Jamdhar katari - a theory

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Using of katar. Maybe piercing through the mail.

Illustration from Genghis-nama. Mugals, 16c.
"Turkish tribes slay Jenghiz Khan's ancestors in the Land of Argune-Kun"

Thank you Mercenary, excellent illustration!!

[ariel]

I agree!
I still remember Mercenary’s posting of pictures of a battle between Persian and Afghani armies showing guardless sabers ( shashkas?) from the era of Nadir Shah.
The only one comparable in its impact was a pic of Baluchistan warriors carrying sabers with camel head-like pommel and a ring. That one was found by Eric ( estcrh).


I know, I know , some pseudoacademic characters may persist in doubting the impact of those iconographic pieces of evidence against the popularly accepted dating of shashkas or the attribution of Hyderabadi swords.

But IMHO they can just go and beat their heads against the Great Wall of China.

My hat is off to these two guys!

[Bob A]

First, I'd like to remark Mercenary's illustration depicting not only the use of katar as armor-piercing weapon, but also to note the soldier being attacked seems to be wielding a jamdhar katari. Two for one!

I have posted below a few poor cellphone pictures.

One illustrates the near-identical distance between the bars of a katar, and those of a jamghar katari. Each is about 8.5cm. However much they may be dissimilar in other ways, the grip size is equivalent. While probably useless as information, a comparison seemed worthwhile.

Other photos illustrate the way that the nature of the grip forces hand position; the weapons are dissimilar in use and function, but they sit in hand identically. Th only difference is the way the blade projects from the hand.

Finally, the thickness, or lack thereof, of the blades is worthy of remark. The jamdhar katari's blade is remarkable for its thinness. This is not a weapon for slaying tigers. I can see it slipping nicely between someone's ribs, though.

Similar names, similar hilts - with a twist - but totally different uses.

Finally, the hilt design of the jamdhar katari is notably similar to that of the chillanum, to my eye at any rate. Of course there are obvious differences, but the underlying concept seems to derive from an archetype common to both. (No chillanum pics, though.) Apologies for the implied derailment here.

[ariel]

Bob,


Agree with you completely. The only similarity between the two is, as you have mentioned, the distance between the bars of the Katar and the upper and lower “ quillons” of the Jamdhar Katari. The explanation is simple: both of them demarcate the grip, the size of which is determined by the width of human fist. Any dagger will have approximately same size grip: chillanum, ch’hura, khanjarli etc.

It is the position of the grip that determines the function, and the transverse positioning of it in case of katars is unique: it is a perfect stabber but an extremely poor slasher.

No matter how Jamdhar Katari and Katar might be similar phonetically or linguistically, they are two different weapons with two different engineering solutions. Linguistics is the only thing that unites them

Once again, I would like to remind Elgood’s definition: “ Jamdhar= Katar”. But that is all that unites them.

What is interesting, IMHO, that blades of South Indian katars were flat to the point that many used a fragment of European rapiers. But the North Indian ones had inherently reinforced points in a manner of Zirah Bouks. Does it suggest that North Indians constructed them with a view to more heavily armored opponents?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Mercenary, excellent illustration!!

Voilá ... a scene in that katars are not being used in tiger hunting

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by ariel

What is interesting, IMHO, that blades of South Indian katars were flat to the point that many used a fragment of European rapiers. But the North Indian ones had inherently reinforced points in a manner of Zirah Bouks. Does it suggest that North Indians constructed them with a view to more heavily armored opponents?

An interesting point, so to speak.

I'm not sufficiently versed in battle wear of North or South Indians to come to a conclusion, but I suspect that the further south you travel on the Indian subcontinent, the lighter one's clothing must be. Stabbing through several layers of cloth and leather would require a sturdier blade than one that has little or no barrier between the attacker and the target's flesh.

This begs the question whether my jamdhr katari, with its 2mm blade thickness, hails from a southern area?

