On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Ian

... I would hate to try to master English as a second language...

Specially if you have to deal with British english and later struggle to converse in American english, "aggravated" by the diverse levels of education; this starting from a native language that has little or nothing to do with it. Still is fascinating when you learn all those by ear from the beginning, no school involved, just trying to express yourself with what you have at hand. Needless to say that the range of self learning resources is nowadays so much larger with the Internet.

Originally Posted by Ian

...Idiomatic use must be very challenging to the newcomer. It must confuse folks enormously when confronted with phrases such as: "take the bull by the horns" ...

Ah, we also use that one over here

[A. G. Maisey]

Ariel, I believe I can accept the blame for first coining the term "name game".

At least, I had never heard it before I myself used it, and I first used it perhaps 40 odd years ago.

The intent encaptioned in the term was not to denigrate the diligent research of those scholars who seek to interpret and understand the terminologies applied to weaponry --- and for that matter, other examples of the material culture of foreign places, but rather to illuminate the total and absolute futility of attempting to identify the "correct" terminology applied to any item in the absence of a good working knowledge of the culture, society, history and language of the place concerned.

Further, any terminology that may be perceived as being a probable "correct" terminology must be fixed in terms of time and place, for the very obvious reason that time distorts perception, and that which is accepted as accurate today has only about a 45% possibility of still being accepted as accurate in 50 years time --- at least this appears to be so in the field of medicine, and by extrapolation can probably be considered to be so to a greater or lesser degree in other fields.

The meanings of words change over time, as does the way in which constant meanings are understood, thus if it can be shown that a particular name is correct for any object, that correctness must at the very least be fixed within a framework of time and place.

For example, if it can be shown that the accepted name for a particular object was "Whatsit", that accepted name must be qualified in terms of time and place by the affixation of historical and geographic parameters. To do less than this is not simply sloppy, it is close to rabid stupidity.

Thus, our Whatsit becomes "an object known as a Whatsit during the 13th century in Shaftsbury, Dorset, England". Of course supporting references and/or evidence are provided.

As an example of the way in which meanings can become lost or can change I would like to use the case of the keris, variant spellings of creese, kris, cris, and a few more that do not readily come to mind. At the present time we have a number of other words that can be used to refer to the keris:- dhuwung, kadgo, curigo, wangkingan, cundrik, pusaka, and that is only in Javanese.

However in this same language of Javanese, prior to about 1600, it is probable that none of those names would have referred to a keris as we know it now. Good candidates for the "correct" name for the Modern Keris, and other keris-like objects , in pre-1600 Jawa were "tewek" and "tuhuk", but we do not really know with any certainty whether this presumption is correct or not.

So, I put it to you:- the "name game", when understood as I intended the phrase to be understood, is something worse than useless, however, diligent research into terminology by dedicated scholars is not the "name game", and must never be thought of as such.

[Mercenary]

You know if you study ethnic weaponry seriously than you have to join to one of serious disciplines: or history of art or ethnography. If you don't do it then you will be able to publish only beautiful pictures. There is nothing wrong but for what?

Without thorough immersion into their contemporary atmospheres ( further complicated by linguistic problems), one cannot fully understand the multilayered depth of meaning of the peculiar names given to old elongated and sharpened pieces of steel.

Many thanks Ariel again. This is what I consulted before with some serious ethnographers about. They advised me: you should not to make new "right" classification. It will also be bad as other ones. Just show how Indians looked at their weapons, what they felt and how they explained it. It is what I am working on.
The article we discussed here (thank you all, I saw how it was hard for some of you) is an article about military (warriors) practices of North India of 1600-1800. This article was reported (and published) at 5th International Science-practical conference, May 2014 in the Military-Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineer and Signal Corps (Russia, St.Petersburg). The second part of the article (about kinds and names of weapons) was reported at 6th conference, May, 2015. You know when you are researching in the fields such as of the using weapons it is very important to know what kind of weapons was used (while you have for it only the mix of names and languages).
Some of this information was published in "On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types" in "Historical Weaponology" #1, 2015.

