on their necks.
4.2
392
Willem van der Molen
Levin's analysis is different from Martowikrido's in a number of respects.
First, her identification of the figures and what is going on in the three scenes
in question is different. Second, she looks for a common theme underlying
all eight scenes, a theme that would explain why the choice fell on precisely
these scenes to decorate the bowl. Third, she attempts to match up the results
of her analysis with the Old Javanese kakawin.
Levin (1999:39, 42-3) identifies the figures and actions of scenes 1.1, 4.1,
and 4.2 as follows:
1.1 Laksmana makes an obeisance to Rama.
4.1 Rawana tries to win Sita over.
4.2 Two women watch over the lamenting Sita.
The identification of scene 4.1 is supported by the Old Javanese text, Levin
argues: Trijata pleading before Rawana on behalf of Sita is not found in the
text, but Rawana trying to win Sita over is. Another point in favour of the
view that we are dealing with Rawana and Sita in this scene, and not with
Rawana and Trijata, is that the man seems to be seizing the woman by her
wrist, while the woman is holding her hands up under her bowed head, as if
she is asking for a favour or catching her tears (Levin 1999:42-3).
Levin's interpretation of scene 1.1 is less plausible: she admits that there is
no mention in the text of Laksmana making an obeisance to Rama. However,
a strong argument for interpreting the scene in this way is that all the scenes
seem to share one common theme: that of loyalty. This hypothesis, Levin
continues, would explain why Laksmana had to be depicted in this way even
though the scene does not actually occur in the Old Javanese Ramayana: he
represents one particular type of loyalty, along with five other types distinguished by Levin. Each type is illustrated by one scene, as follows:
1.1 Laksmana is the prototype of the loyal brother who follows and assists
his older brother Rama everywhere in all circumstances.
2.1 Rama's hunting of the deer reflects the loyalty of a husband to his wife,
dedicated to the fulfilment of her wishes.
2.2 Even Marica, the demon who changed into a deer in order to lure Rama
away from Sita and now reappears in his death agony, represents a
particular category of loyalty, in this case the loyalty of a servant to his
master, Rawana, for whom he is ready to sacrifice his life.
3.2 Jatayu is the loyal friend who tries to thwart the kidnapping.
4.1 The unshakable loyalty of a wife to her husband (Sita's appeal to
Rawana) is illustrated here as well as in the next scene.
4.2 The loyalty of a wife to her husband is again illustrated here, in Sita's
lamentation.
Levin (1999:43) adds that the alternative interpretation of scene 4.1 (not Sita
but Trijata in the presence of Rawana; see Martowikrido) would also fit in
with the general theme of loyalty: Trijata, appointed by Rawana to pester Sita,
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
393
appears instead to protect her 'older sister', yet without betraying Rawana, a
conflicting loyalty which eventually lands her in a difficult position.
Referring once more to the Old Javanese Ramayana, Levin points out that
the topics of Laksmana as Rama's loyal follower, the deer hunt, and Sita's
abduction are described in sarga 5 and 6, while Sita's confrontation with
Rawana and her lamentation are found in sarga 8 (Levin 1999:39; sarga are
the units into which the Old Javanese Ramayana is divided). The comparison
with the Old Javanese text leads Levin to two important observations, one of
which was already mentioned: a scene in which Laksmana makes an obeisance to Rama does not occur in sarga 5. The second is the big time gap in the
reliefs: from sarga 6 to sarga 8 is indeed quite a leap (Levin 1999:42).
The Old Javanese text
One of the problems in interpreting the scenes on the bowl is that the figures
therein are open to more than one identification. For example, the figure in
scene 1.1, to whom an obeisance is being made, is Dasarata according to
Martowikrido, but Rama according to Levin. In the same scene, the figure
who is making the gesture of obeisance is identified by Martowikrido as
Rama, but as Laksmana by Levin. Sita in scene 4.1 is interchangeable with
Trijata. The only information to be had about the figures is their sex: whether
they are male or female can be seen quite clearly from their physical appearance. But exactly whom they represent has to be inferred from the context.
The context is therefore of crucial importance.
