Jamdhar katari - a theory

[ariel]

Yes, all true....
But why the language of Pars is Farsi? Why the F- word?

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Yes, all true....
But why the language of Pars is Farsi? Why the F- word?

Does it have to do with the use of Persian/Arabic script not having a letter for "p"?! "Pars" is also written as "Fars" in Nasta-liq. The Fars province in Iran is also called Pars.

[Jim McDougall]

I always find linguistics fascinating, and this part of the discussion is truly interesting. It is a very big part of arms study, as we have always seen with what we here have called 'the name game' affectionately, however while I once somewhat dismissed the relevance, I have come to view it quite differently.

Regarding my misspeaking on the Tsarkoe Selo Collection and my assumption that Egerton may not have had insight into it...…..I wanted to thank Mahratt again for correcting me. With that I finally 'excavated' my copy of Egerton, and realized I should have gone to it in the first place rather than relying on my clearly fallible memory

As Ariel noted, indeed the frontispiece was FROM that Russian collection, and Egerton describes specifically the value of these folio/volumes which he was quite aware of as he began his collecting in 1855 (he published in 1880).


Here Mercenary directed that the use of the term 'jamdhar' was clearly used for the transverse grip dagger which we now term katar (Egerton, p.23 shows the illustrated page from Ain I Akbari) . As Mercenary suggested it WAS indeed documented as the term here and it was 16th century.

In the same page, the Ain I Akbari illustrates the very dagger of the Kafir/Kalash as the 'katarah' as the vertical H shape hilt (pommel and guard perpendicular to grip).


It was suggested that perhaps the term ch'hura (choora) might have been used to describe these Kafir daggers. Here I would note discussions going back to 2007 regarding the more commonly known daggers of Khyber regions termed 'choora' by collectors today.

Egerton plate XIV shows one of these (#624) and describes it as a pesh kabz. It is further attributed to 'Banu' and the embossed brass mounts noted.

Banu refers to Bannuchi tribe of Khyber regions who use a small hafted pick termed 'Lohar' (Stone). It is interesting that these lohar picks are often of the same character and decoration as the 'pesh kabz' form which we now term 'choora'.


Apparently if I recall research correctly (here I go again) Lohar refers to a dialect of Hindi and the people who were itinerant blacksmiths and metal workers who frequented Northwest Frontier regions, and somehow the term became applied to these small picks.


This would add impetus to the notion that ch'hura, a colloquial term in Sanskrit with various connotations might be applied to these pesh kabz variant form knives. While attributed often to the Mahsud tribes, they of course were widely found, and in effect seem to be smaller versions of the T blade 'karud', another knife which seems to have been considered in the pesh kabz spectrum in the 1860s and even by Holstein (1931).


So in summary, it would seem that jamdhar indeed was known term for transverse grip dagger in 16th c. and the traditional dagger with wide pommel and guard (of the form used by Kalash) was known as katarah.


The term ch'hura (which term also seems well known in Hindu bridal beads) does not seem likely to have been used by Kalash for these daggers. In my view the ch'hura term was likely misinterpreted in seeking terms for specific weapons as noted in the 2007 discussions.

This was likely in the manner of presuming the term for the small picks, often fashioned by the Lohar people, and the decoration etc. of these as well as the fancy daggers might have had the term ch'hura used in conversation asking for terms called by. Perhaps reference to the fancy Hindu bridal beads etc. ? It does not seem the pejorative connotation of ch'hura used otherwise would be the case.


Attached are the 'choora' dagger and the haft/hilt of the lohar axe.....note the similar 'beak' effect at pommel which seem shared in many examples, and the similarity on decoration and materials.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Does it have to do with the use of Persian/Arabic script not having a letter for "p"?! "Pars" is also written as "Fars" in Nasta-liq. The Fars province in Iran is also called Pars.

Bravo!
Only the matter is not in the absense of a letter “p”, but of a sound “p”.
Arabs replace it with either f or b.
Old biblical town Shkhem after the destruction of the Second Temple was re-named Neapolis by the victorious Romans. When the Arab captured it in the VII century, they kept the Roman name, but pronounced it as Nablus. A beautiful stream with waterfalls at the Northern Golan Heights was a spa town for Roman officers. They called it Panus ( one of the minor deities, always drunk and horny). Arabs call it Banias.
That is how you find them in Wiki even today.

The easiest example of a p-to-f transition is old biblical Plishtin becoming Palestina by Roman decree and Filastin in Arabic.

Just for a change, we are not dealing here with complex linguistical constructions, just with the simplest phonetics,yes siree:-) . Kind of like Kard/Karud.

