Figural horn (possibly rhino) hilt

Gustav · 17th April 2016, 10:11 PM

[QUOTE=David]

I don't see any particular indicators in the style of this buta hilt that would definitively place it in the 17th century. Carvers have been producing this right up into the 20th century, though perhaps not in rhino horn.

QUOTE]

David, I have studied the kerisses and their hilts from old Kunstkammer collections for some years now, have visited many museum magazines in the last years and have seen and handled most of them. We have a very limited amount of pre-1700 hilts, perhaps less then a percent of figural hilts ever made let's say from 1500 to 1670, so each of them is singular and has sometimes quite unexpected features. Nevertheless, there are some indicators, which are typical for early figural hilts and doesn't appear on later Pasisir figural hilts, and this particular hilt has many of them. One of the keys is the symbolism within the Tumpal, and the state of development of the reversed Tumpal under the feet of the figure. Also modern replicas of these hilts mostly fail in reproduction of one very important feature.

Please take a close look at Chapter Banten in Krisdisk (attention to the noses, when a hilt is depicted en profile

)

A. G. Maisey · 18th April 2016, 02:12 AM

In Jawa people tend to regard wear to the back of the head as a sure sign of age in a figural hilt, and the corresponding part of other hilts is normally the place they look at if trying to guess at age of a hilt.

I tend to agree with this, but I also recognise that protruding parts of a figural hilt face do mostly show wear on older hilts.

As to material, yes, it might be rhino horn --- it does look like it in the photo --- but I've seen this same sort of grained surface in hilts that were taken as kerbau (water buffalo) horn, ones that were old and dried out. I might even have an example at home, I'll see if I can find one in a couple of weeks.

Gustav, could you please expand on the these comments in your post #6 :-

1) there are some indicators, which are typical for early figural hilts and doesn't appear on later Pasisir figural hilts, and this particular hilt has many of them

2) One of the keys is the symbolism within the Tumpal, and the state of development of the reversed Tumpal under the feet of the figure

3) Also modern replicas of these hilts mostly fail in reproduction of one very important feature

Thanks

Jean · 18th April 2016, 09:25 AM

I agree that the materials look like rhino horn but it should be confirmed in the hand.
Regarding the indicators mentioned by Gustav differentating this hilt from the modern ones, I see 4 of them:
. The shape of the worn-out nose with distinct nostrils.
. The earlobes (or earrings) have a different shape than on the modern hilts.
. The small carving above the tumpal motif on the front depicts the male organs according to Jensen.
. The carving at the base of the tumpal motif depicts the female organ according to Jensen.
Accordingly I believe that this hilt is very old.
Regards

Gustav · 18th April 2016, 10:03 AM

Thank you Detlef and Jean.

Alan, I will think about 1) and 2), yet I absolutely wouldn't like to answer the last one.

Today I received an e-mail with four pictures.

A. G. Maisey · 18th April 2016, 11:45 AM

Thank you Gustav.

Jean, I would be extremely reluctant to identify the form of the nose, or of the ears, or of any other part of this hilt as indicative of age.

Why?

Because current era carvings of this hilt form are, in general, copies of earlier hilts, sometimes fragmented earlier hilts, but those earlier hilts themselves were again copies of hilts that came down from a previous time.

The cheap modern productions that we generally see are turned out like Bali art carvings, but the high quality hilts made by m'ranggis use patterns and models that have been in the craftsman's family for generations. Certainly, these vary, but they vary in accordance with what one m'ranngi's family carves, as opposed to what another family carves.

Yes, the an acceptable reading of the abstraction between the figure's knees is of his reproductive organs, however, we must never forget that we are dealing with a society that is based upon death and renewal, so the way in which this symbolism is read can often be a little bit too simplistic.

When we consider the tumpal it is important to understand that an upright tumpal is representative of the gunungan and all associated icons, and also of the male element. The inverted tumpal is symbolic of the female element. The small yoni inserted in the base of the tumpal completes the Hindu-Javanese iconography of the Lingga-Yoni.

There are a number of ways that this symbolism can be interpreted, but it is perhaps sufficient to recognise that it is representive of Siwa's Shakti, Siwa himself being represented by the gunungan.

As a complete entity of lingga-yoni we have the symbolism of continual renewal --- plus a whole heap of other symbols.