The first question I. want to raise is the identity of the woman who is
depicted in scene 4.1, supposedly Trijata (Martowikrido) or Sita (Levin). In
my opinion, neither of the two hypotheses finds support in the kakawin.
I agree with Levin (and not Martowikrido) that Trijata as a mediator
between Rawana and Sita, proposing patience rather than the use of force as
a means to win Sita over, is not found in the Old Javanese Ramayana (Levin
1999:43). One might even say that such a role is highly unlikely. Trijata is
one of the three hundred demonesses ordered by Rawana to guard Sita
and to pester her, after his own efforts to win her over have failed, (sarga 8).
However, Trijata, instead of pestering Sita, is impressed by her high morals
and feels pity for her, and thus takes her side against Rawana. She becomes
Sita's confidante and chases the other demonesses away (sarga 8.140-142).
Nor is Trijata's torn loyalty, brought forward by Levin as an alternative
possibility in support of Martowikrido (see the end of the previous section), found in the text. Trijata does act as a mediator - not between Sita
and. Rawana, but rather between Sita and her liberators. On two occasions
Rawana deceives Sita as to the fate of her husband, making her believe that
394
Willem van der Molen
Rama has died. In both instances Sita wishes to follow Rama in death, and
she asks Trijata to prepare the funeral pyre. But both times Trijata first checks
whether the rumour of Rama's death is correct: she travels to the enemy's
camp and finds out the truth, with the happy outcome that Sita does not
climb onto the funeral pyre (sarga 17.61, 62, 76; sarga 21.5).
Levin's own solution, that the woman represents Sita, also seems untenable from the perspective of the text: Sita would never kneel before Rawana.
It is in fact the opposite: Rawana kneels before Sita, who continues to display
her great contempt for him. Sarga 6.30:
She pointed at him with the finger of her left hand; he did not get the answer that
would please him.
He addresses her with sweet words, promises, threats, all to no avail. Sita does
not deign to answer. She turns her back on him and lets him talk. And when
she finally answers, it is to tell Rawana what she thinks of him (sarga 8.128):
Bastard! Shame on you Dasanana, debased Rawana,
stupid treacherous fool, mean imp!
If you match Rama,
why did you abduct me while he was not there?
She goes on in this tone for another seven stanzas. There is no room in this
text for a humbly kneeling Sita imploring her captor to let her go.
It seems equally implausible that the male figure in scene 4.1 could
be Rawana. Rawana is known for having ten heads and so is also called
Dasamuka ('with the ten heads') and Dasanana ('with the ten faces'). One
exception is the moment he wants to kidnap Sita. To be able to do so he has to
try to come as near as possible to her without arousing suspicion or fear. Being
a demon, he is able to change form, and that is what he does, by adopting the
guise of a respectable ascetic mumbling pious prayers. Once he has seized
her, he reverts to his normal form. Therefore, Sita calls him Dasanana when
addressing him during captivity (sarga 8.128). The scenes on the bowl, parallel
to the Old Javanese text, show how Rawana as an ascetic seizes Sita (scene 3.1)
and takes on his ten-headed form- again when he flies away with her (scene
3.2). The male figure of 4.1 has one head and therefore cannot be Rawana.
Is there an alternative identity for the figures portrayed in scene 4.1, if
they do not represent Rawana and Sita, or Rawana and Trijata? I think there
is. A closer inspection of the details of the scene yields the following. The
man is holding his right arm stretched out towards the woman as if he is
about to touch her (he does not, however, seize her wrist, as Levin suggests).
The woman is not making a gesture of obeisance; rather, she has her hands
raised, holding them as if expecting to receive something (as Levin says).
The scene makes me think of the stanzas in sarga 6 of the kakazoin where
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
395
Rama cures the sawara (barbarian) woman. This lady is a hermit discovered
by Rama and Laksmana after the kidnapping, when they are looking for Sita.
She is doing penance in the forest for a former mistake: she once ate the meat
of a wild boar which in reality was1 Wisnu. As a consequence she has turned
black. Now her hope is that Rama will release her. How this is done, she
explains in the first line of sarga 6.110:
Have mercy, Rama. Wipe my face.
Rama acts as requested, with the result that the woman recovers from her
affliction.
