Fossil Molar Talisman Research Needed

David · 26th October 2014, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

Thank you David. I just edited my original last post and we must have posted at the same time.

Ah, i see you changes now. The reference is a bit misplaced on the Keris Forum however, since we only discuss Indonesian keris here. I am still not familiar with any talismanic application of such material there, though that doesn't mean there is none, of course. However, i was speaking solely of its use in Indonesian keris dress which in my understanding is a rather contemporary phenomenon.

A. G. Maisey · 26th October 2014, 02:06 PM

I think you're probably pretty right about contemporary use of this material David.

I don't know of any examples of really old hilts made of this stuff. I know of the existence of one hilt with some age, in the Radya Pustaka Museum in Solo, Jawa, but even that is likely to be post WWII, or maybe at most after 1900.

It is very difficult material to work, and I personally believe that none of this material was worked until craftsmen could get hold of dentist drills.

Similarly, I don't know of any talismanic properties attached to the stuff, and if any do surface, I'd put money on it that they're a pretty recent phenomenon.

Gustav · 27th October 2014, 10:29 AM

As I wrote once before in a similar thread, there is a Sumatran, possibly Minang Keris in the Moser-Charlottenfels collection, which has a huge showy molar hilt. It was collected before 1886. By huge I mean, it has a size, which don't allow to use it practically, like some balinese Bebondolan, often with Kendhit. The provenance of this Keris is absolutely sure.

There is another, very similar Keris in Amsterdam (or Leiden).

Sorry David, yet I am not sure if I understand the general sense of your lengty and somehow light-minded sentence:

"Somebody will now probably post some old keris hilt that they have provenance on for late 19th century or something, but when you say "rare use" i would have to agree that old examples of this material in keris dress is indeed rare and i would say that yes, that would explain why there is no lore to be found that is attached to it because most probably none exists."

I am confident, you are able to understand that old museum collections are OFTEN an invaluable help to pin down an object in a time-period.

Now to the material. I am absolutely not wondering myself about the fact, people in Central Java now or decades ago werent informed, what was going on somewhere in Sumatran highlands around 1880 regarding local beliefs on this strange and impractical, and rare material. I would say, they most probably didn't have the slightest interest in a thing, which were light years off from the refined esthetics of javanese courts.

It is known, that different wood species used for Keris hilts have different amount and kind of spiritual power in Malay beliefs. The same can be said about different sorts of iron.

It is obvious that a hilt made from a quite special material in a size, which don't allow to use it practically, has a power, which is beyound the practical use. Back in those days people wouldn't pick up a piece of rubbish, drill a hole in it and fit it on a Pesi. And if they would do it, they surely would find a "lore" about it.

Which sources do we have regarding Sumatran Minang beliefs from 1880-ties about minerals? Or - about Keris?

If there are no awailable, it is still quite reckless to say, there were no such beliefs, even more when lacking the available information about the physical objects from this time.

As students of Keris we most of the time are living with awareness of fact, that the most part of beliefs/information about Keris from its beginnings on are gone forever. What we know, is much less then the visible part of an iceberg.

Sajen · 27th October 2014, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gustav

As I wrote once before in a similar thread, there is a Sumatran, possibly Minang Keris in the Moser-Charlottenfels collection, which has a huge showy molar hilt. It was collected before 1886.

Here is this thread: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ighlight=molar
I am sure that the hilt of my keris have a good age but of course I can't give an exact date.
I think it will be pure speculation if a molar hilt is attached to a keris or also to a kris because it has some spiritual power or it was attached because it's value. But I agree with Gustav in all what he has written in above.

Regards,
Detlef

A. G. Maisey · 27th October 2014, 02:39 PM

Yes Gustav, we've been down this road before.

If we're talking about Sumatera, second half, 19th century, probably any definitive answer depends upon interpretation of local belief in the place where these hilts originated, at that time.

I don't have any answers in respect of this, and quite frankly, I don't have any idea where such answers might be found.