[ariel]

Alan,
There was no attempt to assign the blame for the " name game". In my defense, I didn't even know that you were the culprit:-)
But you have made my point very well: I qualified the requirements by mentioning " immersion in the contemporary atmosphere", and your example of "keris" names does it beautifully.
.
This is exactly the reason why IMHO the " name game" has to be played as part of the holistic approach to the overall study of weapons: it is a reflection of the societal view of them. We are in complete agreement.

And this is why it needs to be played by people like yourself, at least in the field of Javanese kerises.


Having read a boatload of books about ottoman-to-indian swords , I definitely know more about them than the rest of the University of Michigan faculty, students, their significant others and pets :-))))

However, I am completely unqualified to add anything new to the field beyond what can already be found in Stone, Pant and Elgood.

A rather silly example: I can proudly advance a hypothesis that Indian " kirach" or "kirich" is just a mis-pronounced Turkish " kilij", i.e. just a "sword". However, in the absense of even rudimentary knowledge of any "indian" language and phonetics such a "discovery" would be plainly laughable.

[A. G. Maisey]

Looks as if we're in agreement Ariel.

Your "kilij" is not an isolated example, SE Asian weaponry is full of such probable mispronunciations or misunderstandings.

Still, one thing continues to bother me, and that is the use of the term "name game" to refer to serious investigation, as well as to uninformed application of names for less than serious reasons by less than serious people.

Personally, I would much prefer the serious researchers to be carried in a separate bucket to that which contains people who want a name at any cost, so that the relevant item can be filed into the "correct" pigeonhole.

[Emanuel]

Hello,

Mercenary, leaving your "primary school little game" aside...

A variety of Sanskrit dictionaries define kattara as simply dagger:
http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?s...e&direction=AU.

Kattara is not just the blade. In the 16th-17th Northern Indian context it appears to have been a court dagger worn in the sash with a narrow, piercing blade. This is also clear from the Ain-i-Akbari, which lists katara as a "long and narrow dagger".

I have not yet read your article, but here are additional sources to study.

The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri (Memoirs of Jahangir) includes a number of references to the phul-kattara being gifted year after year at the New Year's feast. Sometimes it is noted as just a phul-katara, other times it is specifically qualified as a phul-katara studded with jewels.

The full text is accessible here in a variety of formats: https://archive.org/details/tuzukijahangirio00jahauoft and the text is searchable.

Some passages essentially repeating the same structure, with some variations:

This idea was a very good one, and on this account, on the 6th of Day, at the hour fixed upon, I despatched him in happiness and triumph. I presented him with a qaba (outer coat) of gold brocade with jewelled flowers and pearls round the flowers, a brocaded turban with strings of pearls, a gold woven sash with chains of pearls, one of my private elephants called Fath Gaj, with trappings, a special horse, a jewelled sword, and a jewelled khapiva, with a phill katdra.

Nur-Jahan Begam prepared a feast of victory for my son Shah Jahan, and conferred on him dresses of honour of great price, with a nadiri with embroidered flowers, adorned with rare pearls, a sarplch (turban ornament) decorated with rare gems, a turban with a fringe of pearls, a waistbelt studded with pearls, a sword with jewelled pardala (belt), a phul Jcatdra (dagger), a sada (?) of pearls, with two horses, one of which had a jewelled saddle, and a special elephant with two females.

The next day I sent a phul-katara (dagger) studded with valuable jewels to Burhanpur to Khan Jahan.

he waited on me, and presented as an offering 1,000 muhrs, 1,000 rupees, 4 rubies, 20 pearls, 1 emerald, and a jewelled phul katara, the total value being 50,000 rupees.

Additional translations of the text are available here:
http://persian.packhum.org/persian/m...0%26work%3D001

On Yādgār ‘Alī there were bestowed a horse with a jewelled saddle, a jewelled sword, a vest without sleeves with gold embroidery, an aigrette with feathers and a jīgha (turban ornament), and 30,000 rupees in cash, altogether 40,000 rupees, and on Khān ‘Ālam a jewelled khapwa or phūl kaṭāra (a sort of dagger) with a pendant of royal pearls.

