Katars with or without hand protection

[Jens Nordlunde]

We have all seen the early 16th to 17th century katars from South India with a hand protection, but when, and why, did it dissapear?
In the early miniatures from both the south and the north, the katars have no hand protection. Can anyone tell me why that is?

[Roland_M]

Hello Jens,

I think it could be difficult to find a definite answer.

Forget my thoughts if you are already read them, they are probably wrong.

Roland

[Mercenary]

I guess the most part of South India jamdhars had protection because they were historically single, main weapon for right hand as well as pata. North jamdhars became additional weapons for the left hand too. So one must be able to get it from his belt both right and left hand.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

I guess the most part of South India jamdhars had protection because they were historically single, main weapon for right hand as well as pata. North jamdhars became additional weapons for the left hand too. So one must be able to get it from his belt both right and left hand.

Very interesting argument!

[ariel]

And how do we know that hooded katars were not a S. Indian equivalent of the European main gauche?

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by ariel

And how do we know that hooded katars were not a S. Indian equivalent of the European main gauche?

That's a very good point Jens.

From a martial point of view, I have always mentioned this aspect in my stock descriptions because when you look at the nature of the hooded katar, there are multiple points that a sword be be blocked/stopped.

These points are in the openings either side of the langet where the side bars protrude and meet the hood and also the hood itself, on the thick hooked terminal at the end of the hood.

A point to remember too is that the katar of hooded type, are typically much longer than their brethren, being easier to engage an incoming strike in defence.

I note the length of side bar extension can vary greatly too.

Gavin