For comparison purposes, the thickest section of the katar blade illustrated above is about 9.6mm. The tool, ideally, defines its purpose.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Bob why dont you show us your katar?
Yes the difference of the blades can be big, especially on the early katars, and it could be due to the different way they dressed, but as Henderly wrote, the wounds from katars were very bad, I think he must have meant the wounds from the katars with the armourpiersing tips.

[ariel]

Wasn’t “ bad wound” a desired effect of using katars for their alleged main function, i.e. tiger hunting?:-)

Fernando, we seem to be on the same page ( both literally and figuratively).

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

...Fernando, we seem to be on the same page ( both literally and figuratively).

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Bob A

An interesting point, so to speak.



This begs the question whether my jamdhr katari, with its 2mm blade thickness, hails from a southern area?

For comparison purposes, the thickest section of the katar blade illustrated above is about 9.6mm. The tool, ideally, defines its purpose.

Bob,
Your last sentence perfectly captures the gist of this discussion. Engineering construction of any well-developed weapon is the strongest indicator of its intended mode of action. This, IMHO, is perfectly reflected in the Persian name of short bladed daggers with reinforced point: Zirah Bouk, Mail Piercer, a purely function-describing approach.

This is also why attempts to propose evolution of Ch’hura from “Karud” as a consequence of transitioning from real mail to padded clothing makes no sense: their blades are indistinguishable, and better defined lower stop of the Ch’hura’s handle further prevents hand sliding during stabbing action.

Why were Jamadhar Katari blades thin? I do not think that can serve as the evidence of its Southern origin; rather I would be interested to know whether mail was widespread in Kafiristan early on.

Any information?

[Jim McDougall]

In looking into the 'jamadhar-katari' there are a number of things to consider about these daggers as far as ethnographically as well as martially (in manner of use).
These were weapons of the Kafir tribes of Hindu Kush, regions of Eastern Afghanistan near Chitral areas. This region was known historically as Kafiristan as the tribes (collectively Kafirs) practiced an animist religion nominally with Hindu associations. When Pushtuns invaded and eventually converted many these areas became known as Nuristan.
The tribes relocated to avoid conversion to Islam, and here it becomes complicated. There are tribes known as Kalash believed to descend from the Kafirs in Chitral, while other Kafirs known as Siah-Posh (back robes) are in other areas (who claim they are not 'directly related to the Kalash).

Apparently these Kafir tribes were not easily subdued, probably mostly for their guerilla style warfare, and they were known for use of axes, bow and arrow, as well as the dagger. In images I have seen of one holding a dagger, it is like a 'fist' dagger grasped for downward stab.

I would note here an interesting detail, the tribes of Kafirs had of course different names, and one tribe decribed were known as the 'Katars'
This was found in an online reference about the Kafirs of Nuristan.
One of the sources listed was "Notes on Kafiristan" by H,G.Raferty , 1859.

In considering the construction of these jamadhar katari it seems there is concern directed to the thinness of the blade. It would appear these daggers have, like the khanjhar in Arabia, become a status symbol worn by men as an element of traditional wear. Obviously, these accoutrements are not made with the same martial soundness as earlier weapons intended for combat.

It does not seem like these Kafir tribes fought in pitched combat formations and as noted used bow and arrow and axes, with these daggers probably in close quarter contact. I would look forward to others insight into the case for use of mail by their opponents, but I strongly doubt that the Pashtuns who primarily fought them wore such armor.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

... What is interesting, IMHO, that blades of South Indian katars were flat to the point that many used a fragment of European rapiers. But the North Indian ones had inherently reinforced points in a manner of Zirah Bouks. Does it suggest that North Indians constructed them with a view to more heavily armored opponents?

I will humbly look forward to hear those knowledgeable (as you are) opining that, the different type of blades (reinforced or flat tipped) is more a circumstantial choice (read resource) than a selective one, thus armour piercing not being the obliging factor. As an example would be the Mahratas, being more in contact with Europeans, whether capturing their blades in combat or acquiring them in trade.
I have read someone (gratuitously) saying that, the reinforced tip does not necessarily have more efficacy in piercing armor than narrow and slender blades, their primary function being that of preventing them from bending or breaking, such is the force applied to their thrust.

