Image of an Indian warrior with a dagger khanjarli.

[ariel]

From the old Russian movie:
- Can you see the gofer?
- No
- Me neither. But he is somewhere there....

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

From the old Russian movie:
- Can you see the gofer?
- No
- Me neither. But he is somewhere there....

It’s extremely funny. You are a real comic. It would seem that I asked the forum participants an elementary question. But instead of answering, I enjoy humor and lengthy philosophical discourse.

[Saracen]

Probably because weapons often serve as a symbol of belonging to a certain social group.
For example, I have also never come across an image of a janissary with an Ottoman court dagger.

[Ian]

Saracen,

That's an interesting thought. Any ideas as to which social or ethnic groups in India may have used the khanjarli? That could help point us in a certain direction to look for images.

[Jim McDougall]

If I may, not to detract from the banter, and following Ian in returning to objectivity, I think possibly this entire situation is partly 'name game' and partly a variant form from one to another.

In Pant (1980) he notes the 'KHANJARLI' (p.179) and that Egerton has wrongly termed several 'kanjarli' (502-505) and pictured with the lunette pommels as khanjhars.
In checking Egerton however, it is as noted, but 500,501 ARE described as Khanjharli, but not pictured.

In searching old posts here, I found one which had a chilanum grouping, but one had a lunette ivory pommel instead of the flared 'arms' type. With that I thought perhaps this is a variation.
As 'khanjharli' does not appear in the index or glossary in "Hindu Arms & Armor", Robert Elgood, 2004............I had not found this, but looking back at the chapter on Vijaranagaram there it was..........p.179:

Chilanum and khanjharli, with notes that the form probably evolved in Vijayanagara with Maratha conquests in Orissa. Orissa, known for elephants may have presented the ivory to be used to form the lunette style hilts. The lunette form pommel is seen in Deccani dagger types (also seen in Elgood, p.175).

The chilanum is typically regarded as a Maratha originated dagger (some suggest Nepal but that may be from diffusion northeast) . While Pant suggests Hindu origins, perhaps that is due to the Vijayanagara examples of chilanum.

Clearly terminology, influences and diffusion of styles add more confusion to the identification of weapon forms and the semantics in describing them.
The image of the Sikh warrior in the original post, may have had the term khanjarli used to describe what we know as a chilanum. ....due to the case noted.
If he was in the Deccan, where these daggers (chilanum) were well known, the term khanjarli may have inadvertantly been used to describe a chilanum, although not the variant 'khanjarli' >..a word known to the photographer or others captioning the photo.

As far as finding a warrior of cultural region wearing these recurved, lunette pommel daggers.....look to art work from Vijayanagara 17th century, and Marathas there.....specifically Orissa, also in Madras, c. 1758, (as per Zarkoe Selo cat. p.276) an example from Arkati.


I hope this helps.

[Ian]

Thanks Jim, for your very helpful and informative response.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Ian

Thanks Jim, for your very helpful and informative response.

Thank you Ian.
I have found more toward the Vijayanagara connection from a query on this I relayed to a personal friend who is an established authority on Indian arms. He notes that finding artwork such as miniatures which might have such a depiction from the south is unlikely as this type of art was more peculiar to the north. Also the obscurity of this particular weapon compounds the problem.

He does however point out that the 'khanjarli' as a dagger was emplaced as a gift on two (perhaps more) occasions in the 19th c. by Maharajahs of Vijayanagara, in one case to Prince of Wales, the other to a British general. Presumably this may have been the source of Egerton's references, but have not looked further.
These events and Egerton may have been the sources for the references which claim the khanjarli is of Hindu origin and from Vijaranagara.

The age of these seems suggested from the 18th c. and that seems likely. That these were presented by Maharajahs to British figures in the 19th c simply reflects that these were weapons deemed worthy of such presentation even if much earlier examples.

As I have shown in my earlier post, the khanjarli appears to have been a variation of the Maratha chilanum with the ivory lunette as a pommel which came into regions of Orissa in their incursions. This is clearly shown in Elgoods" Hindu Arms and Ritual" as noted with an ivory lunette pommeled example among other 'chilanum'.

This again, is the reason the Sikh in the original post was 'supposed' to have a khanjarli, it referred to the chilanum clearly seen in his sash.

After this research, I was furnished the attached photo from another personal friend, which is a remarkable find to say the least! He indicates this image is from Pondicherry, a location in these regions on the eastern side of India, c. 1838.

Again the plate of Chilanum from Elgood. It would seem that the khanjarli developed into a slightly smaller weapon perhaps leading to the term with suffix 'li' which I think may be a diminutive of 'khanjhar' ?

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by Ian

Saracen,

That's an interesting thought. Any ideas as to which social or ethnic groups in India may have used the khanjarli? That could help point us in a certain direction to look for images.

No, Ian. It was an insight. Or, if you like, a hypothesis within the framework of a hypothetico-deductive model of research, which is still waiting for its confirmation or refutation.
To do this, now everyone can attach their deduction to this hypothesis.