Jamdhar katari - a theory

[fernando]

Originally Posted by mahratt

... Dear fernando, your impression is not right I do not argue.

Of course you don't .

Originally Posted by mahratt

... For example, my grandfather was a tankman, but this does not mean that I can manage a tank. ...

Have you ever tried ? i guess you would manage well .

Originally Posted by mahratt

...Crocodiles in India attacked people

Not only in India, as you should know; take Africa, for one. And it is not only because they get the habit by eating corpses; living warm blood mammals are just fine for their diet.

[Mercenary]

This term was used for different kind of weapon because in meant just "to cut" (as a rule for a straight item). Ibn Batuta in fact described jamdhar, but with the blade two cubits long (one metr?). May be it was proto-pata?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

... Ibn Batuta in fact described jamdhar, but with the blade two cubits long (one metr?). May be it was proto-pata?

Two cubits measure 90 cms., which is also the longest known length of katars. But you are probably right. Unless it was a hybrid of both ... or other period styles; India had/has such immense profusion of weapons !

[Jim McDougall]

It seems it was cleared up years ago (we have been discussing and researching katars here for over 20 yrs) that the jamadhar was actually the transverse gripped dagger we have known collectively as the katar. The error in term seems to have originated with Egerton (1885) who transposed the terms in his description. This was well pointed out by Pant (1980) and noted that despite the proper term 'jamdhar' for the 'katar'......he seems to have juxtaposed the two with the classification of the 'jamdhar/katari'.

As this was the actual topic of this thread when it began, it seems appropriate to reattend to it here.

The jamdhar/kitari is an H shaped hilt on a dagger blade, and as Egerton has described, well known in Nepal (#344-45) I know this form of dagger, actually termed 'katara' is indeed well known there as a good friend from Germany who travelled in Nepal extensively for many years, always found them in great number there.
Also, these were well known in Nuristan( formerly Kafiristan) in India, where they were used by tribes known as Kafirs. These tribes relocated in regions in Chitral and are now known as the Kalash people. In research on them I communicated with tribal elders and others of this heritage.

Image of katara attached.


The katar (jamdhar) we are familiar with seems to have mysteriously appeared much earlier than the examples we know now of 17th-19th c.
and as noted is even described in writings of 13th-14th c. as katar. But do we know what weapon was actually meant? No.

The 'katar' term seems a well used cognate of words for cut or knife etc.


It seems that early examples of katar from Vijayanagara etc. are indeed larger than later examples (I am not familiar with cubits, aside from use describing the ark). It does seem that the hooded examples probably did inspire the eventual evolution of the pata.


The description used as 'dirk' for katar is believed to have derived from the common repurposing of blades, whether broken or otherwise, from full size swords...in the manner of Scottish dirks. We know it was common practice to reue the valuable blades from basket hilts into dirks. When these were proscribed in the 18th c. the dirk was still allowed as it was regarded as utilitarian.

When European blades flooded into India in late 16th-17th c. they were often fashioned into katar blades.


Now all of this is truly DIGRESSION......back to the actual topic here.....the JAMDHAR KATARI .

[Mercenary]

Thanks Jim. I only can added that these daggers in huge numbers got to Nepal from Bihar and Bengal along with fakirs after the suppression of their rebellion in 1799.
And not "jamdhar katari". Just "katar" or "katara"/"katarah". Dagger of Kafirs are an another type. I do not know what they are

[ariel]

Mahratt,
I intentionally do not react to your posts and this is my second appeal to you to do the same.
If you want to express your opinion related to my comments on this Forum, first, please keep it to yourself. If unable to do so , please express yourself in a civilized manner , without ad hominem attacks. This is obviously OK on the Russian Forum, but not here.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Mahratt,
I intentionally do not react to your posts and this is my second appeal to you to do the same.
If you want to express your opinion related to my comments on this Forum, first, please keep it to yourself. If unable to do so , please express yourself in a civilized manner , without ad hominem attacks. This is obviously OK on the Russian Forum, but not here.

Ariel,
I know that you deliberately do not answer if you do not have an answer. This is a very convenient position. It seemed to me that this is an open forum, where everyone can express their opinions. I do not express the opinion "about your comments". I lead the discussion. Isn't the forum created to share information and debate using facts?
You personally have not been attacked (In addition to the fact that I asked you to argue your words with facts, and not "play with words").
By the way, You accuse me in what I do "ad hominem attacks", and you yourself speak insultingly about the Russian forum.

