![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
Ariel - thank you for the invitation:-).
Ken, yes I think it could very well be a katar of a very old form. I dont know if you have read my article How Old is the Katar? If not, here it is. https://www.academia.edu/31094926/How_Old_is_the_Katar Originally the article was published in Arms & Armour. Vol. 10, no 1, 2013. Royal Armouries, Leeds. A possible wooden grip, did not have to have been round, it could also have had other forms. See my catalogue pp. 182-183, or if you dont have it you can find some katars with only one cross bar on the MET homepage. You do, now and again, see katars with only one cross bar, but it is not often, and they are usually quite old. The missing protection, in this case the missing side guards, is strange, and I cant give you an answer to this, but in the south you sometimes see katars with very short side guards. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 905
|
![]()
Hello,
Thank you so much ! Especially Jens for your precious complete file about katars origin ! Really interesting ! No, there was no real back story, the seller sold it as a really old knife, maybe european ... I'll post more pictures when I'll receive it Kind regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 90
|
![]()
I personally would be wary of attributing much age to this piece. Assuming it is even supposed to be some kind of katar, there are fair number of "katars" of similar form - all of which are blatant fakes/crude reproductions - that are currently being sold online.
Attached is one such example. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]()
Definitely not a katar as it would be impossible to use, thus useless.
This contraption simply cannot be held firmly in the hand. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
That this is or not a katar, i wouldn't presume to have the luggage to judge on it but, i wouldn't easily reject that its sole bar doesn't allow for a firm grip, without pondering on its (missing) handle. Think of such being of a (wooden) square cross section ... or ovoid, like the naginata, for one
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
I also would not dismiss the idea of it being a fighting weapon simply on the basis of a “single bar” argument.
Jens was kind enough to provide a link to his paper. Go there and look at the pics. #205 has a single crossbar and no side bars at all. Naturally, all old original examples of whatever mechanical creations had engineering imperfections and those were tweaked during subsequent development. Compare nomadic sabers with their barely effectual handguards with the later examples from a multitude of cultures. Pata has retained a single bar but introduced other solutions of the “infirm grip” problem. A similar problem of round Persian Shamshir grips was solved in Georgia by gradual widening of the grip toward the quillon block. Just making the bar flat instead of round would have improved the firmness of the grip. As they say in Russian, the first blin ( thin pancake) always comes out as a lump:-) Thus, IMHO, we may be seeing here not just old, but archaic Katar. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|