A katar is a katar till......

ariel · 15th June 2019, 08:11 PM

I am not so pessimistic and dismissive about the value of the already existing books and articles. Purely statistically, only 2.5% of all published stuff is of tangible value. The bottom line,- choose what you want to read:-)
I find Jens’ paper “ How old is the Katar?” belonging to these 2.5%. It gives more actual historical information than anything I have gotten from the rest or books I have in my library. Of course, it is purely factual as are all historical studies: one cannot perform an experiment to validate one’s historical hypothesis , as is the norm in physics, physiology, engineering etc.
But I would strongly advise any person aspiring to re-write the “book” on the Katar to read it carefully.
One could notice that in the 12 century book “Pritviraj Raso” there already was a term for double- edged objects: dodhara ( just like the saw-edged objects aradam and arapusta: Indians were notorious for the obsessive-compulsive approach to precise descriptions). Thanks One could also put into his mental piggy bank that the Sanskritized names of Jamadhara and Katar are mentioned separately , telling us that those were separate ( at least in some way) weapons.

One would have to take the above into account while conducting a novel study of katars. Jens gave a superb basis for future endeavors; we may ignore it at our peril.

ariel · 15th June 2019, 09:31 PM

Fernando,

You have nailed it!
Jens have attributed the oldest Katar to Orissa.
Jamdhar village is in the Kendrapara district. But not far away , in the Sambalpur district there is a village Katarbag.
Isn’t it obvious that these 2 villages used to be invention and production centers of this peculiar punch dagger that they called after their localities?

I am going to write a paper to The Journal of Irreproducible Results with this brilliant analysis and in the best ( or worst) tradition of academic research will appropriate full credit for this momentous discovery! Your name will not even be mentioned.
The Ig Nobel will be mine and mine alone!

After all, as Kissinger was fond of saying, academic battles are vicious because the stakes are very small.

Tongue in cheek, boys, tongue in cheek:-)

Jim McDougall · 15th June 2019, 11:21 PM

I think Jens' work on the katar (jamadhar) is not only superb, but even surpasses assignment to any percentile of published arms material of 'tangible value' of a statistic of 2.5% (unsure of how this is calculated). I would say that his work on the katar is in the top ranking, without such numbers. I think the assessment of tangible value is purely subjective as it depends on what is being sought in the material. As I had mentioned, much material serves as benchmark for future research.

With Jens' work, I know how intensely and for how many years he researched all of this, and how carefully scrutinized he vetted his material before publishing. Still, even he will not consider his work the final word on the katar, and his research never stops.

I do appreciate the tongue in cheek humor in associating this term or its variants to places and presuming some sort of central location named for the weapon or in some tenuous way related to them. Ironically, this kind of approach still lurks among arms researchers. Pant used this sort of idea in some of the terms for regional hilt forms on tulwars, such as 'Delhi shahi' as that was where the style was 'invented', among others. However we know hilt styling was not 'invented' in any particular moment or place, but they evolved subtly over time and in undetermined locations.

Humor is always good, as sometimes serious research and discussion can get kinda heavy sometimes.

15th June 2019, 08:11 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I am not so pessimistic and dismissive about the value of the already existing books and articles. Purely statistically, only 2.5% of all published stuff is of tangible value. The bottom line,- choose what you want to read:-) I find Jens’ paper “ How old is the Katar?” belonging to these 2.5%. It gives more actual historical information than anything I have gotten from the rest or books I have in my library. Of course, it is purely factual as are all historical studies: one cannot perform an experiment to validate one’s historical hypothesis , as is the norm in physics, physiology, engineering etc. But I would strongly advise any person aspiring to re-write the “book” on the Katar to read it carefully. One could notice that in the 12 century book “Pritviraj Raso” there already was a term for double- edged objects: dodhara ( just like the saw-edged objects aradam and arapusta: Indians were notorious for the obsessive-compulsive approach to precise descriptions). Thanks One could also put into his mental piggy bank that the Sanskritized names of Jamadhara and Katar are mentioned separately , telling us that those were separate ( at least in some way) weapons. One would have to take the above into account while conducting a novel study of katars. Jens gave a superb basis for future endeavors; we may ignore it at our peril.

15th June 2019, 09:31 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Fernando, You have nailed it! Jens have attributed the oldest Katar to Orissa. Jamdhar village is in the Kendrapara district. But not far away , in the Sambalpur district there is a village Katarbag. Isn’t it obvious that these 2 villages used to be invention and production centers of this peculiar punch dagger that they called after their localities? I am going to write a paper to The Journal of Irreproducible Results with this brilliant analysis and in the best ( or worst) tradition of academic research will appropriate full credit for this momentous discovery! Your name will not even be mentioned. The Ig Nobel will be mine and mine alone! After all, as Kissinger was fond of saying, academic battles are vicious because the stakes are very small. Tongue in cheek, boys, tongue in cheek:-)

15th June 2019, 11:21 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,717	I think Jens' work on the katar (jamadhar) is not only superb, but even surpasses assignment to any percentile of published arms material of 'tangible value' of a statistic of 2.5% (unsure of how this is calculated). I would say that his work on the katar is in the top ranking, without such numbers. I think the assessment of tangible value is purely subjective as it depends on what is being sought in the material. As I had mentioned, much material serves as benchmark for future research. With Jens' work, I know how intensely and for how many years he researched all of this, and how carefully scrutinized he vetted his material before publishing. Still, even he will not consider his work the final word on the katar, and his research never stops. I do appreciate the tongue in cheek humor in associating this term or its variants to places and presuming some sort of central location named for the weapon or in some tenuous way related to them. Ironically, this kind of approach still lurks among arms researchers. Pant used this sort of idea in some of the terms for regional hilt forms on tulwars, such as 'Delhi shahi' as that was where the style was 'invented', among others. However we know hilt styling was not 'invented' in any particular moment or place, but they evolved subtly over time and in undetermined locations. Humor is always good, as sometimes serious research and discussion can get kinda heavy sometimes.