Keris Handle / Hilts Appreciation

[rasjid]

Hi everyone,

I recently asking around (friends, bakuls, collectors, etc) in Jakarta their opinion in regards keris hilts. I know that some threads already display some nice hilts. I have my own opinion to what I like or to keep. (will update you later). How about yours?

If we are looking at the same quality carving on the handle we are going to buy, which one to choose? (in regards the hilts material)
The questions as follows:
1. Picture# 1: the wood shows "fire" (dont know how to express but you can see the stripes on this picture)
2. Picture#2: they have the "puser" which gives you magical power....
This location was told "good" for man.... One friend show me he got 4 puser in one hilt.
3. Picture# 3: Shiny, crystall clear and no marks. (so no magical power?? )
4. Picture#4: Silhouette / Shadow?

All the pictures are not the best around but just to give some ideas about the wood to choose from. We assume all made from tayuman wood and carving at the highest quality you can buy and similar age.


Thank you guys...

[Sajen]

Hello Rasjid,

when I would have enough money I would take all four since it seems like you write that they all have a very good quality.
When I have to choose between all I get my problems, the one with the "puser" is very nice, the last one have a beautiful grain and the one with selut is nice since the selut is as well from very good quality.
I think that I would make my choice that I look to which keris I would attach this hilt. Sorry that I can't be from more help.

Regards,

Detlef

[A. G. Maisey]

This is an interesting topic Rasjid.

When a tukang jejeran makes a handle, he follows a very strict form and pattern. He will have a blak that the handle must fit with the most minute perfection. He may have inherited this blak from somebody in his family, or he may have developed it himself, but this blak will govern every handle that he produces, and will give it its overall form when it is viewed from both the side and the back. That form will create an impression in the knowledgeable viewer, and the impression will in most cases be pretty similar in all knowledgeable viewers. The impression created is the first step in appraisal of the handle.

Just as a blade can create an impression of bravery, or strength, or weakness, a handle can do the same thing, however as with the blade, the knowledge needed to interpret the feeling created by a handle needs an understanding and depth of knowledge that cannot be transferred in the absence of physical examples of handles.

Then there is the depth and symmetry of the cecekan, which again must follow a very strict form.

Is the base of the handle recessed to accept the mendak? Generally speaking, the base of a good quality Surakarta hilt will be recessed.

What is the type of finish that has been used?

French polish, traditional varnish, modern synthetic varnish, or has it been burnished by rubbing with a boar's tusk, or piece of bone?

Each of these finishes is of a different level of quality.

Then we have the type of wood that has been used. Tayuman is generally accepted as perhaps the most desirable, but there are many other woods that can be used, and a lower ranked wood that has desirable grain, or unusual features, could well outrank an ordinary piece of tayuman.

The appraisal of a handle can be almost as complex as the appraisal of a blade, and in my opinion can only be learnt in the same way, that is , by lengthy personal instruction from knowledgeable teachers.

However, you did not ask how to appraise a hilt, you set the parameter that all handles under consideration would be of the same material (tayuman), and of the same quality of workmanship.However, I don't think that it can be this simple.

Firstly we need to establish exactly what the features of a "good" quality handle are, for if we do not, the judgment of quality becomes subjective, rather than objective.

The flame grain in the bottom handle could be called "chatoyant" in English, "nginden" in Javanese.

[rasjid]

Thank you Gentlemen,

@Detlef: If you have only one choice to own, which one? The selut is a bad example, because we are talking about the wood material only.

@Alan: Yes, I agree with your opinion and thank you for the word "nginden". (Thats the word I was looking for... ). Its a lot more into it, thats why I'm asking about the wood itself only. All Tayuman, same garap, same quality of carving but we all know that we dont have printing machine at home (and plus the finance controller at home ) so we have to choose one only and of course the best hilt for our best keris.

and again, my examples are not the #1 around (but this is all I have for example), so which character of wood do you consider to be the best?

I'm looking for personal opinion here and I'm also asking what is the choice for king or prince hilts handle? (I dont have the luxury to handle or own one).... yet

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by rasjid

Thank you Gentlemen,

@Detlef: If you have only one choice to own, which one? The selut is a bad example, because we are talking about the wood material only.