What makes the woman think Rama can cure her? The answer is not difficult to find. If Wisnu struck the woman with his curse because she affronted
him, he can also undo the curse. According to the Ramayana Rama is identical with Wisnu because he is Wisnu's incarnation on earth. See sarga 1.2
where Dasarata, Rama's father, is called the father of Wisnu:
He was Triwikrama's father, through him as a father God Wisnu became man
for the well-being of the whole world; that was his aim, the reason why he became
man.
and sarga 24.200, where God Siwa tells Rama who he really is:
You are Wisnu and your best-beloved Sita is Sri.
(A separate problem is how the hermit knew Rama's real nature.) The liberation of the woman from her discoloured countenance could be seen as
foreshadowing the liberation of the whole world from evil, personified by
Rawana.
Rama does not leave empty-handed: the woman predicts that he, with the
king of the apes as his ally, will be reunited with his wife.
Let us now turn to scene 4.2. The three women in this scene, one lying
on a bench while the other two watch her from behind the bench, have been
identified as the lamenting Sita and two women (Levin) or the lamenting Sita
and two female servants, Trijata being one of them (Martowikrido).
In the Old Javanese text we find this situation of Sita being watched by
Rawana's subjects twice: shortly after her arrival in Lengka, described in
sarga 6, and much later, when Hanuman spots her in Rawana's gardenias
described in sarga 8. The second time we learn new details: Sita has become
very thin ('her body was thin and her ribs were showing'; sarga 8.105),
and has decided to lie on the ground, rejecting all the amenities offered by
Rawana to make her life more comfortable. Furthermore, in sarga 6 Rawana
orders his subjects to keep an eye on Sita (rumaksa-raksa 'to guard', in the
sense of 'to protect', 'to take care of; Zoetmulder 1982:1492), whereas in sarga
8 the atmosphere has turned grim: three hundred demonesses are ordered to
396
Willem van der Molen
pester Sita, until Trijata puts an end to it and sends everybody away, staying
behind alone with her (sarga 8.138-143). Looking at scene 4.2 on the bowl, it
appears that Sita is not thin at all in comparison to previous scenes, that she
is lying on a bench, not on the ground, and that she is being watched over by
two women, not pestered by many nor accompanied by only one. My conclusion is that this scene must represent the situation in sarga 6, not that in sarga
8. As a consequence scene 4.2 cannot be labelled Sita's lamentation because
this only takes place in sarga 8.
This conclusion is reinforced by what is going on between the three
women. Sita has turned her back on the other two women, as if she does not
want to have anything to do with them. The gestures of the two other women
and the way one is looking at the other, who in turn is looking at Sita, seem
to suggest that they are engaged in conversation. This would imply that Sita
is silent, and not uttering a lamentation.
At this point I must make a linguistic digression on sarga 6. The situation
we are discussing is described in stanza 31. The particular line portrayed in
scene 4.2 reads as follows (sarga 6.31d):
while he ordered his subjects to keep an eye on Janaki.
('He' refers to Rawana.) The Old Javanese word used to denote 'subjects' is
bala. According to Zoetmulder bala means 'strength' or 'power', and 'troops',
'army', 'soldiers of lesser rank' (Zoetmulder 1982:194). Now it is very clear
that scene 4.2 is not filled with soldiers but with two unarmed women. On
the face of it this would seem to contradict my solution. There is no reason
to assume that the Old Javanese text is out of order: there are no variant
manuscript readings for this line, and metrically bala is the right word. The
only solution I can think of is that Zoetmulder's gloss of bala is too narrow.
In order to clarify this point I have checked the entire Ramayana for the use
of bala. It is found 142 times in the text, and although in the great majority of
cases it must be translated as 'army' or 'soldiers', there are a few instances
where it could also mean 'subjects' or 'followers', or where these are indeed
the only acceptable translations.
I found two places where 'subjects' or 'followers' seems to be the only
correct translation. The first example is in sarga 2. When the newly wed Rama
and Sita are on their way home, in the company of Rama's father and others,
they meet one Parasurama, who threatens them but is successfully chased
away. Everybody feels relieved. The text says (sarga 2.77):
The bala shouted, they all made a big noise.
