Jamdhar katari - a theory

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... I hope I can make this clear enough as it was queried in the original post 7 years ago. The transverse grip dagger we these days call katar…...was originally called jamdhar. Egerton in his writing (1885) for some yet unknown reason termed these H hilt daggers attributed to Nepal the JAMDHAR-KITARI.
What transpired after this appears that the jamdhar term which SHOULD have been used for the many transverse gripped daggers illustrated inexplicably became noted as katars. This profound oversight or error became the ever known term for these daggers in the literature to this day...

Can you establish a relation in that, according to what i have been told, the term "Kuthar" was used by Rajendralala Mitra (The Antiquaries of Orissa) in 1876, thus earlier than Egerton adopted the term "Katar".


.

[ariel]

An almost literal translation of Jamdhar Katari would be something like “ Sharp-edged cutter of the God of Death”.
This is a purely poetic moniker and as such it cannot be used for any historical or technical analysis or conclusions.

The most frustrating example of such a name is Dhu -l -Fakar ( literally spiny, ridged) the real form of which is still a mystery despite its major significance.

If we take 10 people totally ignorant of Oriental weapons and ask them to draw their images of some fighting implement called “ lion’s tail “ or “scorpion” , we shall get 11 different images having nothing to do with shamshir or bich’hwa.

India is a multiethnic, multilingual country with a millennial history of mass migrations. One needs to be well-versed in its minute details of history and fluent in several of its languages to even start thinking about the meaning of its weapons’ names. Otherwise, it is the lowest degree of the infamous “name game” belonging to a cynically defined “ intellectual masturbation”. We should resign to the fact that we have no idea and either make peace with it or wait for a true specialist.

Elgood’s entry in his Glossary ( see Jodhpur book) consists of 2 words :
“Jamdhar: Katar”. Also, he shows several “Khandas” that have nothing to do with Egerton’s or Stone’s stereotypes.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

An almost literal translation of Jamdhar Katari would be something like “ Sharp-edged cutter of the God of Death”.
India is a multiethnic, multilingual country with a millennial history of mass migrations. One needs to be well-versed in its minute details of history and fluent in several of its languages to even start thinking about the meaning of its weapons’ names. Otherwise, it is the lowest degree of the infamous “name game” ...

Yet the name game, for as much as we (sort of) forget, is an irreplaceable component of our spoken communication, right after we abandoned our ape stage of expressing ourselves by gestures. We have to get hold of alternative tricks like the consuetudinary resource to consider the determined name of one thing as being we are all talking about ... even with exceptions taken into account.
I recall illustreous Professor Agostinho da Silva )1906-1994) in that, every time they asked him his ideas on a subject, he started by recalling the etymology of the term, before unequivocally lecturing on such topic.
I wonder to which extent, if any, India's profusion of languages comprehends Western European tongues but, even if just for fun, it is worthy to note, within the Katar-Kutar saga that, in my lingo we say "Cortar" for cutting, from the Latin Curtãre. Can't deny the resemblance .

[Jim McDougall]

I don't think there can be any doubt that many cognate words diffused widely through cultures as languages and dialects evolved from the root languages over time.
The use of the term katar, regardless of spelling, is not really in question but it seems that Egerton who wrote his book in over 10 years prior to first publication in 1880 (republished 1896) transposed the term from the jamdhar -kitari to the transverse grip jamdhar (we now call katar).

As we cannot say for sure when, in the years compiling his data Egerton made this error, we can presume it was well prior to 1880.

Prior to this time, in India, these transverse grip daggers were known as jamdhar (= tooth of god of death, or to that effect). I was unaware of the use of the term 'kuttar' in Russia in 1860 in cataloging of the holdings of the Tsarskye Selo arsenal, and would be interested to know what the weapon described looked like.
If this was indeed the transverse grip 'jamdhar' type, then we may establish the error(?) to precede Egerton, and question whether Pant (1980) had sound evidence of the jamdhar term being correct for these in the first place.


We know, from the extensive research Jens has done over many years, that the term katar has been in use since about 13th century and of course for a dagger, but what type we do not know as no illustrations exist until much later.


We know that the "Ain I Akbari" , Abu'l Fazi , written in years 1551-1602, had a 'fist dagger' called 'maustika' looking of course like a rudimentary katar.

The term katar seems well represented in a number of Indian languages , where the Tamil 'kattari' became the Sanskrit 'katara' (the a dropped later).

With the 'katar' term this deeply embedded in various other languages specifically referring to the transverse grip daggers, I cannot help but question if the term jamdhar evolved as an alternate term at some point.

In this case Egerton was right all along, and the combining of the two terms jamdar-kitari to describe these curious daggers was perhaps Egerton trying to use both terms due to the character of the hilts.