However, maybe we will return to the topic of discussion? For example, in the context of traditional Indian culture. Well, or at least we can discuss what is more important for the study of weapons, the images that are on the coins or images on miniatures and other works of art?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Thanks Jim. I only can added that these daggers in huge numbers got to Nepal from Bihar and Bengal along with fakirs after the suppression of their rebellion in 1799.
And not "jamdhar katari". Just "katar" or "katara"/"katarah". Dagger of Kafirs are an another type. I do not know what they are

Thank you so much for the attention to my post in trying to get back to the topic of this thread, the jamdhar-katari, which Stan posted so thoughtfully some 7 years ago.
As I was desperately trying to illustrate amid the rest of this specious katar discussion, the KATARA was indeed the dagger which was illustrated as the dagger of the Kafir people of what is now Nuristan (a province in Eastern Afghanistan). As I noted, I did research on these people, now called Kalash and situated in regions of Chitral to the west in Afghanistan.

In my research I obtained the two volume set of "The Kafirs of Hindu Kush: A Study of the Waigal and Ashkun Kafirs" by Max Klimburg (1999).
In this book these daggers are illustrated and called katara.


I hope I can make this clear enough as it was queried in the original post 7 years ago. The transverse grip dagger we these days call katar…...was originally called jamdhar. Egerton in his writing (1885) for some yet unknown reason termed these H hilt daggers attributed to Nepal the JAMDHAR-KITARI.

What transpired after this appears that the jamdhar term which SHOULD have been used for the many transverse gripped daggers illustrated inexplicably became noted as katars. This profound oversight or error became the ever known term for these daggers in the literature to this day.


The note that the katara daggers got to Nepal via the fakirs rebellion from Bengal is most interesting and I would not dispute that this form was known over many regions in these areas, and surely not exclusive only to the Kafirs any more than people in Nepal. I have always been under the impression that fakirs were not allowed weapons and used their innovative and 'disguised' forms.....but in a formalized insurgence the use of any weapon would be understood.


This again is simply another futile effort to address the topic of the thread originally and avoid further attention to the specious debate digressing presently, and frankly disappointingly ridiculous.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you so much for the attention to my post in trying to get back to the topic of this thread, the jamdhar-katari, which Stan posted so thoughtfully some 7 years ago.
As I was desperately trying to illustrate amid the rest of this specious katar discussion, the KATARA was indeed the dagger which was illustrated as the dagger of the Kafir people of what is now Nuristan (a province in Eastern Afghanistan). As I noted, I did research on these people, now called Kalash and situated in regions of Chitral to the west in Afghanistan.

In my research I obtained the two volume set of "The Kafirs of Hindu Kush: A Study of the Waigal and Ashkun Kafirs" by Max Klimburg (1999).
In this book these daggers are illustrated and called katara.


I hope I can make this clear enough as it was queried in the original post 7 years ago. The transverse grip dagger we these days call katar…...was originally called jamdhar. Egerton in his writing (1885) for some yet unknown reason termed these H hilt daggers attributed to Nepal the JAMDHAR-KITARI.

What transpired after this appears that the jamdhar term which SHOULD have been used for the many transverse gripped daggers illustrated inexplicably became noted as katars. This profound oversight or error became the ever known term for these daggers in the literature to this day.


The note that the katara daggers got to Nepal via the fakirs rebellion from Bengal is most interesting and I would not dispute that this form was known over many regions in these areas, and surely not exclusive only to the Kafirs any more than people in Nepal. I have always been under the impression that fakirs were not allowed weapons and used their innovative and 'disguised' forms.....but in a formalized insurgence the use of any weapon would be understood.


This again is simply another futile effort to address the topic of the thread originally and avoid further attention to the specious debate digressing presently, and frankly disappointingly ridiculous.

Thank you very much. I will study your post many times. But what do you think, it is correct to compare the dagger of 2nd century and Kafir's dagger of the first post of thread. How old are Kafirs? )))

P.S. Maybe moderator will let Ariel and Mahratt write here in Russian? It is the native language for both, I think it will be better for all.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I have always been under the impression that fakirs were not allowed weapons and used their innovative and 'disguised' forms.....but in a formalized insurgence the use of any weapon would be understood.
.

"Fakirs" it is the name given by Europeans to a large group of people including ascetic-warriors. They were really not allowed weapons... but after 1799 and not in Nepal )

http://indianfight.com/fighting-ascetics/

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... I hope I can make this clear enough as it was queried in the original post 7 years ago. The transverse grip dagger we these days call katar…...was originally called jamdhar. Egerton in his writing (1885) for some yet unknown reason termed these H hilt daggers attributed to Nepal the JAMDHAR-KITARI.
What transpired after this appears that the jamdhar term which SHOULD have been used for the many transverse gripped daggers illustrated inexplicably became noted as katars. This profound oversight or error became the ever known term for these daggers in the literature to this day...

Can you establish a relation in that, according to what i have been told, the term "Kuthar" was used by Rajendralala Mitra (The Antiquaries of Orissa) in 1876, thus earlier than Egerton adopted the term "Katar".


.