[Jim McDougall]

In rereading some of this thread, I came across some notes I had made last February (#156), concerning the use of these daggers by the Kafirs, and that the distinction of the term jamadhar katari apparently derived through Egerton (1880) in some confusion on weapon descriptions.

As I noted, the dagger form we are apparently referring to as used by the Kafirs is termed a katarah (or katara) by the Kafirs, as I found in the 1999 book "Kafirs of Hindu Kush: A Study of the Waigal and Ashkun Kafirs" by Max Klimburg.

Many salient facts and notes are often lost in the volume of these long standing threads so sometimes helpful to bring forward certain notes for the benefit of current readers.

These katara daggers, at least the ones I have seen are not 'armor piercing' blades, but more leaf shaped straight, or with slightly curved khanjhar like blades.

I think we are confusing these apparently mistermed jamadhar-katari with the katar (jamdhar) of northern regions (Rajasthan, Lahore etc.) which indeed had malle perce (reinforced) tip blades. The katars of the Deccan and southern regions did indeed use fragments of European blades for katars, but these were not typically 'rapier' blades but those of the heavier European arming swords. The use of actual narrow rapier blades was it seems usually confined to full size khanda type swords intended more as prestigious court type weapons in my view.

[Jim McDougall]

As I have noted previously, this is a pretty monumental thread, begun with Stan S. who was posting thoughts on the JAMADHAR KATARI in April of 2012.This drifted into a 4 year chat on the katar, and lost sight of the original query on these jamadhar katari daggers.

In my previous post I noted that the jamadhar katari term seems to have come from Egerton (1880, #344,345) where he uses this to describe these H shape hilt daggers. They are curiously noted as from Nepal.

As has been noted many times over as many years here, the term katar was apparently somehow used by Egerton to describe the transverse grip 'punch' daggers which according to Pant (1980) are properly termed 'jamadhar'.

The original post by Stan some 5 years ago observes that along with the confusion in terms to these two dagger forms, he suggests that perhaps the grip or hand hold has a similarity, though in different disposition as far as position.

Some years ago while researching with a German colleague on the Kafirs and their unique weapons and culture, I was shown numbers of these daggers, which in actuality are termed 'katarah'. These are as I describe in the previous post yesterday, used in areas of Afghanistan to the east by Kafirs (also Kalash) and their tribal groups in Chital to Nuristan.
Apparantly these were held in a fisted grasp, indeed much like the 'katar' and the bar like pommel and crossguard form similar support afforded to the hand of the wielder by the side bars.
(see attached of Kafir man holding one).
Also attached are the entries in Egerton (1880) with the daggers illustrated accordingly.

Also: Regarding the curious attribution to Nepal. My German friend would often travel to Nepal to acquire weapons, and gathering quite a number of these there. Apparently there was a notable diaspora of Kafirs out of the Nuristan regions when subjugated by Abdur Rahman in the late 1890s, however there must have been a flow of them to Nepal prior to this as Egerton did his research many years prior to this. The reason for the movement was of course the Kafir folk religion and avoidance of conversion to Islam. They were animists as well as closer to Hinduism, which along with Buddhism was prevalent in Nepal.
Attaching also examples of katarah (jamdhar katari) .

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The use of actual narrow rapier blades was it seems usually confined to full size khanda type swords intended more as prestigious court type weapons in my view.

Ah ... Jim, don't forget the pata, often mounted with European blades. My late example had a long slim one (960X25 m/m).

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Ah ... Jim, don't forget the pata, often mounted with European blades. My late example had a long slim one (960X25 m/m).

Yes indeed, I had overlooked noting that pata also sometimes received rapier blades.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Yes indeed, I had overlooked noting that pata also sometimes received rapier blades.

Many times, definitely ... thin and flexible .

