Figural horn (possibly rhino) hilt

[Gustav]

This week a hilt was auctioned, possibly made from rhino horn, and possibly from 17th cent. There are only 3 figural 16th/17th cent. horn hilts from european collections shown in Jensens Krisdisk - in Vienna (which is rhino for sure), Firenze, Dresden, so they are more rare then similar ivory hilts.

Two pictures of it for posterity.

[David]

I can't speak for sure to either the age nor material of this piece (though it doesn't have quite the wear and patina that i would expect from a 17th century hilt), but it is indeed lovely. I do hope that whoever won this auction has the wherewithal to undo the mad glue-man's atrocious and sloppy adhesive mischief.

[Gustav]

Regarding wear, the most sensitive place on these hilts is the nose, and here it is very similar to some wooden specimens from Krisdisk.

[Sajen]

Hello Gustav,

I've followed the auction as well and think like you that the hilt is carved from rhino horn and think that we are not the only ones by the reached price. And I am also sure that the hilt have a very good age. Are you the winner of the auction? If so, good luck for removing the glue.

Regards,
Detlef

[David]

Originally Posted by Gustav

Regarding wear, the most sensitive place on these hilts is the nose, and here it is very similar to some wooden specimens from Krisdisk.

Actually, from my experience the place on these buta hilts that tend to receive the most amount of wear is along the backside as this is the area most often positioned into the palm of the hand when holding the hilt. You can see the extensive wear in this very old example from my collection below.
Of course we can only use wear as guide to age in a very approximate fashion and in the end it all depends on how much any particular piece has been handled in its lifetime. If it was collected early in its life and taken out of daily use it could still be old and not show as much wear. But it is really impossible to tell one way or the other, isn't it? 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. I can see why you suspect it might be rhino, but for me at least, i would not say that a definitive conclusion could be reached on that assessment based solely on these two photographs. It's a shame we don't have more detailed shots, especially a good close-up looking down on the grain from the top. Otherwise i think we are only guessing at this material. Hopefully, if the auction price went high on this piece as , the winner's gamble was rewarded.

[Gustav]

[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]

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