While the katar has an 'H' shaped hilt it is vertically oriented and meant to be held transversely.

The jamdhar-kitari has an 'H' shaped hilt which is horizontal, that is meant to be gripped in the traditional dagger manner.


So possibly the 'katar' term has been correctly describing these transverse grip daggers all along...….and the conundrum brought up by Pant in 1980 setting off a red herring that has persisted since.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Prior to this time, in India, these transverse grip daggers were known as jamdhar (= tooth of god of death, or to that effect). I was unaware of the use of the term 'kuttar' in Russia in 1860 in cataloging of the holdings of the Tsarskye Selo arsenal, and would be interested to know what the weapon described looked like.
If this was indeed the transverse grip 'jamdhar' type, then we may establish the error(?) to precede Egerton, and question whether Pant (1980) had sound evidence of the jamdhar term being correct for these in the first place.

Jim, in my opinion in the picture that I attached to the subject, it is clearly seen that in the catalog of weapons from Tsarskoye Selo is described the transverse grip 'jamdhar' type... Post № 180

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Jim, in my opinion in the picture that I attached to the subject, it is clearly seen that in the catalog of weapons from Tsarskoye Selo is described the transverse grip 'jamdhar' type... Post № 180

Thank you for redirecting that, I overlooked it. So there we have the transverse grip c. 1860 which would likely precede Egerton's notes even if as early as 1860s-70s. It seems unlikely that Egerton would have had access to Russian notes or materials given the climate of relations in these times with Crimean War and its aftermath.


Again, I question Pant's declaration of the proper term for the transverse grip dagger being jamdhar, and suggest perhaps it was an alternative term. This of course completely overturns the notion I have long held that Pant was correct, and now compels rethinking.


That is the thing with research and assertions which have long stood sacrosanct in venerable volumes and long held views in the arms community, they are always subject to revision. Most authors not only expect this, but implore it, as the search for truth and accuracy needs to be relentless.
'

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you for redirecting that, I overlooked it. So there we have the transverse grip c. 1860 which would likely precede Egerton's notes even if as early as 1860s-70s. It seems unlikely that Egerton would have had access to Russian notes or materials given the climate of relations in these times with Crimean War and its aftermath.
'

Dear Jim, you will be surprised, but Egerton saw items of weapons with descriptions from Tsarskoe Selo. This information is in his book:
A Description of Indian and Oriental Armour: Illustrated from the Collection Formerly in the India Office, Now Exhibited at South Kensington, and the Author's Private Collection

[Gustav]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you for redirecting that, I overlooked it. So there we have the transverse grip c. 1860 which would likely precede Egerton's notes even if as early as 1860s-70s. It seems unlikely that Egerton would have had access to Russian notes or materials given the climate of relations in these times with Crimean War and its aftermath.

Jim, in Egerton's book there is a short chapter about Malayan and Indonesian arms. Plate VIII in it contains some quite detailed drawings of a Keris in the collection of Czar of Russia. So there is at least a possibility he has access to some materials from Russia.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

We know that the "Ain I Akbari" , Abu'l Fazi , written in years 1551-1602, had a 'fist dagger' called 'maustika' looking of course like a rudimentary katar.

Jim, excuse me, I do not know very well the whole text of "Ain I Akbari", but in the chapter on weapons there is definitely no such dagger.

[Mercenary]

In the 19th, 20th, 21th and even in 31th centuries, we can call these daggers as we please. But it is perfect for sure that in the 16th century the wide dagger with transverse grip was called "jamdhar", and the narrow dagger with ordinary handle - katar. This is documented facts.

Jim, you are absolutely right that the word "katara" was widespread in India. This word was used for all type of weapons that could cut (before the catalog of Lord Egerton became known in India through the work of Dr. Pant). Like all swords were "tulwars".

Very interesting how Kafirs themself called their daggers? I strongly suspect that "chura" or so. Didn't they?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

In the 19th, 20th, 21th and even in 31th centuries, we can call these daggers as we please. But it is perfect for sure that in the 16th century the wide dagger with transverse grip was called "jamdhar", and the narrow dagger with ordinary handle - katar. This is documented facts.

Jim, you are absolutely right that the word "katara" was widespread in India. This word was used for all type of weapons that could cut (before the catalog of Lord Egerton became known in India through the work of Dr. Pant). Like all swords were "tulwars".

Very interesting how Kafirs themself called their daggers? I strongly suspect that "chura" or so. Didn't they?

I surely don't know the text of these volumes either of the Ain I Akbari, the corpus of the the "Akbarnama" of Mughal culture. I only know the plates I have seen with the transverse grip which I believe was called 'moustika', and this term is another puzzling type of gauntlet type weapon seen in Stone and Calvert ("Spanish Arms and Armor". 1907).