My fortunate son, Shāh-Jahān, sent with him the brother of Afẓal K., his Diwan. As Qubu-l-mulk had shown attachment and desire to please, and repeatedly importuned me for a portrait, I presented him, at his request, with my likeness, a jewelled khapwa, and a phūl kaṭāra. 24,000 darb, a jewelled dagger, a horse, and a dress of honour were also given to the aforesaid Mīr Sharīf.

Elgood documented what was shown to him in Jaipur as phul katara. They are dagger with narrow piercing blades, with floral hilts. Some examples of these might have been jeweled, and some might have crucible steel blades.

I am well aware of the addition of a variety of plant material to the crucible loads to impart carbon to the iron. That does not mean flower dagger = wootz.

All the best,
Emanuel

[Mercenary]

))
THE JAHANGIRNAMA
Memoirs of Jahangir, Emperor of India
Translated, edited, and annotated by Wheeler M. Thackston
FREER GALLERY OF ART ® ARTHUR M. SACKLER GALLERY
S}nithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
in association witFi
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
New York ® Oxford

jewel-studded khapwa with a phul-katara, p.148

jewel-studded khapwa with a phul-katara, p.154

a jeweled dagger with a phul-katara, p.180

a jeweled khapwa with a phul-katara, p. 293

a jeweled khapwa with a phul-katara, p.303

a royal dagger with a phul-katara, p.394

a jeweled khapwa with a phul-katara, p.429

Try more. Good luck!

[Mercenary]

Dear colleagues, just smile ))))

[Mercenary]

But I'm not kidding. Why in Ain-i-Akbari there are nothing information about the dagger "phul-katara", while it was an ordinary item for gift? And a very prestigious gift for the first persons? Although Abu-l Fazl says even about "karmahi" - very rare but real weapon?

[ariel]

First of all, not every weapon known to us by its ( presumed) name was mentioned in that book.
Second, this book listed weapons, not their modes of decoration.
No sense listing a dagger with a flower-like handle, since there must have been examples of the same dagger without it, or with handles of a variety of different styles.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ariel

First of all, not every weapon known to us by its ( presumed) name was mentioned in that book.
Second, this book listed weapons, not their modes of decoration.
No sense listing a dagger with a flower-like handle, since there must have been examples of the same dagger without it, or with handles of a variety of different styles.

Very sensibly noted.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

First of all, not every weapon known to us by its ( presumed) name was mentioned in that book.
Second, this book listed weapons, not their modes of decoration.
No sense listing a dagger with a flower-like handle, since there must have been examples of the same dagger without it, or with handles of a variety of different styles.

So it is no separate kind of dagger. This is progress.
What do you think were there any different types of hilt decoration at Jahangir court?

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

They are dagger ... with floral hilts. Some examples of these might have been jeweled,

I think that such daggers are very beautiful. Can I see some of them?
And be so kind what are you mean by "floral hilts"?

[ariel]

Floral hilt is a hilt with a flower ( or flowers) as its main decoration.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

Floral hilt is a hilt with a flower ( or flowers) as its main decoration.

O! I see! I have realised why at Jahangir court all the daggers were with phul-katara:
(pictures from Robert Hales's book)

[Mercenary]

More:

[ariel]

No need to exaggerate: I said " main decoration"
The upper panel would suffice.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

No need to exaggerate: I said " main decoration"
The upper panel would suffice.

Ok. So you think there are "phul-kattara" on the pictures with the upper panel?

[Emanuel]

Hi Mercenary,

We are working from two different translations of Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri (Memoirs of Jahangir). Not having access to the original text and not having a linguistic background, I cannot say which one is more correct. The translation I used indicated that phul katara can sometimes be jeweled and sometimes not.

For the Ain-i-Akbari, I used the plate from Egerton. A katara is clearly labelled.

Thank you for the excellent pictures. To clarify I would consider the bottom 3 and rightmost examples in the attached images as phul katara. The top of the hilt is clearly floral, and matches the examples in Elgood closely. Elgood used the words "gourd", "seedpod","leaves","flowers". He also comments that such hilts can be found in ivory and nephrite in some numbers and were obviously fashionable throughout the Rajput courts until later 18th-19th centuries.

