First, I'd like to remark Mercenary's illustration depicting not only the use of katar as armor-piercing weapon, but also to note the soldier being attacked seems to be wielding a jamdhar katari. Two for one!
I have posted below a few poor cellphone pictures.
One illustrates the near-identical distance between the bars of a katar, and those of a jamghar katari. Each is about 8.5cm. However much they may be dissimilar in other ways, the grip size is equivalent. While probably useless as information, a comparison seemed worthwhile.
Other photos illustrate the way that the nature of the grip forces hand position; the weapons are dissimilar in use and function, but they sit in hand identically. Th only difference is the way the blade projects from the hand.
Finally, the thickness, or lack thereof, of the blades is worthy of remark. The jamdhar katari's blade is remarkable for its thinness. This is not a weapon for slaying tigers. I can see it slipping nicely between someone's ribs, though.
Similar names, similar hilts - with a twist - but totally different uses.
Finally, the hilt design of the jamdhar katari is notably similar to that of the chillanum, to my eye at any rate. Of course there are obvious differences, but the underlying concept seems to derive from an archetype common to both. (No chillanum pics, though.) Apologies for the implied derailment here.
|