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Many times, definitely ... thin and flexible .

Exactly, which is why they would not have served well for a katar. Whether on khanda or pata, these blades were strictly prestige oriented as there were no provisions for European fencing techniques in indian swordsmanship.

[Bob A]

Having made an effort to look into Kafiristani costumery, I admit my thought that the thinner blade of the Jamdhar katari is not influenced by scanty dress. Those folks live in an area demanding reasonable-to-serious clothing.

My example was deemed to be early 17th century by Artzi, and is in fact rather different from the later examples, with regard to the hilt geometry. Assuming the kafiristan location attributed to these weapons, I have to assume that their blades are standard and of long standing. I'm still unsure of their intended function, given the nature of the weapon. I assume it would be just the thing for close-in assassination; aside from that I'd be hard pressed to think what to do with it.

All that said, it remains a very attractive dagger.

[Bob A]

Pics of my katars per request:

I thought I'd append extra information. The Jamdhar katari weighs 215grams; the scalloped katar is 347g; the big nasty one is in excess of 610 gram (I misplaced my scale-extender for the balance. Probably <700g).

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Bob A

Pics of my katars per request:

I thought I'd append extra information. The Jamdhar katari weighs 215grams; the scalloped katar is 347g; the big nasty one is in excess of 610 gram (I misplaced my scale-extender for the balance. Probably <700g).

Bob, which of these is presumed to be a jamadhar katari? Please see my post #244 just a few before this. It presents the jamadhar katari dilemma created prior to 1880 by Egerton with the misnomer.

These daggers are both katars, and as far as I know, these have nothing to with the Kafirs we have been discussing. Both of these appear to have the bolstered points. Did Artzi give more specific details on perhaps the regions these are from?


Attached is the dagger referred to as jamadhar katari (1880) which is actually a Kafir 'katarah'.


A comparison of KATAR and JAMADHAR KATARI from the OP from April, 2012 here.
I just wanted to illustrate the difference between the two weapons.
I will avoid elaborating on the proper terms for these two daggers so as not to confuse things further.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

..., Whether on khanda or pata, these blades were strictly prestige oriented as there were no provisions for European fencing techniques in indian swordsmanship.

May i fully disagree, Jim. On the contrary, patas were mainly used in the field, despite requiring exclusively oriented training on their own, the reason why these formidable Mahrata swords were not adopted by other nations. Prestige orientation was not the issue.
The deliberate flexibility of the blade, with a length varying from 120 to a 150 centimeters, was an added advantage, because if it hit across a hard or resistant object, it merely bent over and thus prevented the rider from being unhorsed. You are surely aware of Egerton quoting Capt. Mundys journal, recounting a demonstration of the pata: The gauntlet sword whose blade fully 5 feet long in the hands of a practiced swordsman appears a terrible weapon, though to those unaccustomed to its use, it is but an awkward instrument ... the performer describing a variety of revolutions, not unlike an exaggerated waltz.
These assumptions are not distant from those of Rainer Daehnhardt, who also emphasizes the need for special training of these ideal (SIC) swords.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

May i fully disagree, Jim. On the contrary, patas were mainly used in the field, despite requiring exclusively oriented training on their own, the reason why these formidable Mahrata swords were not adopted by other nations. Prestige orientation was not the issue.
The deliberate flexibility of the blade, with a length varying from 120 to a 150 centimeters, was an added advantage, because if it hit across a hard or resistant object, it merely bent over and thus prevented the rider from being unhorsed. You are surely aware of Egerton quoting Capt. Mundys journal, recounting a demonstration of the pata: The gauntlet sword whose blade fully 5 feet long in the hands of a practiced swordsman appears a terrible weapon, though to those unaccustomed to its use, it is but an awkward instrument ... the performer describing a variety of revolutions, not unlike an exaggerated waltz.
These assumptions are not distant from those of Rainer Daehnhardt, who also emphasizes the need for special training of these ideal (SIC) swords.