One of the repeated problems that I have found in trying to attach any reliable information in respect of belief in talismanic objects, or anything else for that matter, is that things that are often generally accepted as long standing beliefs passed down from the ancestors very often turn out to be no more than a generation or two old. Not only that, but individual informants often change direction depending on how they feel on the day.

In short, in respect of beliefs in Indonesia it is often best to qualify everything by statements that name the informant, place and time, something like:-

" on (date) I was told by (informant) that (this material) is regarded by (inhabitants of) this (place) as being very efficacious for
(whatever)" .

Ask the same person the same question next year the reply is likely to alter.

David · 27th October 2014, 04:07 PM

Well Gustav, i do apologize if you are having trouble understanding my statement. If it seems at all "lengthy" to you that is perhaps because i was sure to add words like "probably" in order to be sure no one considered my statement to be in any way a statement of "fact". I expressed an informed opinion bases upon my experience with available evidence. As such i would hardly consider such an opinion as being "reckless". I am also uncertain about your own meaning when you use the term "light minded", but i can assure you that i did indeed think about my opinion before posting it.
If you read my sentence carefully you will note that i never implied that an old version of this material used as a hilt does not exist, only that it is very rare. In fact i stated that somebody would probably now post one. So now you have fulfilled my statement by providing us with that example. No, it would not be the habit, then or even now i would image, for someone to simply pick up any old trash and create a hilt from it. Obviously the person who created the Sumatran hilt of which you speak valued the material when they made that hilt. Why would't they as we know it can be beautiful, especially when worked. But valuing a material does not necessarily equate to a belief that the material holds talismanic properties, nor does beauty alone. Of course the possibility exists that for the maker it did, but from my perspective it would be more irresponsible to assume that without more supportive evidence. Talismanic meaning in these cases usually is supported by some sort of community or societal agreement of the powers and uses of any given material. So if we saw more examples of these hilts from the time period i might be more likely to suspect that there was talismanic intent in their usage.
I hope that what is now indeed a lengthy response to your confusion clears up what i had originally believed was a fair simple expression of opinion.

Gustav · 27th October 2014, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes Gustav, we've been down this road before.

If we're talking about Sumatera, second half, 19th century, probably any definitive answer depends upon interpretation of local belief in the place where these hilts originated, at that time.

Alan, I am sorry, but this is almost the same oppinion I stated in my post, which is absolutely understandable, becouse it is the relevant view on this subject.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gustav

Now to the material. I am absolutely not wondering myself about the fact, people in Central Java now or decades ago werent informed, what was going on somewhere in Sumatran highlands around 1880 regarding local beliefs on this strange and impractical, and rare material. I would say, they most probably didn't have the slightest interest in a thing, which were light years off from the refined esthetics of javanese courts.

Which sources do we have regarding Sumatran Minang beliefs from 1880-ties about minerals? Or - about Keris?

Where our opinions, or better, the information differs, is the fact, that oldest specimen you are aware of "is likely to be post WWII, or maybe at most after 1900", and I know of one, which is most probably collected before 1876 (1886 was my tiping mistake), absolutely sure before 1893. It makes a dentist drill as a premise for the emergence of hilts from this material rather implausible.

VANDOO · 27th October 2014, 06:10 PM

I AGREE THAT THE USE OF THIS FOSSIL MATERIAL IN BALI FOR MAKING KERIS IS A FAIRLY RECENT DEVELOPMENT. KNIFE MAKERS ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR SOME NEW MATERIAL TO MAKE KNIVES OUT OF THE MORE ATTRACTIVE OR EXOTIC THE BETTER. WHEN EVER A NEW MATERIAL IS FOUND EVERYONE WANTS SOME ESPECIALLY IF IT SELLS WELL. SO MOST OF WHAT WE SEE TODAY IS A REFLECTION OF THIS RECENT FAD AND THERE IS LIKELY NO OLD TRADITIONAL BELIEFS ,JUST RECENT STORIES MADE UP FOR SALES PURPOSES.