What I've written above is all well known, nothing new or special there, but Gustav's words intrigued me, so I eagerly await his response.

kai · 18th April 2016, 12:38 PM

Hello Alan,

Quote:

the high quality hilts made by m'ranggis use patterns and models that have been in the craftsman's family for generations. Certainly, these vary, but they vary in accordance with what one m'ranngi's family carves, as opposed to what another family carves.

Do you possibly have any examples (carved during the last 100-200 years by traditional mranggi families) of these archaic styles/patterns that appear to be characteristic of the "Kunstkammer" keris? While I realize that traditional pre-WW2 (or possibly even extant) hilt carving is (often) based on very old patterns, I have gained the impression that the early hilts had features that got obsolete (possibly culturally inappropiate or, less likely, merely out of fashion) in the following centuries.

As Gustav (and Karsten) already pointed out, there are only a few extant examples that appear to be early collected. If you know of any similar ones from later periods, this would certainly be really important for the current working hyotheses.

Regards,
Kai

David · 18th April 2016, 05:08 PM

Kai, here are a couple of examples which i am sure have been carved within the last 100 years. To my eye you can still see aspects of the lingam/yoni symbolism in the tumpals carved here.
I am also including a front shot of the older example i showed earlier for a comparison of the tumpals used there. I am uncertain of the actual age of this hilt.

Jean · 18th April 2016, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gustav

Thank you Detlef and Jean.

Alan, I will think about 1) and 2), yet I absolutely wouldn't like to answer the last one.

Today I received an e-mail with four pictures.

Post deleted.

kai · 18th April 2016, 12:20 PM

Folks, we have been through this already several times: From the pics supplied so far, there is no chance whatsoever to verify wether this hilt is made from rhino or waterbuffalo horn! We really need a close-up of a cross-section of the fibers, i. e. the top of the head or possibly the base of the hilt also.

We can argue about likelihoods but this never positively prooves anything for any given piece. Actually, the current pics make me feel albino water buffalo - I agree that the alternative is also plausible though...

Thanks a lot for those pics, Gustav! Could you please try to get additional ones? I also wouldn't mind better quality pics of the other parts of this keris...

Regards,
Kai

Sajen · 18th April 2016, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kai

Thanks a lot for those pics, Gustav! Could you please try to get additional ones? I also wouldn't mind better quality pics of the other parts of this keris...

Hello Kai,

here two more pictures from the auction.

David · 18th April 2016, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jean

The materials is translucent on these pics so it definitely looks to be rhino horn.
Regards

Jean, i have both white and green buffalo horn that is also translucent. I don't believe we can use that as an indicator of rhino horn. Again, i am not trying to argue that this cannot be rhino, simple that we do not have the type of photographs yet that can provide any definitive answer to that question.

Jean · 19th April 2016, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

Jean, i have both white and green buffalo horn that is also translucent. I don't believe we can use that as an indicator of rhino horn. Again, i am not trying to argue that this cannot be rhino, simple that we do not have the type of photographs yet that can provide any definitive answer to that question.

Hello David and Kai,
Could you please show us a hilt made from white or green buffalo horn and having a similar color to the one shown by Gustav?
Regards

18th April 2016, 09:25 AM	#3
Jean Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,740	I agree that the materials look like rhino horn but it should be confirmed in the hand. Regarding the indicators mentioned by Gustav differentating this hilt from the modern ones, I see 4 of them: . The shape of the worn-out nose with distinct nostrils. . The earlobes (or earrings) have a different shape than on the modern hilts. . The small carving above the tumpal motif on the front depicts the male organs according to Jensen. . The carving at the base of the tumpal motif depicts the female organ according to Jensen. Accordingly I believe that this hilt is very old. Regards Last edited by Jean; 18th April 2016 at 09:35 AM.