Are we still talking about European 'rapier blades'??? These thin blades for civilian combat/dueling/fencing were entirely inadequate on the battlefield, which was why swords with similar hilts/guards began having 'arming' blades. These were heavier blades, wider and still flexible.

I have no problem with the actual viability and skills of Indian swordsmen with pata and khanda, but with narrow, thin rapier blades (as in cup hilt rapiers)? I have seen and had many 'firangi' pata and khanda with good size blades, and have always been impressed with the way they were used as such. From what I have understood, the Marathas had great disdain for the thrust, which of course was the primary function of the rapier blades I was referring to.

[Bob A]

Jim, neither of the two katars in the post responding to a request for pics of my katar are jamdhal kataris, nor did either of them come through Artzi.

I thought I might as well illustrate both of the katars I have at present, since the scalloped one is unusual and attractive, and I bethought myself that it would be of some interest to folk here.

My jamdhal katari came from Artzi recently, and is illustrated in my earlier post on the topic.

I understand the confusion which currently reigns supreme on the topic, and the emotions which sometimes are inspired by the Name Game; this is of little interest to me just now. My interest is driven by the nature of the jamhhal katari and its reason for being.

My current understanding is that it hails from Kafiristan, or Nuristan, or whatever the region might be called, which refuted my earlier speculation regarding a more southerly origin, which appears to be erroneous.

I took the liberty of mentioning chillanum, due to the nature of the hilts having passing similarity. Again, following the lead of the OP in indulging in speculation which might strike a spark, perhaps leading to some insight. Or it might just be a passing derailment of our trains of thought.

I'm further interested, viewing examples early and late, in the gradual evolution of the hilt design, and questioning whether these changes represent evolution or devolution of design as a function of utility. Seem to me, based merely on appearance of later examples, that the earlier ones would be more utilitarian, while still being more elegantly rendered than the later examples.

If there is interest, I'd gladly post up more pics of my jamdhal katari (so called) to illustrate the nature of the hilt. While photos are available on Artzi's site, I continue to be charmed by the various treatments seen in the hilt - which seems to be hollow, which contributes to its remarkable (lack of) mass.

If I have contributed more than my share of confusion to the subject, I either apologise or accept credit for extending the breadth of the dialogue, whichever might be found appropriate.

[Jim McDougall]

Bob, thank you for the thoughtful and well expressed explanation, and now I can see we are pretty much on the same page.
There has always been a degree of confusion on these pages, mostly simple misunderstandings or that often people post without reading what has previously been said. With threads of this size and duration it is understandable as few care to read back through sometimes years of dialogue.

While I have reread this thread I overlooked the jamadhar katari that you mention and your well placed observation on the similar holds of this and the katar. Actually that was what I had I mind when I posted the image of the Kafir man holding one of these.

As I had described earlier, my research on the Kafirs began nearly 20 years ago with a colleague in Germany researching their axes. I became even more intrigued by watching the movie "Man Who Would be King" based on Kipling's writing and focused on Kafiristan.

Later I became connected with a Kalash man here in the US but intent on preserving the culture and language of his people now in Chitral.

The chilanum comparison is a fair one, and these jamadhar katari have some resemblance, but as you note, the chilanum is it seems farther south.

The jamadhar katari, though I regret having to defer to the maddening name game, I think we need to clear up.

These are actually 'katarah' (jamadhar thing is totally Egerton)….and the katar (transverse grips) is a jamadhar. With katar, the term has become too 'died in the wool' to change, so we keep calling them that.

With the KATARAH, these are little known and unlikely to cause great disturbance in the collectors lexicon by using this simpler term instead of the compound.

These have been around for some time, and I have even seen examples with the Afghan state seal etc. As with most traditional weapons, earlier ones were of course more utilitarian, becoming less so and more decorative in recent times.

The Hindu Kush regions of Afghanistan to the east are where the lands of these people historically were termed Kafiristan, but after subjugation by Abdur Rahman in 1890s, were named Nuristan.
The Kalash people primarily in Chitral are deemed loosely aligned with the Kafirs, but more research needed there. Diffusion in these regions is of course complex.