THE ABILITY TO CARVE STONE DOES GO BACK WAY BEYOND THE ADVENT OF THE DENTISTS DRILL AND VERY ANCIENT LAPIDARY TOOLS HAVE BEEN USED EVEN BY EARLY MAN IN THE STONE AGE. JADE ONE OF THE TOUGHEST STONES HAS BEEN CARVED IN MANY COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD SINCE ANCIENT TIMES. MANY ARTIFACTS HAVE BEEN FOUND MADE BY THOSE WHO HUNTED THE MAMMOTH OFTEN OUT OF BONE, IVORY AND TOOTH FRAGMENTS. SOME ARE JUST TOOLS BUT SOME ARE TALISMANS OR OBJECTS OF ART ASSOCIATED WITH THE HUNTERS AND THEIR PREY. TALES OF DRAGONS, GIANTS AND OTHER MYTHICAL GODS AND BEASTS ABOUND THRUOUT HUMAN HISTORY SO THESE BELIEFS AND SUPERSTITIONS HAVE EXISTED BUT ARE NOW VERY CHANGED AND MOSTLY LOST. MAN'S CURIOSITY ASSURES THAT STRANGE AND UNKNOWN OBJECTS WOULD HAVE BEEN OF INTEREST AND QUESTIONS ASKED AND STORIES MADE UP TO EXPLAIN THEM SINCE ANCIENT TIMES. SO SOME OF THESE STRANGE OBJECTS WERE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO A HUNTER OR WARRIORS ATTIRE AND PERHAPS WEAPONS. THERE ARE LIKELY SOME EXAMPLES OF OLD SWORDS USING THIS FOSSIL MATERIAL FROM DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS AND REGIONS OF THE WORLD STILL AROUND BUT THEY WOULD LIKELY BE FEW IN NUMBER. FOR EXAMPLE I REMEMBER A POST ON MEDIEVAL SWORDS WITH A AMMONITE FOSSIL MOUNTED IN THE POMMEL ON THE FORUM.
LIKE THE CLASSIFICATION OF ANTIQUE NOW AT 100 YEARS OLD, THE CLASSIFICATION OF FOSSIL MAY HAVE A DATE BUT I THINK THEY EXAGGERATE WHEN THEY REFER TO ME AS A OLD FOSSIL.

MINERALIZATION OCCURS IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND AT DIFFERENT SPEEDS DEPENDING ON THE ENVIRONMENT. I WOULD CONSIDER A MAMMOTH TUSK FROM SIBERIA AND ONE FROM TEXAS BOTH FOSSILS. THE ONE FROM SIBERIA WOULD STILL BE CLOSE TO THE WAY IT WAS IN LIFE AND COULD STILL BE WORKED. WHILE THE ONE FROM TEXAS WOULD BE CHANGED TO MINERAL AND BE FRAGILE CHALK AND NO LONGER USEFUL. BOTH COULD BE THE SAME AGE BUT DUE TO THE ENVIRONMENT VERY DIFFERENT MATERIALS. PERHAPS SOME MUSEUM HAS A OLD STONE KNIFE FITTED WITH MAMMOTH IVORY OR TOOTH IN ITS COLLECTIONS, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

26th October 2014, 02:06 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,085	I think you're probably pretty right about contemporary use of this material David. I don't know of any examples of really old hilts made of this stuff. I know of the existence of one hilt with some age, in the Radya Pustaka Museum in Solo, Jawa, but even that is likely to be post WWII, or maybe at most after 1900. It is very difficult material to work, and I personally believe that none of this material was worked until craftsmen could get hold of dentist drills. Similarly, I don't know of any talismanic properties attached to the stuff, and if any do surface, I'd put money on it that they're a pretty recent phenomenon.