It is great to know that the term jamdhar was documented as for the transverse grip in 16th c. and I do know that katar was used for the regular hilt dagger as shown in Burton and Stone et al.
What I was trying to determine was at what point the terms became switched.
While it seems moot, it does make a difference in reading early contemporary accounts where we cannot visually know the weapon they refer to.

The term chura, if I recall correctly and understand, was a colloquial term used in Northwest Frontier regions for small knives of the pesh kabz variety. I do not think the Kalash (Kafirs) people would have that term in their lexicon, but who knows, dialects diffuse through these regions. That would be a good thing to look into further.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by fernando

I wonder to which extent, if any, India's profusion of languages comprehends Western European tongues but, even if just for fun, it is worthy to note, within the Katar-Kutar saga that, in my lingo we say "Cortar" for cutting, from the Latin Curtãre. Can't deny the resemblance .

You are not imagining.

Proto-Indo-European (PIE) languages include Greek and Italic. Latin is just one of the offshots of Italic.
“Cutting” and “knife” are very basic words. Such words, necessary for oral communication between the members of very early human communities, seem to share common elements. Mother in Sanskrit is Amba, in most modern Indian languages it is Amma, Maa or Ammee, and in virtually all European languages it does not even require a professional translator:-)
Father in Sanskrit is Pitar ( Latin Pater), water is wodr and fire is paewr or agni ( Lat. ignis) in PIE, etc.

Sir William Jones still rules!

Trick question: who knows why the old name of Iran was Pars ( Persia) , but their language is Farsi? As they say on TV games “The answers will surprise you!”. Hint: it has nothing to do with complex ancient linguistics.

Just for the fun of it:-)

[Ian]

Originally Posted by ariel

... Trick question: who knows why the old name of Iran was Pars ( Persia) , but their language is Farsi? As they say on TV games “The answers will surprise you!”. Hint: it has nothing to do with complex ancient linguistics. ...

Simplified answer. Persian/Persia are exonyms probably first coined by the Greeks around 500 BCE to describe the inhabitants of Pars, then extended to those on the Iranian Plateau. The Romans then adopted the term Persia to describe the same area.


Farsi is an endonym, also derived from the regional name Pars, to describe the main language of Iran.


Ian.

[ariel]

Yes, all true....
But why the language of Pars is Farsi? Why the F- word?

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Yes, all true....
But why the language of Pars is Farsi? Why the F- word?

Does it have to do with the use of Persian/Arabic script not having a letter for "p"?! "Pars" is also written as "Fars" in Nasta-liq. The Fars province in Iran is also called Pars.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

... “Cutting” and “knife” are very basic words. Such words, necessary for oral communication between the members of very early human communities, seem to share common elements.

Speaking of which, when searching the 1206 pages of Luso-Asiatic Glossary (Monsenhor Sebastião Dalgado 1919) one most surprisingly can not find the term katar (or catar, as the K is absent in Portuguese) as a weapon, but finds (possible) analogies in that the term is related with light slim and fast boats that cut the waves (bolds are mine). Fray João Moura derives it from the Persian Kãtür, which however there are no records of such dictations in Arabic and Persian. Crooke suggests as possible ethym the sanscrit chatura "legere". However Dalgado goes for the version malaiala kattiri or neo-Arico Kãtar, from the sanscrit kartari "scissors" literally cutter, from the verb krt "to cut". Dalgado further opines that this boat could well be called katar, which is employed in various metaphoric senses like, in Concani, truss, pyramid, obelisc.
On the other hand, the term katar (or catar) in his strict wording only appears as Persian-Arabic "qatâr", meaning a set of (often seven) camels or mules, used by cargo collectors that cover all Persia transporting goods from a city to another (Domingos Vieira 1529).
As i first said, among 1250 pages of terms picked or shared with Asians since the XV century. Unless some unknown transliteration prevents from reaching further.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by fernando

Can you establish a relation in that, according to what i have been told, the term "Kuthar" was used by Rajendralala Mitra (The Antiquaries of Orissa) in 1896, thus earlier than Egerton adopted the term "Katar".

In 1860, the word “katar” was used by the Russian researcher Florian Gille in the spelling of “kuttar”, describing the arsenal of Russian Imperators in Tsarskoye Selo.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by fernando

Can you establish a relation in that, according to what i have been told, the term "Kuthar" was used by Rajendralala Mitra (The Antiquaries of Orissa) in 1876, thus earlier than Egerton adopted the term "Katar"...

Not so significant for the matter but, i should have written 1876 instead of 1896.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by fernando

Not so significant for the matter but, i should have written 1876 instead of 1896.

Not so significant for the matter. The example I gave refers to 1860