Jamdhar katari - a theory

[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.