Imagine that its horizontal bar is wrapped with thick strips of leather or fabric. Would you change your verdict?

Marius' comment no. 15 on the earlier post No.12 being a fake may be clouding his inability to envision it with an oval or more ergonomically shaped grip that would allow a user to, in the words of FIF, Index the blade properly.

In contradiction to the historical examples of western and eastern swords that DO have cylindrical grips, and were obviously made that way for ages. Marking down an item they are unfamiliar with and do not grip or use properly is not the fault of the weapon.

Richard, I dont think a slaughter's sticking knife would have had a diamond shaped blade.[/QUOTE]

Why not Jens?
Many of the modern ones have diamond shaped blades,=.
Regards
Richard

Richard so you found a butchers knife on the net, with a diamond shaped blade. This does not proof anything, and besides from that, I am sure the steel is of a different quality than the steel used for the katar originally shown.

Not likely.

It is not only the geometry of the crossbar/crossbars that determine the stability in the hand, but also the extended longitudinal arms that contribute in a major way.
Those long arms are there with a purpose and no matter how flat/rectangular the transverse grip would be, it simply cannot ensure enough stability alone. Without the long arms, the slightest misalignment of the thrust would not only be ineffective, but also can have disastrous effect on your wrist.

I am saying all this because I have small hands and was able to play quite a lot with my katars and got a feel on how they fit in the hand.

Yet, this is only my personal opinion...
:shrug:

Thank you Marius, but I will show you the statue from where the katar, shown as a deawing, in my article origins. Its from a temple from Orissa build in the 10th century.

Sorry Jens.
It was on;y a suggestion. I wasn't seeking to prove anything.
Regards
Richard

Thank you Jens!

The sculpture is a proof that katars existed and were used as early as 10 century.

However, the sculpture is strongly stylised and cannot be consdidered as an accurate description of the precise geometry of the katar.

Also it would have been technically very difficult to make the katar in the sculpture with longer arms as they would have broken during the sculpting process.

Because of the artistic stylization, even the position of the hand holding the katar in the sculpture would make any thrust highly ineffective...

Last but not least, even the highly stylised katar in the sculpture resembles more to the clasic katars we know (with a characteristic triangular blade) than to the "item" in the original posting.

Do you know of any extant historical example of a katar like the one in the original posting?

Hello,

I found this picture of old indians swords an harpoon,
comes from Paul Jaiwant book Arms and Armour of India.
archaic models.

I don't pretend mine is so old ( or just a real old !! )
but it can be a mix between this old ''antenna'' sword and a katar,
used in two ways, as a small sword or as a push dagger .

Just an idea but why not ?!...

For the handle efficiency-handling, I will try to wrap the bar with a strip of cloth 2-3cm thick and tell you.

Three other pictures of the dagger,
one side is much damaged/a lot of small holes,
the other side is in better conditions...

Kind regards

Frankie, no way that your weapon was held like this.


Richard, dont say you are sorry, as there is no reason to be. You came up with a sugestion. and this is as this forum works. Others may have other thoughts, and will say so.


Marius, no I dont. My guess is, that any 'old' katar is still to be found in the earth (ealier battle fields), or have been melted down centuries ago.

From Pitt Rivers museum: :p

For the last few days I have been trying with no luck to locate an old gardening tool owned by my Great Grandmother called a dibble. Though not quite as large as the one being discussed here it too has a shovel style handle and a diamond profiled blade. These were used for planting and while some have only a round blade for punching holes into the soil others had blades like this that were used not only for planting seeds but for cutting sod and roots. Below is a photo of a newer example with a round blade. If this is a dibble (as I suspect it to be) it could have been pushed into the soil forgotten and lost for years which would explain the overall heavily rusted condition.

Best,
Robert

Unless your dibble is a katar, I vote for the dibble.

The rusted condition means nothing look at all the Chinese swords fakes or the Central Asian sword fakes...

Hi
The push daggers are secured by fingers.
The way your tool is made you cannot do that...
:shrug:

Hello,
a blacksmith told me that for him it was a really old ( spear ?) blade
separated in two parts at the basis in a second time much later...

For make a katar ?! or a tool ?!

You are right Kronckew. Katars seem to have had different forms, till they ended up looking 'more or less' alike. These different forms seem to have been used at the same time, although far more research has to be done on the subject.
Below is one of mine, former in The Norris Castle Collection, UK. South Indian possible Deccan 17th century.
If the katar started as a tool, is a question I cant answer - as I dont know, and I have no where seen any hint of this.

Marius,
As you can see, there are good and old examples of Katars with very short side projections. One could argue that the long ones might have served as minimalistic gauntlets, but you would agree that those were not very effective. Also, since they were positioned on the lateral sides of the forearm, their ability to minimize bending of the wrist was practically nonexistent. To control for it, one would need rigid support of the dorsal side of the forearm. Indians might have mutated their katars into hooded examples and, eventually, into Patas to correct it.

