Katar (????) for comment ...

HUSAR · 10th December 2006, 02:26 PM

Hello Everybody!
This dagger I got yesterday from old collection, owner is collecting European swords and this was almost the only eastern item he had… I`m not keen on katars, but this one looks very interesting to me, blade is wavy and made of wootz steel, 34 cm long. In overall dagger measures 50 cm. Any comments are welcome!
Best
HUSAR

katana · 10th December 2006, 02:57 PM

Certainly not a usual Katar ....almost a cross between a Katar and a Pata.
Very nice variant.

HUSAR · 10th December 2006, 03:15 PM

yes looks like some combination of those two forms

rather rare I think

Tim Simmons · 10th December 2006, 05:39 PM

and nice. What do you think went in the four holes? chain mail? a metal cover?

katana · 10th December 2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

and nice. What do you think went in the four holes? chain mail? a metal cover?

Well spotted Tim......judging by the size of the holes maile would seem more likely.....although it could be attaching points for some sort of adornment

carlos · 10th December 2006, 05:39 PM

AND A CROSS BETWEEN A KERIS AND A KATAR?

BEST
CARLOS

Andrew · 10th December 2006, 05:59 PM

The grip(s?) and guard look odd to me. And the blade affixation looks weak.

Ceremonial or decorative, perhaps?

Valjhun · 10th December 2006, 06:16 PM

Very nice piece!
I love it!

Andrew, the blade affixation is rather weak on all katars.

Tim, holes were used for attaching the padding.

Andrew · 10th December 2006, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valjhun

Andrew, the blade affixation is rather weak on all katars.

Hi Valjhun. I have to disagree with you on this one.

The katars I've handled have been quite sturdy. Certainly, exceptions are encountered.

Most are mounted in such a fashion as to neatly handle significant linear force generated by a punching motion. The attachment of this blade directly to the guard as shown would not appear to be optimal for the linear or lateral forces one would expect to encounter.

I wouldn't want to rely on this weapon to defend myself in a fight.

Valjhun · 10th December 2006, 11:58 PM

I meant, that all katars are weak weapons compared to other classic hilted daggers and swords, simply because the blade is soldered to the hilt and that soldering is never very extensive. I find the soldering on thatone much more stronger than on other katars. I bet that a normal classic katar or even a turup would break more easily than thatone.

B.I · 11th December 2006, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valjhun

I meant, that all katars are weak weapons compared to other classic hilted daggers and swords, simply because the blade is soldered to the hilt and that soldering is never very extensive. I find the soldering on thatone much more stronger than on other katars. I bet that a normal classic katar or even a turup would break more easily than thatone.

Sorry, I cant agree with this. Not all katars are contructed the same. Some are one piece, and some have langets and are riveted. All of these, and the forge-welded examples were very sturdy, and not weak at all. The example you show does not show a typical katar construction, and so cant really be used to verify this point. This katar is a retro piece, based on a much earlier example and so not made for heavy use. Its original form dates back to the 16thC, but feel yours is much later. These pieces were shown in early sculpture, and so its form was revered and replicated.

B.I · 10th December 2006, 06:22 PM

I think the holes are more than likely to attach padding. Firangis used the same concept, in a thickened padded insert, shaped to fit into the grip and attached by just one or two holes. As did patas.
I dont feel the contruction is weak at all, but as Andrew said, it was possibly more for a ceremonial use.
This piece is unusual in design, but of a specific type. The is a similar example in Stone, now in the Met. This has a different shaped guard (which makes it look more like the normal hooded katars) but the contruction is completely different to them, and more like this example (with the blade welded to the guard and grip(s) riveted on. I am away from my library, so cant show the katar I mean in Stone, but it is pictured with the other katars. I am sure this is of the same type, as I have seen a few of them and the similarities are remarkable. The image in Stone only shows the outside, so the similarity is lost.
The design on this guard is South Indian, and the evidence of silver plating adds to this as an origin. I feel the dating to be later than the hooded katars, and made in a retro fashion.
The wavy blade is uncommon, but also does appear know and then. This feature also adds to its potential use as a ceremonial piece (see attached image from the Royal Armouries).

Husar, are you sure the blade is wootz?

katana · 10th December 2006, 06:51 PM

Here are several pictures....one states the evolution of the Katar to Pata....perhaps this is an example of this 'transition'. The other picture shows that the 'wavy' blade is not exclusive to the SEA.

HUSAR · 10th December 2006, 07:07 PM

Husar, are you sure the blade is wootz?[/QUOTE]

Hello
I`m not sure that the blade is wootz I will try to bring out pattern maybe next weeknd and post more pictures. But from the steel "shape" I think it is wootz.

