hilt material ?

[simatua]

Let's go back to the beginning.

looking at the pictures i asked myself is it really ivory?/ is it an old hilt?
- The kind of carving is indeed not to sharp. ( even in the early days ivory was scarce, carvers low paid, and have more time to make little masterpieces.
.....especially for someone with royal connections, looking at the symbol of the son.
imo its not patine / or worn off, looking at the front; the triangles are different size. Ivory is an hard material is does not quicly show patine, and if so the inside stays like it is.

The hot needle is just an test, and not every new material melts away.

, I cannot lay my finger behind this...what exactly the material is, but i would not say its ivory. I some hilts myself.
1. Onknown material molded?; even stands the hot knive test. ( at the backside some airholes?

2. Old ivory, with patine

[David]

Originally Posted by simatua

Let's go back to the beginning.

looking at the pictures i asked myself is it really ivory?/ is it an old hilt?
- The kind of carving is indeed not to sharp. ( even in the early days ivory was scarce, carvers low paid, and have more time to make little masterpieces.
.....especially for someone with royal connections, looking at the symbol of the son.
imo its not patine / or worn off, looking at the front; the triangles are different size. Ivory is an hard material is does not quicly show patine, and if so the inside stays like it is.

The hot needle is just an test, and not every new material melts away.

You know, the hilt is not in my hands so i guess anything is really possible, but we really have seen quite a lot of ivory hilts on this forum. This first hilt, IMO, shows all the signs of being real ivory. If they are making molds that look like this i would be sincerely impressed.
The first example you show Simatau clearly is a composite material and that shows itself very clearly as an unnatural material. Danny's hilt looks nothing like this material though.
As for age, i am less inclined to form an opinion. While ivory does not patina quickly there are many methods available to create patina and color. I am willing to except that it is possible that this is not an old hilt, that the age might have been artificially added, but the material sure looks like ivory to me regardless of the actual age. You experts might know better.

[Sajen]

Hi Danny,

here the pictures from my wooden hilt.

To Simatua: Like I write before, it's just not possible to be sure by pictures but I see grain, I see cracks at Danny's hilt so it would be a masterwork of molding when it is not some sort of ivory.

Regards,

Detlef

[danny1976]

Simatua ,

Thanks for youre input .

Personaly i think the hilt is ivory , what kind ? no idea .
I had some time,s molded hilts in my hands and the look realy different and also feel difrent (weight) but i think they can find away in indonesia to give a molded hilt a good weight.

About the hot needle test ... when i did it i realy let the needle become red and when pushd against the hilt there is verry verry short a little smell what looks the most to uhhhh burned hair , not the same but that,s the smell that will the most close tho what i can discribe.

I don,t know where you live in holland ? if its close maybe i can pass by so you can have a look and tell me youre opinion , so i can learn again a little more.

regards,

danny

[danny1976]

Hi Detlef,

Nice hilt ! Thanks for posting.

The same kind of sun , i didn,t know what it ment .


regards,

danny

[kulbuntet]

Originally Posted by danny1976

The same kind of sun , i didn,t know what it ment

Posible does the sun stands for the sun in the Solo coat of arms. With this would a (royal)maduran show that his familie was affiliated with the Sunan of Solo. See the coat of arms of Solo, it has sun rays in it.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you Michel for advising us of your reasoning process used in estimation of age of Madura keris hilts.

I believe it is reasonable to assume that following the alignment of Madurese rulers with Dutch interests, symbols associated with the Dutch began to appear in Madurese keris dress and other Madurese ornamentation. A nominal date of 1825 is probably reasonable for the commencement of this practice.

However, although the presence of symbols associated with the Dutch may be able to be used to support an estimate of production time after 1825, the absence of such symbols cannot be used to support a production time prior to 1825.

The relationship between the royal houses of Surakarta and Suminep is well documented, and the speculation that the presence of a symbol on this hilt, that appears to be the sun, could represent such relationship is interesting. My personal opinion is that when we indulge in such speculation it is probably advisable to provide some evidence in support of the idea. The field of keris study is riddled with good ideas, and very often, these good ideas tend to become accepted fact, but "accepted fact" lacking any evidence in support of it.

