[A. G. Maisey]

This discussion is developing into the type of thing that interests me. Thank you gentlemen for your input.

Detlef, you have given us a translation that Henk, who is apparently a native speaker of Dutch, has told us is a good translation:-

"Dr. Groneman described in his studies about the kris that in the Keraton of Jogya keris hilts are carried in human or animal design in the form of maize cob or flowers (here I am unsure if it is the correct way of tranlation) which are called Gana, carved from tree roots, look at Pic. No. 25, which are showing a human figure."

If I run the relevant words through an online translator I get:-

"Dr. Groneman mentions in his study of the keris that is in the Yogya Kraton handles carried in human or animal figure, in the form of a djagoengkolf (ie corn). or flowers, which are called Gana, also known as with tree roots. at No. 25, which show the human form. "

I think that the online translator comes fairly close in sense to your translation, so we can probably accept that you have translated the sense of the passage adequately.

However, in the recent publication of Groneman in English, the translation has significant variation:-

" In the Kraton of Jogjakata --- they carry ukiran in the shape of humans and animals, of djagung (corn-) cobs or flowers, called gana, as well as some made from tree roots resembling the human form."

What interests me is this:- your quote is a report of Groneman's original writing, note "--- Dr. Groneman mentions in his study---" , it is not the original words written by Groneman.

In your translation, and in the online translation of this passage, it can be taken that a particular form of hilt is identified that is known as the gana form, that is:-

"--- human or animal design in the form of maize cob or flowers --- which are called Gana, carved from tree roots---"

and

"--- human or animal figure, in the form of a djagoengkolf (ie corn). or flowers, which are called Gana, also known as with tree roots ---"


However, if we look at the translation done by Peter Richardus of Leiden, and Timothy Rogers of Oxford, we find that the passage is given quite a different meaning, in that the hilts in the form of humans, animals , flowers and cobs of corn are called "gana", and " --- as well as some made from tree roots resembling the human form." which are not given any name.

I believe that we can accept that the English edition of Groneman was sourced from Groneman's original writings, however, I will put that question to Tim today and ask him for a clarification of the source used, and the reliability of the translation.

This is a vital distinction, and indicates to me that perhaps everybody who has followed on from Groneman has sourced from the publication that you have used, and as a result people have been calling these naturally occurring root-form hilts by the name intended for a different form for a very long time.

I don't know about you people, but I really do find this sort of thing to be of intense interest.