In order to understand who the bala were, we have to know what people
were with Rama at the time; Laksmana accompanied Rama when he went
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
397
to Mitila to compete for Sita (sarga 2.53). Then Rama's father Dasarata was
invited by Sita's father to attend the wedding ceremony; he was accompanied by high officials and officers {sarga 2.67). When they returned to Ayodya,
Sita took her servants with her (sarga 2.66). As this company cannot be considered an army in any meaningful way, my conclusion is that bala should be
translated here as 'followers' or 'attendants' (or some similar term referring
to the lower-ranking members of the company, comparable to the idea of
lesser rank inherent in the meaning of 'army').
The second example is from sarga 3. Dasarata has told Rama that he will
not be the future king of Ayodya and must leave the kingdom. The people
feel outraged and might have revolted if they had not been calmed down by
Rama. It is no wonder then that many choose to follow him when he leaves,
escorted by the prime minister, Sumantri. When after a day's march everybody is tired and asleep, Rama seizes the opportunity to slip away. Sarga 3.15
describes the situation during the night:
He watched over all his bala who were in deep sleep.
('He' is Rama.) The crowd is referred to in various ways: as 'the people'
(wwang kabeh; stanza 9), 'all those who (wanted him to be king)' (sahana;
stanza 14), and finally in the line quoted above as bala. Assuming that in all
cases it is the same crowd which is being referred to and not one that all of a
sudden has changed into an army, the word bala can only be understood here
as 'company' or 'following'.
Based on these two cases I conclude that 'subjects' in sarga 6.31 is the correct
translation of bala. Kern (1922:123), in his Dutch translation of the text, takes
the same view: he renders the bala of this line as 'subjects' ('onderhorigen').
If my conclusion is correct that in scene 4.2 we are dealing with two followers of Rawana ordered to keep an eye on Sita, this would imply that
Trijata, after having been eliminated as a possible candidate in scene 4.1, now
definitively disappears from sight, and with her one of Levin's problems, the
strange leap from sarga 6 to sarga 8.
Unfortunately my solution for scene 4.2 also creates a problem: in the Old
Javanese text Sita's lament occurs before Rama's meeting with the sawara
woman, not after it, as the bowl has it. I do not have an explanation for this
discrepancy between text and bowl.
The last scene to be discussed is scene 1.1. The passage in the Old
Javanese text that comes closest is found in sarga 2.9, although the farewell
itself is not mentioned. Seen from the point of view of the Old Javanese text,
Martowikrido's interpretation of this scene as Rama's farewell has the disadvantage that it does not immediately precede the other scenes depicted
on the bowl. All the other scenes take place during Rama's exile. By then it
is a long time since he left the court, and new complications have arisen. To
398
Willem van der Molen
begin with, Rama's younger brother, Barata, travelled after him to the forest
and urged him to return to become king; Rama turned down the request
and instructed his brother on the requirements for a good king, then sent
him back to town. Next comes the episode of Surpanaka, the demoness who
tried to seduce Laksmana; Laksmana did not allow himself to be deceived by
Surpanaka's beautiful appearance but brought her real nature to light with
a careful blow of his sword; the army of demons she called to the rescue
was destroyed. Only then follows Sita's kidnapping. Rama's parting with
his father can hardly count as an introduction to this episode. Another argument against Martowikrido's interpretation is that it makes the subject matter of scene 1.1 stand apart from the rest: seven scenes are connected with the
kidnapping of Sita, one scene has nothing to do with it.
If the tenability of Martowikrido's interpretation of scene 1.1 is doubtful
in the light of these considerations, Levin's alternative interpretation that
Laksmana is respectfully expressing his loyalty seems equally improbable.
True, Laksmana's loyalty is an important theme in the Ramayana. It is mentioned repeatedly, right from the beginning. In sarga 1 Laksmana is extolled
because of his loyalty. He is called an example for people in the service of
others (stanzas 59 and 60):
The excellent Laksmana shared happiness and sorrow with Rama.
His thoughts were always close to Rama, so he went to the hermitage with him.
He set an example for those people whose business it is to serve.
He obeyed all Rama's orders, never did he stay behind, going wherever
Rama went.