It is very dangerous to hypothesize in the absence of evidence or logical argument, and most especially in respect of a culture and time that differs from our own.

[kulbuntet]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Thank you Michel for advising us of your reasoning process used in estimation of age of Madura keris hilts.

I believe it is reasonable to assume that following the alignment of Madurese rulers with Dutch interests, symbols associated with the Dutch began to appear in Madurese keris dress and other Madurese ornamentation. A nominal date of 1825 is probably reasonable for the commencement of this practice.

However, although the presence of symbols associated with the Dutch may be able to be used to support an estimate of production time after 1825, the absence of such symbols cannot be used to support a production time prior to 1825.

The relationship between the royal houses of Surakarta and Suminep is well documented, and the speculation that the presence of a symbol on this hilt, that appears to be the sun, could represent such relationship is interesting. My personal opinion is that when we indulge in such speculation it is probably advisable to provide some evidence in support of the idea. The field of keris study is riddled with good ideas, and very often, these good ideas tend to become accepted fact, but "accepted fact" lacking any evidence in support of it.

It is very dangerous to hypothesize in the absence of evidence or logical argument, and most especially in respect of a culture and time that differs from our own.

Hi Alan,
Yes i do agree with your point that the absence of these indicators is not a garuantee tht the age of a hilt is older than 1825. But that is a general thing with indicators, its a indication of posibility. That combined with other indicators like material, other paterns, the state of the material, sometimes even a feeling and so on, can give a good impression. Maybe in some times can give some "proof" or suport that it must be of certain age, atleast give a good estimation. Iff not so, how can it be that museums or other experts can give a clear age to a hilt or blade or other material? I personaly dont think that carbon dating is used on all things in collections of museums. Panting can be indentified and given a age by the painter.. his time of life, style in a erra of his live.. But it cant ben done with hilts.. Maybe you can suport us ith some info about how its been done, or about some other indicators. My knowledge on this is still in my eyes limited..and always willing to learn and know more.

About the suporting info for the sun on Danny's hilt. One of the experienced members of the Dutch keris study group have told us. I do have confidence that he does have done reseach and got suporting info of this. But i have posted it as a posibility, not as a statement or fact. I do apreciate and agree with your caution to not see a post of this as a fact. but if i or others dont post there posibilitys it would be difficult to get a good view and later to result of fact. That is why forums do exist, even in the old times. To get a agreement of accepted truth, by reasoning and discusion. I wil try to ask the person iff he would like to give me and all people here some more info on this. Maybe posted by me, or him self.

Regards Michel

Ps link to hilt with also a sun. Link

[spiral]

Originally Posted by danny1976

About the hot needle test ... when i did it i realy let the needle become red and when pushd against the hilt there is verry verry short a little smell what looks the most to uhhhh burned hair , not the same but that,s the smell that will the most close tho what i can discribe.

Fascinating thread, I was wondering about Whale ivory or boxwood even but neither seems quite right to my eye and while personaly I dont realy like the hot needle test, the smell of burning hair one usualy finds with animal horn like cow,goat, buffalo etc. Occasionly when worked it smells like an old cattle shed.

When worked Tooth Ivory whether elephant or marine smells of drilled or ground teeth just like a filling at the dentist.

Spiral

[danny1976]

Hi Spiral,

Thanks for youre info ,

One thing that i know sure about this hilt is that it is no bone , maybe my nose is not al that good

It looks that we won,t find the answer here to say .yes its made from ....?
I like to thank everybody for the input and i will put the hilt on a keris and let it be nice..

Regards,

Danny

[spiral]

Originally Posted by danny1976

One thing that i know sure about this hilt is that it is no bone , maybe my nose is not al that good

I agree Danny, its definatly not bone, but horn is not bone & often has a structure of concentric rings.

Spiral

[Rick]

Horn, IMO is usually lighter in weight than marine ivory and bone .

Burning dentine does smell a bit like burning horn but definitely different .