18th April 2016, 10:03 AM	#4
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,273	Thank you Detlef and Jean. Alan, I will think about 1) and 2), yet I absolutely wouldn't like to answer the last one. Today I received an e-mail with four pictures. Attached Images

18th April 2016, 05:08 PM	#7
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	Kai, here are a couple of examples which i am sure have been carved within the last 100 years. To my eye you can still see aspects of the lingam/yoni symbolism in the tumpals carved here. I am also including a front shot of the older example i showed earlier for a comparison of the tumpals used there. I am uncertain of the actual age of this hilt. Attached Images

18th April 2016, 12:20 PM	#9
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	Folks, we have been through this already several times: From the pics supplied so far, there is no chance whatsoever to verify wether this hilt is made from rhino or waterbuffalo horn! We really need a close-up of a cross-section of the fibers, i. e. the top of the head or possibly the base of the hilt also. We can argue about likelihoods but this never positively prooves anything for any given piece. Actually, the current pics make me feel albino water buffalo - I agree that the alternative is also plausible though... Thanks a lot for those pics, Gustav! Could you please try to get additional ones? I also wouldn't mind better quality pics of the other parts of this keris... Regards, Kai Last edited by kai; 18th April 2016 at 12:54 PM.

17th April 2016, 10:11 PM	#1
Gustav Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,273	[QUOTE=David] I don't see any particular indicators in the style of this buta hilt that would definitively place it in the 17th century. Carvers have been producing this right up into the 20th century, though perhaps not in rhino horn. QUOTE] David, I have studied the kerisses and their hilts from old Kunstkammer collections for some years now, have visited many museum magazines in the last years and have seen and handled most of them. We have a very limited amount of pre-1700 hilts, perhaps less then a percent of figural hilts ever made let's say from 1500 to 1670, so each of them is singular and has sometimes quite unexpected features. Nevertheless, there are some indicators, which are typical for early figural hilts and doesn't appear on later Pasisir figural hilts, and this particular hilt has many of them. One of the keys is the symbolism within the Tumpal, and the state of development of the reversed Tumpal under the feet of the figure. Also modern replicas of these hilts mostly fail in reproduction of one very important feature. Please take a close look at Chapter Banten in Krisdisk (attention to the noses, when a hilt is depicted en profile )

18th April 2016, 02:12 AM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	In Jawa people tend to regard wear to the back of the head as a sure sign of age in a figural hilt, and the corresponding part of other hilts is normally the place they look at if trying to guess at age of a hilt. I tend to agree with this, but I also recognise that protruding parts of a figural hilt face do mostly show wear on older hilts. As to material, yes, it might be rhino horn --- it does look like it in the photo --- but I've seen this same sort of grained surface in hilts that were taken as kerbau (water buffalo) horn, ones that were old and dried out. I might even have an example at home, I'll see if I can find one in a couple of weeks. Gustav, could you please expand on the these comments in your post #6 :- 1) there are some indicators, which are typical for early figural hilts and doesn't appear on later Pasisir figural hilts, and this particular hilt has many of them 2) One of the keys is the symbolism within the Tumpal, and the state of development of the reversed Tumpal under the feet of the figure 3) Also modern replicas of these hilts mostly fail in reproduction of one very important feature Thanks

18th April 2016, 11:45 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Thank you Gustav. Jean, I would be extremely reluctant to identify the form of the nose, or of the ears, or of any other part of this hilt as indicative of age. Why? Because current era carvings of this hilt form are, in general, copies of earlier hilts, sometimes fragmented earlier hilts, but those earlier hilts themselves were again copies of hilts that came down from a previous time. The cheap modern productions that we generally see are turned out like Bali art carvings, but the high quality hilts made by m'ranggis use patterns and models that have been in the craftsman's family for generations. Certainly, these vary, but they vary in accordance with what one m'ranngi's family carves, as opposed to what another family carves. Yes, the an acceptable reading of the abstraction between the figure's knees is of his reproductive organs, however, we must never forget that we are dealing with a society that is based upon death and renewal, so the way in which this symbolism is read can often be a little bit too simplistic. When we consider the tumpal it is important to understand that an upright tumpal is representative of the gunungan and all associated icons, and also of the male element. The inverted tumpal is symbolic of the female element. The small yoni inserted in the base of the tumpal completes the Hindu-Javanese iconography of the Lingga-Yoni. There are a number of ways that this symbolism can be interpreted, but it is perhaps sufficient to recognise that it is representive of Siwa's Shakti, Siwa himself being represented by the gunungan. As a complete entity of lingga-yoni we have the symbolism of continual renewal --- plus a whole heap of other symbols. What I've written above is all well known, nothing new or special there, but Gustav's words intrigued me, so I eagerly await his response.