I'm looking for personal opinion here and I'm also asking what is the choice for king or prince hilts handle? (I dont have the luxury to handle or own one).... yet

Rasjid,

you ask a simple question which is to answer very difficult.
Maybe you can post a picture of the sheath from the keris to which you want to attach the hilt? I think that this is very important that the hilt matching together with the sheath. I personal like the one with nginden but like I write, this hilt maybe don't look good together with the sheath.

Regards,

Detlef

[rasjid]

Hi again Detlef,

All my hilts already have their own sheats, I just want to know the general preference which type of wood material is the best according to keris owner.

rasjid

[ferrylaki]

[QUOTE=rasjid]Hi everyone,

A very interesting topic.
I recently focus my observation on my Jogjakarta and Surakarta Hilt, and I finally come with a short conclusion about "cecekan" in keris hilt.
I found this small "mark' on my hilt.
I've search for the same "mark" on several keris hilt (with various "cecekan" quality) and I found that the better keris hilt always shows this "mark".

I haven't take the picture on Surakartan hilt yet, but I know its there indeed.
come on, have A look at your keris hilt, it might have the same "mark" as mine.
it's a very small carving but comes in a very good detail.
this is my best Jagjakarta hilt, kemuning wood with chatoyant" or, "nginden" .

[David]

[QUOTE=ferrylaki]

Originally Posted by rasjid

Hi everyone,

A very interesting topic.
I recently focus my observation on my Jogjakarta and Surakarta Hilt, and I finally come with a short conclusion about "cecekan" in keris hilt.
I found this small "mark' on my hilt.
I've search for the same "mark" on several keris hilt (with various "cecekan" quality) and I found that the better keris hilt always shows this "mark".

I haven't take the picture on Surakartan hilt yet, but I know its there indeed.
come on, have A look at your keris hilt, it might have the same "mark" as mine.
it's a very small carving but comes in a very good detail.
this is my best Jagjakarta hilt, kemuning wood with chatoyant" or, "nginden" .

Interesting observation. I must say that i did a quick check of what i know to be my finest examples of Jogyakarta and Surakarta hilts. I chose ones that were deeply and expertly cut and also had pierced-throught parts of the carving as well as quality woods. I am uncertain of the wood used on the Jogya, but is of the "crystal clear" variety and beautifully finished. The Surakarta hilt i examined is a fine nginden example. On the Jogya there is indeed some similar marks, but rather than merely being carved into the wood they are worked into the sculptural relief carving of the cecekan. The Surakarta example, which is both, IMHO, a finer wood and a finer carving does not have this feature at all so i am uncertain that it can be seen as a specific indicator of quality.

[ferrylaki]

[QUOTE=David]

Originally Posted by ferrylaki

Interesting observation. I must say that i did a quick check of what i know to be my finest examples of Jogyakarta and Surakarta hilts. I chose ones that were deeply and expertly cut and also had pierced-throught parts of the carving as well as quality woods. I am uncertain of the wood used on the Jogya, but is of the "crystal clear" variety and beautifully finished. The Surakarta hilt i examined is a fine nginden example. On the Jogya there is indeed some similar marks, but rather than merely being carved into the wood they are worked into the sculptural relief carving of the cecekan. The Surakarta example, which is both, IMHO, a finer wood and a finer carving does not have this feature at all so i am uncertain that it can be seen as a specific indicator of quality.

I only have a few example of Jogja hilt.
I must say that the 'mark' does not appear in every jogja hilt.
this particular 'mark' could be indeed shows an advanced carving tecnique,
or is it just another addition to show a special skill of the hilt maker.
I did compare my hilt with my friend's thus we found the 'mark' does appear in a good quality jogja hilt.

[rasjid]

@Ferrylaki, from your picture second from left, I also have a few hilts (jogja) that shows the vertical lines both left and right side of the carving.
I believe it is the trademark from certain maker or area which always have similar or higher grade of carving but I'm not saying without this marking, other hilts are not as good.

I have a few of this type and quite happy with the quality.

regards,
rasjid