Jamdhar katari - a theory

[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

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.

I completely agree. But as to the word "bhuj" I have a slightly different consideration but in general you are right.

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".

Great news! It is high time to update the terminology that has not changed for a hundred years. Let's hope that he will be able to attract competent specialists for the Indian part.

[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?

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by 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?

Thank you. The quote explains why we have a lot of katars now (and so few tigers) and why there are so many small sizes among them. All of this becouse later katars were used as articles of clothing for Indian and souveniers for Evropean unlike real battle or hunting katars.
By the way how many do you know katars decorated with the battle scene or on the contrary with the hunting scene? I cheked this - 1:10.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Thank you. The quote explains why we have a lot of katars now (and so few tigers) and why there are so many small sizes among them. All of this becouse later katars were used as articles of clothing for Indian and souveniers for Evropean unlike real battle or hunting katars.
By the way how many do you know katars decorated with the battle scene or on the contrary with the hunting scene? I cheked this - 1:10.

This is all astounding! and I had no idea just how deadly the katar was, in a conconcurrent thread we have a katar wielding guy mounting a berserk (musth driven) elephant and killing it by piercing his temple with a katar!

So the idea that a man with one of these deadly daggers could dispatch a 400 pound vicious killing machine tiger is perhaps feasible in such light. However, in my thinking if the tiger is close enough to stab, his teeth are likely firmly emplaced in some part of the guys body, not to mention the weight overpowering him. It is hard to imagine the presence of mind to thrust in such a situation, especially to a 'kill' rather than wounding spot.

Still, how can we dispute such compelling evidence? as well as the fact that the northern Indian tiger was driven into extinction by tiger hunts by katar wielding royal and court figures. If I understand correctly only these people were permitted the priviledge of hunting....the average guy was only 'hunted' by the tigers, and not having katars of course, were just fair game.


I have indeed seen 'shikargar' (=hunting scenes) on katars in some limited degree, so certainly again this must be proof of their use accordingly. We already know that shamshirs and tulwars were for hunting as such motif is seen on them as well. ....at least in following with that theory.
I dont think I have ever seen a katar with a battle scene though..........does this mean they were not used in battle?


Most interesting perspective.