There is no need to be confrontational about this topic. It was merely pointed out to you that your proof that "phul-katara" meant "wootz blade" is problematic. You derived that understanding from the similarity between the words phul=flower, with phulad (also transliterated as phulad or fulad or pulad)=steel. Then you tried to argue the relevance of this association with the use of plants in crucible steel production.

Again, Ann Feuerbach and other academics on the topic of crucible steel presented good arguments for the etymology of the word pulad (also known as bulad or bulat in Central Asia) as derived from Sanskrit for "purified iron":
पूत "pu" लोह "auha/loha" = pure/clean/purified iron.

That's all.

Emanuel

[Emanuel]

Some more of what I think of as jewelled phul katara.

[Emanuel]

Since we have two versions of the plate from the Ain-i-Akbari here, I thought I would add another from Aziz, Abdul, Arms and jewellery of the Indian Mughuls, Lahore, 1947. Originally posted by Jens.

(1) Shamshir, (2) Khanda, (3-4) Gupti ‘asa and sheath, (5) Jamdhar, (6) Khanjar, (7) Jamkhak (according to Blockmann; name in plate therefore wrong), (8) Bank, (9) Janbwa (name in plate wrong again), (10) Narsingh-moth (so in Blochmann; in plate the name is pesh-qabz), (11) Katara, (12) Kaman (bow), (13) Takhsh-kaman (small bow) and arrow, (14) Tarkash (quiver), (15) Paikan-kash (arrow-drawer).

Of interest here is #11, Katara. It has a jamadhar handle, but the narrow piercing blade is important.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Emanuel,
I will not get mixed up in the discussion, but no 11 as you mention has the 'katar' hilt, a rather narrow blade - but it is curved.
The 'katars' seen in miniatures from Akbar's time look more like the one at the top.
Jens

[Jim McDougall]

Discussion here continues to be interesting, though mostly of course simply perspective on a well established conundrum in the study of arms which remains perplexing. The good thing here is bringing together various examples of the semantics and transliteration issues in trying to classify ethnographic weapons, and developing a kind of status quo.

As noted, the term 'name game' is concerning to some as it suggests a less than serious concern for the issue at hand. It is however, in my opinion, simply an idiomatic term used among individuals with regard to discussion of their common interests and not significant as far as an actual practice. The discussion and study are of course not a 'game' but it is a comfortable expression used among those engaged in focus on the topic at hand.

I think that in many cases where identification and classification of weapons where there is any notable variation or exception, there should be qualifying description added. This might include a note pertaining to other matters such as alternate terms or altered description, such as 'British infantry officers straight sabre of 1780, also often termed 'spadroon'.
An Indian katar (properly 'jamadhar') probably 18th century, N. India.
In this case, more a working caption, but not misleading or confusing.

The 'phul phactor' is here seen as a bit more 'colorful' (good one on the 'price list' Mercenary I think the humor was missed as often the case). Here a bit more defined description might be necessary.

The idea of a compilation of weapon related terms in a glossary to be used as a cross reference is actually not a bad idea, and actually has been in degree well illustrated on this thread.
In some ways I think of some of the literature and Kiplingesque terms of the British Raj, and the use of Hobson-Jobson catalog of such terms as applied along with proper English and Indian terms.

[Emanuel]

Yes it seems like a lot of these daggers were more or less curved.

I just realized Jens, that you had posted a lovely plate from the Moser collection catalogue a long time ago.

Ultimately the name of these daggers is indeed a matter of semantics. The fact remains that they are marvellous things, regardless of what we call them

[Jens Nordlunde]

Emanuel, in the Aziz book you mentioned the phul-katara, it is mentioned about ten times, here are a few quotes.

Page 9. "Among the articles presented by Nur Jahan to Prince Shah Jahan on Thursday, the 27 Mirh (Xii ruling year), were a waisy-band studded with pearls, a sword with jewelled shoulder belt (paradala) and a phul-katara."
Here the phul-katara stands alone, unlike in the other places where it is mentioned.

