Jamdhar katari - a theory

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by mahratt

In the context of the discussion I recommend those who are really interested to understand the issue, examine the article: On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types

http://historical-weapons.com/the-us...n-weapons-abs/

It is on the website in full version.

From the article...HERE IS THE ABSTRACT;

Abstract: This article examines the emergence in weapons complex of the Mughals one of the most emblematic Indian weapon – Jamdhar dagger and offers new, different from the preceding, interpretation of its use. The appearance of the original Indian phenomenon in the culture of the conquerors is based on written sources, as well as in the context of understanding the atmospheric interactions of the cultures of conquerors and the vanquished. In analysis the author relies on the translation of the original teхts and illustrative sources. The article explains that one of the main assignments of the dagger “jamdhar” was its use in the hunting of large predators, primarily, in self-defense from a wounded beast. As an elite attribute that emphasizes the owner’s status as a hunter of tigers and lions, the struggle with the beast, theriomachia, was anciently part of the Royal rituals, a kind of test of the applicant for authority and, at the same time, the procedure of confirming the right to exercise this power, the jamdhar dagger took the place of the status thing of the Indian aristocracy. By the time of the third Emperor of the Mughal Empire Akbar some elements of Indian culture were accepted by the conquerors, though, as a rule, a culture of the defeated a priori has a lower status and as a rule remains unexploited by the new elites. And only in case some prestigious forms of the local culture do not face with competitors in the culture introduced by the conquerors, they will have a chance of being accepted by the elite. In case of the jamdhar dagger, this form of the local culture became hunting for tigers and lions, which before the conquest of India was not a Mongol or Turkic tradition. Author also proves that in the decorative elements of decoration of jamdhar daggers in the depiction of predator attacks on prey, these scenes differ in their composition from the well-known “scenes of anguish” in Scythian and Iranian traditions. In Indian tradition there was an allusion that a warrior who had defeated a tiger, became tiger-like himself, and his enemies were similar to victim and prey. The scenes of such kind were analogues to battle scenes, which explain the lack of battle scenes in the ornament of jamdhar daggers. The tight connection to prestigious hunting was one of the reasons jamdhar dagger was established in the role of power insignia and was ensured an honorable place in the Mughal`s weapons complex.

[mahratt]

http://historical-weapons.com/the-us...n-weapons-abs/

[ariel]

The author posits that Katars entered the North Indian panoply of weapons primarily as a tiger-hunting weapon.
That surely explains the abundance of North Indian katars and the scarcity of North Indian tigers :-)

[mahratt]

Interestingly, some people like - have a finger in every pie

Some read the article, but do not understand the meaning of the article.

It seemed to me that here in the forum all are able to read independently and can form an opinion about other people's articles (without distorted presentation)

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Interestingly, some people like - have a finger in every pie

Some read the article, but do not understand the meaning of the article.

It seemed to me that here in the forum all are able to read independently and can form an opinion about other people's articles (without distorted presentation)

Most interesting perspective, but while the syntax of your comments are remarkably clear, I am markedly unclear on what you mean. You are saying that Mr. Kurcochkin's abstract is distorted?
Thank you for the generous observation on the acumen of those of us here in the forums in reading and forming personal opinions on articles written. It seems that being judged when expressing those opinions here becomes a bit of a problem.

Ariel, pretty good analogy on the case of katar vs. tiger!

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Most interesting perspective, but while the syntax of your comments are remarkably clear, I am markedly unclear on what you mean. You are saying that Mr. Kurcochkin's abstract is distorted?
Thank you for the generous observation on the acumen of those of us here in the forums in reading and forming personal opinions on articles written. It seems that being judged when expressing those opinions here becomes a bit of a problem.

Ariel, pretty good analogy on the case of katar vs. tiger!

Jim, I want to say that it is possible overdo any words to absurdity.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Ariel, pretty good analogy on the case of katar vs. tiger!

Pretty good will be to learn something new or rather something old. For example that still now somewhere in India the jamdhar dagger it is still called as "tiger dagger" or "tiger knife". Or in sanskrit the word "katari" means exactly "hunting dagger". As well as the word "jamdhar" was never the "teeth of Yama" except in the imagination of the British colonizers. "Jamdhar" meant in ancient India just "double edge weapons". So "jamdhar katari" it is not some kind of any the Hindu Kush dagger.
Too much garbage from books with numerous color images

[ariel]

You are largely correct: far too many books ( and supposedly academic articles as well) lazily repeat statements of earlier authors. Sometimes it is almost funny: Pant, a native Indian arms historian, relied heavily on Rawson, an accidental author of a book on Indian swords. Errors of the past have a tendency to perpetuate and eventually become dogmas or a grudging acquiescence to the commonality of usage. Elgood in his Jaipur book informed us that what is traditionally called "Bhuj" is in reality a "Mujawli". The name "Bhuj" was invented by the British who just used the name of a town where they could buy these axes/knives and stayed in one book after another since. It, just like the Karud, will likely stay in our lexicon simply because far too many of us are used to it.

Elgood is currently working on a humongous glossary of terminology of Eastern weapons. I am waiting for it with great anticipation: he is the ultimate obsessive-compulsive person in the best sense of the word and is well-known for his deep digging into primary sources. I am sure our trips to the bookshelves in search of a dog-eared copy of Stone will dramatically decrease after that. Well, strike it out: not "sure", but "hope".

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

The author posits that Katars entered the North Indian panoply of weapons primarily as a tiger-hunting weapon.
That surely explains the abundance of North Indian katars and the scarcity of North Indian tigers :-)

........

Since the 1840 katars have been created for sale to tourists. R.Elgood. Rajputs Arms&Armour

[Mercenary]

...

[Mercenary]

////

[Jim McDougall]

AT LAST!!!! Irrefutable proof that katars WERE used to hunt tigers!



I am unclear on the highlighted quote from Robert Elgood's outstanding book "Rajput Arms and Armour", is this meant to suggest that no katars were made for 'souvenier' markets during the Raj and easily into modern times?