27th October 2014, 10:29 AM	#3
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,295	As I wrote once before in a similar thread, there is a Sumatran, possibly Minang Keris in the Moser-Charlottenfels collection, which has a huge showy molar hilt. It was collected before 1886. By huge I mean, it has a size, which don't allow to use it practically, like some balinese Bebondolan, often with Kendhit. The provenance of this Keris is absolutely sure. There is another, very similar Keris in Amsterdam (or Leiden). Sorry David, yet I am not sure if I understand the general sense of your lengty and somehow light-minded sentence: "Somebody will now probably post some old keris hilt that they have provenance on for late 19th century or something, but when you say "rare use" i would have to agree that old examples of this material in keris dress is indeed rare and i would say that yes, that would explain why there is no lore to be found that is attached to it because most probably none exists." I am confident, you are able to understand that old museum collections are OFTEN an invaluable help to pin down an object in a time-period. Now to the material. I am absolutely not wondering myself about the fact, people in Central Java now or decades ago werent informed, what was going on somewhere in Sumatran highlands around 1880 regarding local beliefs on this strange and impractical, and rare material. I would say, they most probably didn't have the slightest interest in a thing, which were light years off from the refined esthetics of javanese courts. It is known, that different wood species used for Keris hilts have different amount and kind of spiritual power in Malay beliefs. The same can be said about different sorts of iron. It is obvious that a hilt made from a quite special material in a size, which don't allow to use it practically, has a power, which is beyound the practical use. Back in those days people wouldn't pick up a piece of rubbish, drill a hole in it and fit it on a Pesi. And if they would do it, they surely would find a "lore" about it. Which sources do we have regarding Sumatran Minang beliefs from 1880-ties about minerals? Or - about Keris? If there are no awailable, it is still quite reckless to say, there were no such beliefs, even more when lacking the available information about the physical objects from this time. As students of Keris we most of the time are living with awareness of fact, that the most part of beliefs/information about Keris from its beginnings on are gone forever. What we know, is much less then the visible part of an iceberg.

27th October 2014, 02:39 PM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,085	Yes Gustav, we've been down this road before. If we're talking about Sumatera, second half, 19th century, probably any definitive answer depends upon interpretation of local belief in the place where these hilts originated, at that time. I don't have any answers in respect of this, and quite frankly, I don't have any idea where such answers might be found. One of the repeated problems that I have found in trying to attach any reliable information in respect of belief in talismanic objects, or anything else for that matter, is that things that are often generally accepted as long standing beliefs passed down from the ancestors very often turn out to be no more than a generation or two old. Not only that, but individual informants often change direction depending on how they feel on the day. In short, in respect of beliefs in Indonesia it is often best to qualify everything by statements that name the informant, place and time, something like:- " on (date) I was told by (informant) that (this material) is regarded by (inhabitants of) this (place) as being very efficacious for (whatever)" . Ask the same person the same question next year the reply is likely to alter.

27th October 2014, 04:07 PM	#6
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,250	Well Gustav, i do apologize if you are having trouble understanding my statement. If it seems at all "lengthy" to you that is perhaps because i was sure to add words like "probably" in order to be sure no one considered my statement to be in any way a statement of "fact". I expressed an informed opinion bases upon my experience with available evidence. As such i would hardly consider such an opinion as being "reckless". I am also uncertain about your own meaning when you use the term "light minded", but i can assure you that i did indeed think about my opinion before posting it. If you read my sentence carefully you will note that i never implied that an old version of this material used as a hilt does not exist, only that it is very rare. In fact i stated that somebody would probably now post one. So now you have fulfilled my statement by providing us with that example. No, it would not be the habit, then or even now i would image, for someone to simply pick up any old trash and create a hilt from it. Obviously the person who created the Sumatran hilt of which you speak valued the material when they made that hilt. Why would't they as we know it can be beautiful, especially when worked. But valuing a material does not necessarily equate to a belief that the material holds talismanic properties, nor does beauty alone. Of course the possibility exists that for the maker it did, but from my perspective it would be more irresponsible to assume that without more supportive evidence. Talismanic meaning in these cases usually is supported by some sort of community or societal agreement of the powers and uses of any given material. So if we saw more examples of these hilts from the time period i might be more likely to suspect that there was talismanic intent in their usage. I hope that what is now indeed a lengthy response to your confusion clears up what i had originally believed was a fair simple expression of opinion.

