![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,459
|
![]() Quote:
As you note, the curved side bars are quite likely to have existed in other than the 'garsoe' termed versions, and even earlier, however not that I have been aware of, which is the objective of my query, to become aware of others. The plate you show of these daggers is most telling, and ironically Pant seems to have fallen into the same 'trap' that Egerton did in the 'cross use' of a term. Pant had emphatically rebutted the use of 'katar' for the transverse grip dagger he claims was initiated by Egerton, and actually describes the 'jamadhar' . Here clearly he includes 'bichwa' and another curious baselard looking dagger which has normally configured hilt with 'H' shape, all as 'jamadhars'. Given the suggested definition of jamadhar as 'tooth of death' or to that effect, there does not seem to be any qualification to a dagger with a distinctive 'transverse grip'. Could the inclusion of these other daggers in a plate identified as 'jamadhars' be an editing error with publishers? or was it indeed an interpolation by Pant himself? Is Pant's effort to rebut Egerton's work perhaps too arbitrary? and possibly the jamadhar term had been more broadly used than thought? That does seem to be the case with vernacular use of words and terms in many cases, and the name game ever plagues historians. Last edited by Battara; 24th October 2019 at 11:41 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|