Levin observes that an obeisance as an expression of loyalty is lacking in
sarga 5. But then, no one would expect it. Laksmana's loyalty is evident from
his presence, nothing needs to.be made clear here anymore. An obeisance by
Laksmana to express his loyalty at this point in the story would be strange.
There are two occasions during the stay in the forest on which Laksmana's
loyalty and his making an obeisance are mentioned. The first occasion is
when Laksmana, forced by Sita, goes after Rama and informs him what went
on between him and Sita during Rama's absence (sarga 6.34-35):
While Rama reflected, his thoughts in disarray [about some bad omens he saw],
his younger brother came in a terrible state.
He became more distressed when he saw Laksmana's dismay.
'No doubt Sita is dead/ he thought despondently.
So he asked. His brother answered quickly,
honestly informing his older brother of his loyalty and devotion to him.
Rama became disheartened just hearing the news.
His heart was shattered, he thought the world was desolate.
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
399
The word 'loyalty' in the second line of the second stanza supposedly refers
to Sita's insinuations when Laksmana at first refused to go after Rama. No
mention is made of an obeisance here.
•.
.
The second occasion is when Laksmana holds back Rama from destroying
the whole world after he has worked himself into a fit of rage.about Sita's
disappearance (sarga 6.60):
.
.
Thus spoke Ragawa roaring like a lion.
He put an arrow on his bow, annoyed and angry with everybody.
Laksmana wept, overcome with sadness; out of compassion he made an obeisance
to prevent the world from dying though it had not sinned.
Here the word 'obeisance' is mentioned (see the third line), but in a com:
pletely different context from Laksmana's loyalty towards Rama.
If scene 1.1 does not depict Rama's parting with his father, nor Laksmana's
expression of loyalty to Rama, then what else could it be? I propose the following solution: scene 1.1 is not the first scene of the series, but the last. In
other words, the series starts with scene 1.2 (the couple still together) and
ends after Rama and Sita have become separated, showing Sita in 4.2 and
Rama with Laksmana sitting in front of him in 1.1.
One argument in favour of this interpretation is that sarga 6 of the Old
Javanese text ends with exactly the same scene, Rama grieving in the company of Laksmana, described in sarga 6.116-129, after which the story moves
on to the king of the monkeys and a new episode starts. Another argument is
that Rama in 1.2 and following scenes looks to the left, but not in 1.1: there, he
looks to the right. This too seems to suggest that scene 1.1 is the concluding
scene of the series. Additionally, note that, in this way, the scenes on the bowl
constitute one complete episode of the Old Javanese text: 'Sita's abduction',
as told in sarga 6.
Still, my interpretation is not without difficulties.. The figure sitting on
the mat, Laksmana, is making an obeisance which has no parallel in the
corresponding text of sarga 6.116-129.- One might also ask whether scene
1.1 really reflects Rama's lamentation; in fact, it seems closer to the passage
discussed above in which Laksmana makes an obeisance'when he tries to
hold back Rama from destroying the whole world. But that seems even less
plausible, because it would go against the order of the events as related in
the text (Rama's anger precedes the meeting with the sawara woman), while
on the other hand Rama's posture in scene 1.1 expresses sadness, not anger.3
I have to admit, as in the case of the order of scenes 4.1. and 4.2, thatthere is
3
'[W]ahrend seine Hande vor dem Kdrper auf beiden Seiten die Scharpe halten. Diese Geste
ahnelt einer Bewegung javanischer Tanzer der Gegeriwart, mit der das Gefilhl der Trauer zum
Ausdruck gebracht wird.' (Martowikrido 1995: no. 47.)
400
Willem van der Molen
a problem here for which I have found no solution.
Obviously, my interpretation of scenes 1.1 and 4.1 has consequences for
the loyalty theme proposed by Levin. If loyalty can no longer be considered
the common theme, is there an alternative, and if so, what? I think there is
an alternative. The episode of the kidnapping in fact gives the essentials of
the Ramayana in a nutshell, both as an entertaining story (about a princely
couple, in exile yet very happy, their cruel separation a consequence of cunning and violence, and their future reuniting predicted by the sawara woman)
and as a story about the salvation of the world, with evil seemingly gaining
ground but with the expectation that good will prevail. Given the extraordinary length of the Ramayanakakawin, the golden bowl of Wonoboyo uses
extreme economy in the lay-out of the story. In the limited space available to
him, the goldsmith who created it could not have done better.