[ariel]

Jim McDougall:
“I once somewhat dismissed the relevance, I have come to view it quite differently.”
——————————————————————————————


Jim,
I am glad you have seen the light:-)
History of everything consists of multiple facets and needs to be looked at from different angles.

The “ name game” can be ridiculous or enlightening depending on the question asked and the quality of an answer. But the same is true about engineering aspects of different weapons, their usage, materials, decorations, etc.

Each and every approach adds something new and potentially important to our understanding of the fascinating subject of the history of weapons. Ignoring names or mis-naming the objects is as detrimental to our understanding of their history as ignoring their sacral meanings.

I have a term for it, “ The Rumpelstiltskin syndrome”: know my name and you become my master. And the corollary: misname me at your peril.

In a way, our Kris colleagues got it right: they are meticulous about naming different pamors and minute details of structure and decorations and correlating them with local traditions of manufacture, sacral and mystical features of their objects of interest, names of masters, materials, age etc. I tried but could never become really interested in Indonesian weapons, but I admire their aficionados.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ariel

Jim McDougall:
“I once somewhat dismissed the relevance, I have come to view it quite differently.”
——————————————————————————————


Jim,
I am glad you have seen the light:-)
History of everything consists of multiple facets and needs to be looked at from different angles.

The “ name game” can be ridiculous or enlightening depending on the question asked and the quality of an answer. But the same is true about engineering aspects of different weapons, their usage, materials, decorations, etc.

Each and every approach adds something new and potentially important to our understanding of the fascinating subject of the history of weapons. Ignoring names or mis-naming the objects is as detrimental to our understanding of their history as ignoring their sacral meanings.

I have a term for it, “ The Rumpelstiltskin syndrome”: know my name and you become my master. And the corollary: misname me at your peril.

In a way, our Kris colleagues got it right: they are meticulous about naming different pamors and minute details of structure and decorations and correlating them with local traditions of manufacture, sacral and mystical features of their objects of interest, names of masters, materials, age etc. I tried but could never become really interested in Indonesian weapons, but I admire their aficionados.

Ariel, it does seem I have a good number of ephiphanies of late.......does this mean Im getting old?

I like the Rumpelstiltskin bit!!!!

[ariel]

You are not the only one with epiphanies:-)
But, as they say, not always wisdom comes with old age, sometimes old age comes alone.And.....youth is wasted on the young.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

... But, as they say, not always wisdom comes with old age, sometimes old age comes alone. And.....youth is wasted on the young.

Brilliant ...and so true .
Another one to be beaten is:
“Information is not knowledge.
Knowledge is not wisdom.
Wisdom is not truth.... “
FZ (1940-1993).

- Herewith an Indo-Portuguese oil painting depicting three Malabar warriors with musket, tulwar, katar, shield an pata. In the back a view of Pangim over the river Mandovi, backed by the fortresses of Aguada and Reis Magos.
(collection Georg Scheder-Bieschin. How i envy this guy

... And by the way, pick one of these below... from the said glossary. "Cotari" was the key (in Portuguese).



.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by ariel

In a way, our Kris colleagues got it right: they are meticulous about naming different pamors and minute details of structure and decorations and correlating them with local traditions of manufacture, sacral and mystical features of their objects of interest, names of masters, materials, age etc.

I dare say we'd be lost in there without nomenclature Ariel.
On the other hand, many features have multiple names depending upon the particular keris culture we are discussing.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Rick

I dare say we'd be lost in there without nomenclature Ariel.
On the other hand, many features have multiple names depending upon the particular keris culture we are discussing.

The keris has to me always been one of the most daunting fields of study, not only for the variety and scope of the form, but the very subjective and powerful traditions held deeply in their tradition. I have always admired the tenacity and dedication of those who have mastered these complexities.

With what I do know of keris study is that the nomenclature does seem pretty clearly set, and while there are dialectic variations in expressing these terms, they do not seem to carry as much dispute as with transliterations and colloquial misunderstandings with other ethnographic forms. If I am not mistaken, my limited foray into the keris field seemed as if the terms were often cross references or noted with variations to eliminate misunderstandings.

That is what I wish could be better accomplished in the study of these various ethnographic forms, to simply cross reference the various terms rather than place an adamant classification which will inevitably be disputed.
As has been said many times, according to ones perspective, the same weapon will be referred to by various terms, and the use of variant terms affords more universal understanding.

As noted, the nomenclature is very essential in the understanding of the complex nature of the keris and its varying forms culturally, just as we study other ethnographic weapon forms in similar manner.

[Mercenary]

.