But, as usual, it was the fighting function that took the precedence.
Short lateral arms or long ones would not change the biomechanics of the thrust, i.e. the stabbing function.

Short side projections is a looong way from NO side projections¨
The side projections serve not mainly to keep the wrist in alignment with the arm, but mostly to stabilise the dagger in the hand when the fist is tightened.

When the fist is tightened in the grip, one projection (the upper one) is pressed in the V-shaped space formed by the fist between the thumb and extension of the index finger, while the lower one is pressed against the hypothenar eminence, thus securing the grip.

Anyhow, from Robert's message, it became quite apparent this is a gardening tool.

However, this is my opinion, and mine alone.

It's not only your opinion, it's also mine.

:)

The two last katar posted have nothing to do with the weapon? tool posted originally... And this is not an opinion but a fact.

Robert has more eloquently expressed the point I was trying to make earlier. The obvious possibility of this twisting in the hand when being thrust forward suggests to me it was meant to be placed in position and then pushed, rather than trying to stab a moving target.
This is why, in my opinion, i think it is more likely to be a tool than a weapon.
Regards
Richard

Hello,
the snake biting its tail,
let's begin again :)
If it's not a weapon, as someone an idea about what it could be use for ?
I don't think they made it with his heavy diamond blade just for plant seeds or cut ropes / kill a mouse in the soil...

Let's face it. Robert's suggestion for a dibble is a rather strong argument :shrug:.

Kubur,
Fact is something supported by an irrefutable evidence.
May I see it, please?

Hi Ariel, of course

Pics post #1, #52, #57
52=57 short katars
post 1 is something else

Unless you are looking at our forum with the help of your labrador, it is easy to see.
:)
I have a question for the philosophers on the forum, how many opinions we need to have a truth?
:confused:

Moderator's comment
 

Guys,

I think this topic is close to exhaustion and we are approaching a struggle of wills without much data to back up whether the original subject of this thread is an ancient katar or something else. The blade certainly looks old and perhaps in excavated condition, although it is not too difficult to artificially age metal and create the appearance seen here. The only really remarkable feature is the U-shaped guard with a cross-piece at the end that might serve as a handle. Absent the protrusions beyond the hilt seen on usual katar, the subject of discussion does not resemble that weapon very closely in construction, nor (as some have pointed out) in its ability to be used easily as a "punch dagger."

It is clear, however, that not all symmetrically pointed blades are linked to the history of the katar -- a point that seems self-evident but has been labored somewhat in this discussion. Katar have been said to be made from broken blades, foreign swords and knives, and various other sources. That seems plausible to me.

I have no firm opinion one way or another whether this is actually a primitive "early" katar. Based on the weight of evidence, I think it probably is not a katar, but I don't know what else it might be. Every now and then we come across a mystery item and nobody knows what it is. This may be one of those times. Sometimes threads are resurrected months or years later with new information coming to light that solves the riddle.

At this point, let's wait for more data. I don't want to shut this thread down over petty disputes and have to spank the naughty boys responsible!

Ian.

I vote for:

Though the shape of the blade is not an exact match to the original subject of this thread it is close enough to show what it was possibly originally intended to be used for. :shrug: This was listed as an "18TH CENTURY LG SIZE PRIMITIVE GARDEN DIBBLE W HAND FORGED BLADE & WOOD HANDLE". Like quite a few items I have saved over the years I wish I could locate the one that belonged to my Great Grandmother to post as another example. Unfortunately like too many other items I have owned, after moving from one place to another it has been misplaced hopefully to be found sometime in the future. :o

Best,
Robert

Robert, only not BINGO because you have it already nailed in your post #53.

Hello,
yes it really look like ! I think you nailed it !
Do you know what's the size of this old dibble ?

If mine is an old 17th-18th dibble it's ok for me,
( first as I wrote , I hesitate to post it in the miscelania forum)

not so glorious as a katar :) but many weapons in martial arts come from peasant tools at first ...



For the ''poor maniability'' argument about ''no'' EARLY form of katar possibility

I just wanted to show you this old pata sword coming from the MET, 17th century with no side bars at all...

Wonderful but really difficult to handle no !?

Kind regards

and here comes another one with a similar blade
corrado26

I disagree my friend.
Easy to handle as it looks like a bichwa handle.
Its more a bichwa / katar than a pata...

Francantolin,
I believe that the blade of this piece was listed at being 14-1/8 inches with the handle being another 4-1/8 inches. Here is another example showing the blade being split in a similar manner to form the handle as seen on your piece. It is more of the size and style of my now missing example.

Corrado26,
A beautiful example still in wonderful condition. What was the description used when identifying this piece? Any idea of its actual dimensions as it appears to be of a smaller size?

Best,
Robert

The name pata comes from the MET museum,
you have to write them a message ;)

For the bichwa handling ergonomy, there is a geometrical difference:
Parralel is not perpendicular :)