HUSAR · 10th December 2006, 07:13 PM

Dear Members
Thank you for reply I see that you really like that dagger

Thank you for all comments and pictures!
The conection of the blade and hilt is not weak at all, and in my opinion is rather not ceremonial, but i`m NOT expert in katars either

look at the back site of the hilt, it is really well made
I totally agree with you that holes in hilt are for some kind of pad like in kula-zereh helmets or in firangi swords.
Best
HUSAR

Jim McDougall · 10th December 2006, 08:52 PM

This is a truly unusual example of 'katar' and I agree with B.I.'s assessment of southern India. From the look of the patination etc. it shows good age and likely early 19th c. seems probable. I have not ever seen one of these mounted in this manner, with the transverse grips actually fixed handles welded to the plate type handguard. I agree with Andrew that this piece seems 'ceremonial' as the more two dimensional construction with the plate type guard, rather than contoured hand enclosure suggests that. I dont believe the construction seems weak at all, but the ceremonial application seems supported as well by the nagan or serpentine blade form, which in most cases I have seen have been determined to be in this category.

I think the decorative motif on the guard 'plate' may be the best indicator of the provenance of this distinctly unusual piece. The scalloped edges of the upper and lower udges of the guard plate recall the 'cusped arch' seen in the Peacock Gate of the city palace at Jaipur ("Arts and Crafts of India", Cooper & Gillow, 1996, p.147). While this design here may be Hindu, it is also noted that the four cusp design seen at base of the blade on some Vijayanagara period katars (latter 16th c.) reflect similarity to Muslim architecture ("Hindu Arms and Ritual" p.147). The diamond sectioned diaper pattern enclosing a floral motif seems to me key to Mughal form , and possibly Jens can add more on this.

The holes which may be for the addition of padding also suggest this may be a ceremonial item. It would seem to me that padding would be superfluous to the gauntleted hand of an armored warrior, although we do know that many pieces such as the khandas mentioned and of course patas did have pads.
Elgood has suggested (op.cit.p.147) that on many katar examples of the hooded form padding is absent because of no apparant means of attaching it. Possibly, padding only existed on weapons used by the more pedestrian rank and file? where gauntlets and such armor were not available to them.

This seems a very important and key find and I look forward to learning more from it!! Hopefully there will be more observations from B.I. and Jens on the motif and especially what the floral motif depicts.

All the best,
Jim

Battara · 10th December 2006, 09:06 PM

I agree with Andrew, the piece would be too weak. I have seen and held katars and they in their hey-day could withstand the forces of impact generated. This type of soldering (not looking like welding which would be even stronger that soldering, though still weak) would not hold up long under combat force impact. I'm more for ceremonial. The blade itself maybe fine, but I would suggest that it was not original to the piece and that this piece is a composite.

HUSAR · 31st December 2006, 11:28 AM

DEAR ALL!!!
Thank you for great discussion and all comments.
Best wishes for ALL of You in coming 2007!
HUSAR

spiral · 2nd January 2007, 09:31 PM

I dont collect these so take what I say with a big pinch of salt.

But to me, It looks like 20th century construction or reconstruction methods. The blade to plate join looks like oxy acetlene welding that even continues to edges of the plate! {although ground,flattened,hammered etc..}Ive never seen any forge welding that looked like that.

I also notice those "draw" handles show that each was at one time riveted or had screws through them they have either remains of the rivets in them or there again have been welded or somesuch. But there are no signs of such riveting on the outside of the plate?

But thats just my observations & thoughts.

Are such "features" usual on these?

Spiral

10th December 2006, 02:26 PM	#1
HUSAR Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 80	Katar (????) for comment ... Hello Everybody! This dagger I got yesterday from old collection, owner is collecting European swords and this was almost the only eastern item he had… I`m not keen on katars, but this one looks very interesting to me, blade is wavy and made of wootz steel, 34 cm long. In overall dagger measures 50 cm. Any comments are welcome! Best HUSAR Attached Images

10th December 2006, 02:57 PM	#2
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	Certainly not a usual Katar ....almost a cross between a Katar and a Pata. Very nice variant. Attached Images

10th December 2006, 05:39 PM	#6
carlos Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 738	CROSS AND A CROSS BETWEEN A KERIS AND A KATAR? BEST CARLOS

10th December 2006, 11:58 PM	#10
Valjhun Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 692	I meant, that all katars are weak weapons compared to other classic hilted daggers and swords, simply because the blade is soldered to the hilt and that soldering is never very extensive. I find the soldering on thatone much more stronger than on other katars. I bet that a normal classic katar or even a turup would break more easily than thatone. Attached Images

10th December 2006, 06:22 PM	#12
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	I think the holes are more than likely to attach padding. Firangis used the same concept, in a thickened padded insert, shaped to fit into the grip and attached by just one or two holes. As did patas. I dont feel the contruction is weak at all, but as Andrew said, it was possibly more for a ceremonial use. This piece is unusual in design, but of a specific type. The is a similar example in Stone, now in the Met. This has a different shaped guard (which makes it look more like the normal hooded katars) but the contruction is completely different to them, and more like this example (with the blade welded to the guard and grip(s) riveted on. I am away from my library, so cant show the katar I mean in Stone, but it is pictured with the other katars. I am sure this is of the same type, as I have seen a few of them and the similarities are remarkable. The image in Stone only shows the outside, so the similarity is lost. The design on this guard is South Indian, and the evidence of silver plating adds to this as an origin. I feel the dating to be later than the hooded katars, and made in a retro fashion. The wavy blade is uncommon, but also does appear know and then. This feature also adds to its potential use as a ceremonial piece (see attached image from the Royal Armouries). Husar, are you sure the blade is wootz? Attached Images

10th December 2006, 03:15 PM	#3
HUSAR Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 80	yes looks like some combination of those two forms rather rare I think

10th December 2006, 05:39 PM	#4
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,807	and nice. What do you think went in the four holes? chain mail? a metal cover?