27th October 2014, 06:10 PM	#8
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	I AGREE THAT THE USE OF THIS FOSSIL MATERIAL IN BALI FOR MAKING KERIS IS A FAIRLY RECENT DEVELOPMENT. KNIFE MAKERS ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR SOME NEW MATERIAL TO MAKE KNIVES OUT OF THE MORE ATTRACTIVE OR EXOTIC THE BETTER. WHEN EVER A NEW MATERIAL IS FOUND EVERYONE WANTS SOME ESPECIALLY IF IT SELLS WELL. SO MOST OF WHAT WE SEE TODAY IS A REFLECTION OF THIS RECENT FAD AND THERE IS LIKELY NO OLD TRADITIONAL BELIEFS ,JUST RECENT STORIES MADE UP FOR SALES PURPOSES. THE ABILITY TO CARVE STONE DOES GO BACK WAY BEYOND THE ADVENT OF THE DENTISTS DRILL AND VERY ANCIENT LAPIDARY TOOLS HAVE BEEN USED EVEN BY EARLY MAN IN THE STONE AGE. JADE ONE OF THE TOUGHEST STONES HAS BEEN CARVED IN MANY COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD SINCE ANCIENT TIMES. MANY ARTIFACTS HAVE BEEN FOUND MADE BY THOSE WHO HUNTED THE MAMMOTH OFTEN OUT OF BONE, IVORY AND TOOTH FRAGMENTS. SOME ARE JUST TOOLS BUT SOME ARE TALISMANS OR OBJECTS OF ART ASSOCIATED WITH THE HUNTERS AND THEIR PREY. TALES OF DRAGONS, GIANTS AND OTHER MYTHICAL GODS AND BEASTS ABOUND THRUOUT HUMAN HISTORY SO THESE BELIEFS AND SUPERSTITIONS HAVE EXISTED BUT ARE NOW VERY CHANGED AND MOSTLY LOST. MAN'S CURIOSITY ASSURES THAT STRANGE AND UNKNOWN OBJECTS WOULD HAVE BEEN OF INTEREST AND QUESTIONS ASKED AND STORIES MADE UP TO EXPLAIN THEM SINCE ANCIENT TIMES. SO SOME OF THESE STRANGE OBJECTS WERE LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO A HUNTER OR WARRIORS ATTIRE AND PERHAPS WEAPONS. THERE ARE LIKELY SOME EXAMPLES OF OLD SWORDS USING THIS FOSSIL MATERIAL FROM DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS AND REGIONS OF THE WORLD STILL AROUND BUT THEY WOULD LIKELY BE FEW IN NUMBER. FOR EXAMPLE I REMEMBER A POST ON MEDIEVAL SWORDS WITH A AMMONITE FOSSIL MOUNTED IN THE POMMEL ON THE FORUM. LIKE THE CLASSIFICATION OF ANTIQUE NOW AT 100 YEARS OLD, THE CLASSIFICATION OF FOSSIL MAY HAVE A DATE BUT I THINK THEY EXAGGERATE WHEN THEY REFER TO ME AS A OLD FOSSIL. MINERALIZATION OCCURS IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND AT DIFFERENT SPEEDS DEPENDING ON THE ENVIRONMENT. I WOULD CONSIDER A MAMMOTH TUSK FROM SIBERIA AND ONE FROM TEXAS BOTH FOSSILS. THE ONE FROM SIBERIA WOULD STILL BE CLOSE TO THE WAY IT WAS IN LIFE AND COULD STILL BE WORKED. WHILE THE ONE FROM TEXAS WOULD BE CHANGED TO MINERAL AND BE FRAGILE CHALK AND NO LONGER USEFUL. BOTH COULD BE THE SAME AGE BUT DUE TO THE ENVIRONMENT VERY DIFFERENT MATERIALS. PERHAPS SOME MUSEUM HAS A OLD STONE KNIFE FITTED WITH MAMMOTH IVORY OR TOOTH IN ITS COLLECTIONS, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.