Concluding remarks
In the above I show that the reliefs on the Wonoboyo bowl may be better
understood if we take into account the narrative of the Old Javanese kakawin.
Inspired by the views of Wahyono Martowikrido and Cecilia Levin, I have
searched the Old Javanese text for possible clues for scenes that until now
have been interpreted with less certainty than one might wish. This attentive
reading has led to a readjustment of Martowikrido's and Levin's views in
three respects. First, it has been possible to attribute all the scenes on the bowl
to one episode, the 'Abduction of Sita'. Second, the figures and narrative
actions depicted in the problematic scenes can be identified with a reasonable degree of certainty thanks to the context afforded by the Old Javanese
text. Third, the comprehensive nature of the episode of Sita's kidnapping,
containing the essential elements of the text, offers a plausible reason why it
was chosen to decorate the Wonoboyo bowl.
Below I give an ordered list of the scenes in line with the interpretations
proposed in this article:
1.2 Rama and Sita are sitting together, with Laksmana at their feet. Sita sees
a deer.
2.1 Rama hunts the deer.
2.2 The mortally wounded deer changes back into Marica.
3.1 Rawana, in the guise of an ascetic, seizes Sita.
3.2 Rawana, now with many heads, flies away with Sita. He wards off
Jatayu.
4.1 Rama cures the sawara woman.
4.2 Sita grieves, while lying on a bench. Two servants are guarding her.
1.1 Rama grieves in the company of Laksmana.
Rama and Sita in Wonoboyo
401
REFERENCES
Bianchini, Marie-Claude (ed.)
n.d.
Les ors de Varchipel indonesien; Musee National des Arts Asiatiques-Guimet,
5 mai - 31 juillet 1995. Paris: Reunion des Musses Nationaux.
Eggebrecht, Arne and Eva Eggebrecht (eds)
1995
Versunkene Konigreiche Indonesiens. Mainz: Von Zabern.
Indonesian gold
1999
Indonesian gold; Treasuresfromthe National Museum, Jakarta. Brisbane:
Queensland Art Gallery.
Kern, H.
1900
TJ 2 mi 2 mui rim iwn iten IUI IM n Ramayana; Oudjavaansch heldendicht.
's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
1922
'Zang I-VI van het Oudjavaansche Ramayana in vertaling', in: H. Kern,
Verspreide gesch.rifr.en 10, pp. 77-139. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
Levin, Cecelia
1999
'Classical Javanese gold reflects some new light on the Ramayana', in:
Wilhelmina H. Kal (ed.), Precious metals in early South East Asia; Proceedings of the Second Seminar on Gold Studies, pp. 39-44. Amsterdam: Royal
Tropical Institute.
Martowikrido, Wahyono
1994
'The gold of Wonoboyo; Preliminary notes', in: Wilhelmina H. Kal
(ed.), Old Javanese gold (4th-15th century); An archaeometrical approach,
pp. 30-45. Amsterdam: KIT/Tropenmuseum. [Bulletin/Royal Tropical
Institute 334.]
1995
'Ramayana-Schale', in: Arne Eggebrecht and Eva Eggebrecht (eds),
Versunkene Konigreiche Indonesiens, no. 47. Mainz: Von Zabern.
[Martowikrido, Wahyono and Sutrisno]
1992
Khasanah emas Museum Nasional; Gold treasure of the Museum Nasional.
Jakarta: n.n.
Santoso, Soewito
[1980]
Ramayana kakawin. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies/
New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture. Three vols.
[Sata-Pitaka Series 251.]
Treasures
1997
Treasures of ancient Indonesian kingdoms. N.p.: n.n.
Zoetmulder, P.J. with the collaboration of S.O. Robson
1982
Old Javanese-English dictionary. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff. Two vols.
[KITLV]
The order of the illustrations follows that of the bowl/going from right to left.
Scene 1.1
Scene 2.2
Scene 2.1
Scene 3.2
Scene 3.1
Scene 4.2
Scene 4.1