10th December 2006, 05:59 PM	#7
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	The grip(s?) and guard look odd to me. And the blade affixation looks weak. Ceremonial or decorative, perhaps?

10th December 2006, 06:16 PM	#8
Valjhun Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 692	Very nice piece! I love it! Andrew, the blade affixation is rather weak on all katars. Tim, holes were used for attaching the padding.

10th December 2006, 06:51 PM	#13
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	Here are several pictures....one states the evolution of the Katar to Pata....perhaps this is an example of this 'transition'. The other picture shows that the 'wavy' blade is not exclusive to the SEA. Attached Images

10th December 2006, 07:07 PM	#14
HUSAR Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 80	Husar, are you sure the blade is wootz?[/QUOTE] Hello I`m not sure that the blade is wootz I will try to bring out pattern maybe next weeknd and post more pictures. But from the steel "shape" I think it is wootz.

10th December 2006, 07:13 PM	#15
HUSAR Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 80	Dear Members Thank you for reply I see that you really like that dagger Thank you for all comments and pictures! The conection of the blade and hilt is not weak at all, and in my opinion is rather not ceremonial, but i`m NOT expert in katars either look at the back site of the hilt, it is really well made I totally agree with you that holes in hilt are for some kind of pad like in kula-zereh helmets or in firangi swords. Best HUSAR

10th December 2006, 08:52 PM	#16
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,954	This is a truly unusual example of 'katar' and I agree with B.I.'s assessment of southern India. From the look of the patination etc. it shows good age and likely early 19th c. seems probable. I have not ever seen one of these mounted in this manner, with the transverse grips actually fixed handles welded to the plate type handguard. I agree with Andrew that this piece seems 'ceremonial' as the more two dimensional construction with the plate type guard, rather than contoured hand enclosure suggests that. I dont believe the construction seems weak at all, but the ceremonial application seems supported as well by the nagan or serpentine blade form, which in most cases I have seen have been determined to be in this category. I think the decorative motif on the guard 'plate' may be the best indicator of the provenance of this distinctly unusual piece. The scalloped edges of the upper and lower udges of the guard plate recall the 'cusped arch' seen in the Peacock Gate of the city palace at Jaipur ("Arts and Crafts of India", Cooper & Gillow, 1996, p.147). While this design here may be Hindu, it is also noted that the four cusp design seen at base of the blade on some Vijayanagara period katars (latter 16th c.) reflect similarity to Muslim architecture ("Hindu Arms and Ritual" p.147). The diamond sectioned diaper pattern enclosing a floral motif seems to me key to Mughal form , and possibly Jens can add more on this. The holes which may be for the addition of padding also suggest this may be a ceremonial item. It would seem to me that padding would be superfluous to the gauntleted hand of an armored warrior, although we do know that many pieces such as the khandas mentioned and of course patas did have pads. Elgood has suggested (op.cit.p.147) that on many katar examples of the hooded form padding is absent because of no apparant means of attaching it. Possibly, padding only existed on weapons used by the more pedestrian rank and file? where gauntlets and such armor were not available to them. This seems a very important and key find and I look forward to learning more from it!! Hopefully there will be more observations from B.I. and Jens on the motif and especially what the floral motif depicts. All the best, Jim

10th December 2006, 09:06 PM	#17
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,226	I agree with Andrew, the piece would be too weak. I have seen and held katars and they in their hey-day could withstand the forces of impact generated. This type of soldering (not looking like welding which would be even stronger that soldering, though still weak) would not hold up long under combat force impact. I'm more for ceremonial. The blade itself maybe fine, but I would suggest that it was not original to the piece and that this piece is a composite.

31st December 2006, 11:28 AM	#18
HUSAR Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 80	DEAR ALL!!! Thank you for great discussion and all comments. Best wishes for ALL of You in coming 2007! HUSAR

2nd January 2007, 09:31 PM	#19
spiral Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,712	I dont collect these so take what I say with a big pinch of salt. But to me, It looks like 20th century construction or reconstruction methods. The blade to plate join looks like oxy acetlene welding that even continues to edges of the plate! {although ground,flattened,hammered etc..}Ive never seen any forge welding that looked like that. I also notice those "draw" handles show that each was at one time riveted or had screws through them they have either remains of the rivets in them or there again have been welded or somesuch. But there are no signs of such riveting on the outside of the plate? But thats just my observations & thoughts. Are such "features" usual on these? Spiral Attached Images