Is it a katar dagger ?

[ariel]

If its blade looks like a Katar, the handle looks like a Katar, and functionally it can be used like a Katar, why should we think that it is something other than just a Katar?

[francantolin]

Amen !

[fernando]

And another Amen .

[ariel]

Hallelujah!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

Hallelujah!

You mean הַלְלוּיָהּ .

[Richard G]

Could it be a slaughterer's sticking knife?
Regards
Richard

[Jens Nordlunde]

Frankie, in many Indian states stories are told about single, 'gigant warriors'.
Like the brother of Maharaja Anup Singh of Bikaner (b. 1638 d. 1698), who had to have weapons made especially to him, as other (normal) weapons were too small. His weapons are said to be on exhibition at the Bikaner Museum.
I dont know if this is the case with your katar, but it is a possibility.


Richard, I dont think a slaughter's sticking knife would have had a diamond shaped blade.

[mariusgmioc]

double posting

[ariel]

Imagine that its horizontal bar is wrapped with thick strips of leather or fabric. Would you change your verdict?

[kronckew]

Marius' comment no. 15 on the earlier post No.12 being a fake may be clouding his inability to envision it with an oval or more ergonomically shaped grip that would allow a user to, in the words of FIF, Index the blade properly.

In contradiction to the historical examples of western and eastern swords that DO have cylindrical grips, and were obviously made that way for ages. Marking down an item they are unfamiliar with and do not grip or use properly is not the fault of the weapon.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Imagine that its horizontal bar is wrapped with thick strips of leather or fabric. Would you change your verdict?

Not likely.

It is not only the geometry of the crossbar/crossbars that determine the stability in the hand, but also the extended longitudinal arms that contribute in a major way.
Those long arms are there with a purpose and no matter how flat/rectangular the transverse grip would be, it simply cannot ensure enough stability alone. Without the long arms, the slightest misalignment of the thrust would not only be ineffective, but also can have disastrous effect on your wrist.

I am saying all this because I have small hands and was able to play quite a lot with my katars and got a feel on how they fit in the hand.

Yet, this is only my personal opinion...

[Jens Nordlunde]

Thank you Marius, but I will show you the statue from where the katar, shown as a deawing, in my article origins. Its from a temple from Orissa build in the 10th century.

[Richard G]

Sorry Jens.
It was on;y a suggestion. I wasn't seeking to prove anything.
Regards
Richard

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Thank you Marius, but I will show you the statue from where the katar, shown as a deawing, in my article origins. Its from a temple from Orissa build in the 10th century.

Thank you Jens!

The sculpture is a proof that katars existed and were used as early as 10 century.

However, the sculpture is strongly stylised and cannot be consdidered as an accurate description of the precise geometry of the katar.

Also it would have been technically very difficult to make the katar in the sculpture with longer arms as they would have broken during the sculpting process.

Because of the artistic stylization, even the position of the hand holding the katar in the sculpture would make any thrust highly ineffective...

Last but not least, even the highly stylised katar in the sculpture resembles more to the clasic katars we know (with a characteristic triangular blade) than to the "item" in the original posting.

Do you know of any extant historical example of a katar like the one in the original posting?

[francantolin]

Hello,

I found this picture of old indians swords an harpoon,
comes from Paul Jaiwant book Arms and Armour of India.
archaic models.

I don't pretend mine is so old ( or just a real old !! )
but it can be a mix between this old ''antenna'' sword and a katar,
used in two ways, as a small sword or as a push dagger .

Just an idea but why not ?!...

For the handle efficiency-handling, I will try to wrap the bar with a strip of cloth 2-3cm thick and tell you.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Not likely.

It is not only the geometry of the crossbar/crossbars that determine the stability in the hand, but also the extended longitudinal arms that contribute in a major way.
Those long arms are there with a purpose and no matter how flat/rectangular the transverse grip would be, it simply cannot ensure enough stability alone. Without the long arms, the slightest misalignment of the thrust would not only be ineffective, but also can have disastrous effect on your wrist.

Marius,
As you can see, there are good and old examples of Katars with very short side projections. One could argue that the long ones might have served as minimalistic gauntlets, but you would agree that those were not very effective. Also, since they were positioned on the lateral sides of the forearm, their ability to minimize bending of the wrist was practically nonexistent. To control for it, one would need rigid support of the dorsal side of the forearm. Indians might have mutated their katars into hooded examples and, eventually, into Patas to correct it.

But, as usual, it was the fighting function that took the precedence.
Short lateral arms or long ones would not change the biomechanics of the thrust, i.e. the stabbing function.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Marius,
As you can see, there are good and old examples of Katars with very short side projections. One could argue that the long ones might have served as minimalistic gauntlets, but you would agree that those were not very effective. Also, since they were positioned on the lateral sides of the forearm, their ability to minimize bending of the wrist was practically nonexistent. To control for it, one would need rigid support of the dorsal side of the forearm. Indians might have mutated their katars into hooded examples and, eventually, into Patas to correct it.

But, as usual, it was the fighting function that took the precedence.
Short lateral arms or long ones would not change the biomechanics of the thrust, i.e. the stabbing function.

Short side projections is a looong way from NO side projections¨
The side projections serve not mainly to keep the wrist in alignment with the arm, but mostly to stabilise the dagger in the hand when the fist is tightened.

When the fist is tightened in the grip, one projection (the upper one) is pressed in the V-shaped space formed by the fist between the thumb and extension of the index finger, while the lower one is pressed against the hypothenar eminence, thus securing the grip.

Anyhow, from Robert's message, it became quite apparent this is a gardening tool.

However, this is my opinion, and mine alone.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

However, this is my opinion, and mine alone.

It's not only your opinion, it's also mine.



The two last katar posted have nothing to do with the weapon? tool posted originally... And this is not an opinion but a fact.

[Richard G]

Robert has more eloquently expressed the point I was trying to make earlier. The obvious possibility of this twisting in the hand when being thrust forward suggests to me it was meant to be placed in position and then pushed, rather than trying to stab a moving target.
This is why, in my opinion, i think it is more likely to be a tool than a weapon.
Regards
Richard

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

If its blade looks like a Katar, the handle looks like a Katar, and functionally it can be used like a Katar, why should we think that it is something other than just a Katar?

It only looks like a katar but it cannot be PROPERLY used like a katar as it will be very unstable in the hand.

Maybe to be used for theatrical performance, or just for decoration as part of a poor man's wedding attire.