Page 97. "WhenShah Shuja was sent on the Deccan expedition (22 Safar, 1043) he received a spaccil robe of honour with gold-worked Nadiri, a jewelled khapwa with phul-katara, a jewelled sword....."

Page 143. "The Emperor bestoved on the bridegroom [Sultan Sulaiman Shukoh, te eldest sone of Dara Shukoh] a robe of honour........a jewelled jamdhar with phul-katara........."
The plate you show in your last mail is from the Moser catalogue 1912.
Lets say that phul-katara was the flowers like on the dagger in the midle. How can it then be explained that flowers like that can be placed on a jamdahar/katar? The only place I can think of, is chiselled on the blade, gilded and with gems inlaid. But we dont know if it was so.

In the plate you showed from Arms and Jewellery there are three 'katars'.
No 5. Jamdahar. Looking like most of the katars we know to day.
no 10. Narsingh-moth. Blade narrow and curved.
no 11. Katara. Side guards bend outwards, blade as broad as the ´hilt and curved.
Here is a quote from page 53-54. "The katar or Katara is a beautiful weapon with handle similar to thar of the jamdhar, but the blade is much narrower and longer, and is curved.
Irvin quotes the following from the translator of the Siyar: 'A poignard peculiar to India made with a hilt, whose two branches extend along the arm, so as to shelter the hand and part of the arm............ The total length is 2 or 2½ feet, one half of it being the blade." It is also mentioned in the text, no quoted, that the blade is very thick with two cutting edges, having a breadth of three inches at the hilt and a solid point of about one inch in breadth.
The description above sounds more like a jamdhar, than a description of the two others.
Maybe someone saw a katara, heard the name and forun that all daggers with such a hilt must have been named the same - or found it easier to do so.
Jens

[Emanuel]

Hi Jens,

Simple answer is that I have no idea. A floral hilt on what we think of jamadhar with arm bars makes no sense.

Like you say, we dont know if it was so. We have multiple terms in English translations apparently used interchangeably (katar, katara, khanjar, jamadhar, khapwa). We still don't know if the term referred to specific handle type, blade type, curvature, thickness, or entire ensemble. The use of these terms seems to have changed over time place.

Maybe katara referred just to a narrow blade, slightly curved. Maybe not. Like most things, there were probably qualifiers to denote more specific uses (ex. slashing knife, stabbing knife, dagger, punch-dagger, etc...).

Based on the sources at my disposal, my thinking was that the term phul-katara matched a dagger that has a narrow, piercing, slightly curved blade, and some form of major floral hilt. Could be jewelled or not. Ivory, or other material like jade/nephratite.

Unless we go to the original texts and associate them with period illustrations, we know nothing

Then again we have the Ain-i-Akbari in Urdu, and the Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri in Persian covering matters in the Mughal context.

What do we have from the Rajputs?

Emanuel

[Jens Nordlunde]

Emanuel,
We dont have very much hiis early, and the drawings like the ones from Ani-Akbar would at best leave something to guessing.
There is of course the description of the katar - katara/jamdhar/narsingh-moth.
My guess is, that the Europeians choose one name for daggers with this kind of hilt - but this is purely guessing.

The katars shown in the Akbar miniatures are clearly jamdahars, and I try to research this, as there is something funny/strange, but I am not prepared to discuss anything about it yet.

A pity I did not contact you when I was in Toronto some years ago :-).

Jens

[Emanuel]

There are indeed some interesting things in those Akbar miniatures. I'm looking through the copies I found online and there is lots to extract and dissect.

A pity indeed. Next time you come by our shores, please do drop a line

Emanuel

[Emanuel]

Having hijacked Mercenary's thread enough (my apologies ), I moved discussion of Akbar's weapons specifically, here: http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=20629

Emanuel

[Jens Nordlunde]

I am sorry to say that it will not happend again - a trip to Canada. I found it fantastic - but I hated the time of flying to Canada and over Canada to the west coast - thirteen hours of flying and about two hours of waiting.
So much more I regret not to have contacted you.
Jens