Hopefully what I have noted may help in some degree, and clearly I need to retrace these details myself again..its been too many years.

[ariel]

I am with Fernando.
Mahratta irregular cavalry was a very disorganized bunch: none of the British Light Brigade iron discipline or Mongolian tightly coordinated feint attacks. They just rode full gallop without any order, clashed with the opposing force , slashed two or three times , and turned back full speed. Their mass-produced Patas ( Portuguese “paws”? Fernando, how am I doing?) were very flexible , designed to slash and bounce, distantly reminiscent of South Indian/ Sri Lankan Urumi.
My Pata is so flexible, that if an opponent tries to parry the cut with his sword, my blade will just bend around it and hit him behind the block.

These attacks must have left behind very few dead , but multiple wounded and disabled men and horses.

[ariel]

This particular name game ( jamadhar vs. katar) is not very productive unless based on extremely thorough knowledge of Great Indian linguistics.
Currently, Indian government accepts 22 official languages and 6 special ones. Overall, there are 122 major languages, and 1599 “other” languages.
Thirty languages are spoken by more than a million “native speakers”, and 122 by more than 10,000. How many simply vanished over the past 1000 years is a scary thought.

Different weapons might have been given similarly sounding names and same weapons - differently sounding ones. Mysore/ Haiderabadi Bich’hwa, Baku from Kannada and Marathi Vinchu - are the same weapon. So is Jamdhar and Katar, but in different locations. Add to it transliterations by the British: Seilawa in Afghanistan and sailaba in Deccan, - almost identical weapons, but the former one became known as Khyber knife, and the latter is so esoteric, that only devoted readers of Elgood’s Glossary know what it means.

These questions must be left to professional linguists who, on top of their deep knowledge of languages, are thoroughly familiar with long and complicated history of India, population migrations, conquests, subjugations etc., as well as with weapons themselves. This is a tall order, but anything less than that will only lead to embarrassing “ discoveries” . We have had some of those published here and that’s enough already.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Are we still talking about European 'rapier blades'??? These thin blades for civilian combat/dueling/fencing were entirely inadequate on the battlefield, which was why swords with similar hilts/guards began having 'arming' blades. These were heavier blades, wider and still flexible.

I have no problem with the actual viability and skills of Indian swordsmen with pata and khanda, but with narrow, thin rapier blades (as in cup hilt rapiers)? I have seen and had many 'firangi' pata and khanda with good size blades, and have always been impressed with the way they were used as such. From what I have understood, the Marathas had great disdain for the thrust, which of course was the primary function of the rapier blades I was referring to.

Perhaps the best is to call off the 'rapier' concept from the conversation, due to the amplitude within which the term may navigate. In the extreme, rapier (ropera) blades can be extremely thin, even diamond section and tense like spikes, with points like tooth picks ... but also non troppo.
Patas could (should) be relatively flat narrow... flexible and long, with lengths even greater than regular European blades of the period. Commissioned for the purpose to Venetian and Portuguese traders, exception (possibly) made for those of swords captured in earlier times (end XV beg. XVI Centuries), as then these were not lengthier than the ones used in Europe ... pass the off mark examples.
Blades occasionally made locally were more to the junk side.

.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

Their mass-produced Patas ( Portuguese “paws”? Fernando, how am I doing?) were very flexible , designed to slash and bounce, distantly reminiscent of South Indian/ Sri Lankan Urumi...

Well said Ariel ... the translation, but not the attribution, i am afraid.
I would rather tend to the version in which the patá (पट) comes from the "Pathans, a subdivision of the Kchatrya cast, or Indian warriors, devoted to military life, in his fatherland as in other nations" (Friar Sebastião Manrique 1590 -1669). But i wouldn't put my hand on the chopping block for that ... even my (already) chopped off one .

[Jens Nordlunde]

Are we now discussing patas, should they not be discussed on another thread?