Jim, thank you so much for your response. I am well aware that you are indeed very passionate and experienced with these things, and again I must state that my previous post wasn’t intended to be a direct personal attack, but an open letter inspired by much of what you had said. Some of your remarks are things I’ve heard not only numerous times on this forum (said by many more people than just you), but also innumerable times elsewhere on the internet, in other forums, in the comments of youtube videos, etc. Your reply just tipped the iceberg for me, so to speak, so it only felt appropriate for me to finally say something, especially in a thread that has specifically become name-game related.
I’ll be honest with you that most of what you’ve written in your replies to me are things I either agree with or think work as examples of what I’ve been talking about, and as such I don’t have much to say about them here. I think they illustrate well how humans will sometimes completely change or damage things (depending on your viewpoint) without realizing what they’re doing, for better or worse. Ignorance is bliss, as the platitude goes. This goes both ways too, as I can’t comment on the linguistics disputes for sword types I am unfamiliar with (i.e. ignorant of
).
In regards to the katar/jamdhar example though, so far as I’m aware katar actually is the appropriate endonym to use. To the best of my knowledge,
Jamdhar is of persian origin, or derived from persian root words, while katar comes from the Tamil
kattari, which was then carried into sanskrit, before ending up as katar in modern day hindi. I am of course just parroting what I’ve read online though, without having done my own research, so I would be totally open to anything that proves the opposite.
I would contend with your khyber knife point, as indeed I think the colloquial term is quite silly, and would prefer using salawar/siliwar yatagan (a lot of the larger examples actually do have a forward-and-back curving tip fyi - it’s hard to see but it’s definitely there), however I am unfamiliar with the nuances of that discussion so I’ll stay out of it.
Like I said in my last reply, I consider all of these (generally) long winded terms to function as the “scientific names” for these items. I have nothing against anyone that uses the collector-held colloquialisms for them in casual conversation, however I only think it’s appropriate to use the scientific names when we are discussing these things seriously, which I’d like to think is at least part of what this forum allows us to do - seriously analyze and discuss arms and armor without having to exclusively use layman's terms.
I believe the “true” names for any sword type should be a mixture of those used natively and originally (i.e. as close to the days when they were actually used as possible), mixed with a healthy amount of brevity so as to not make any particular term too jargon-centric and alienate those less invested in the field.
Firangi is a perfectly fine term, however its definition I find to be too imprecise, and as such the native Marathi term,
dhop, seems like a perfectly adequate and necessary replacement.
While I’m aware Laz bichaq was perhaps the closest, most precise term to use for this previously enigmatic sword type, it (the term) is of a turkish origin, and does not respect the native users of these swords, who were predominantly laz (although I’m aware these swords indeed spread across transcaucasia and were allegedly used by kurds and armenians). As such,
in accordance with my own research, I prefer the native term
Lazuri Didi Xami, which I think when shortened to just
Didi Xami (keeping in mind the principle of brevity), is a completely acceptable name that does justice to the ethnic minority group(s) that wielded it.
Anyways back to directly responding: the “fear and ignorance, and the complete opposite of willingness to learn”-part was, I assure you, not at all intended at you, Jim. Again, like I wrote at the beginning of my reply here, I am well aware of your credentials. My intent was never to insult you with this statement, rather it was my attempt to psychoanalyze (perhaps poorly) the exact reason as to why it would seem to me so many people stubbornly hold on to terms that are otherwise antiquated or outdated.
I repeat myself - I
do not believe you to be fearful, ignorant, or unwilling to learn about new terms Jim. My comment was intended at those stubborn forum members that insist on never updating their vocabulary because they’ve grown fond of some poorly transliterated terms written nearly a century ago by one orientalist or another. I feel as though, if and when we can do so, discerning the native, non-loan-word terms for sword, knife, or "edged implement" in general should always be prioritized over the "traditional" terms we use in the ethnographic A&A field. My issue here is with those that insist on clinging to the latter, rather than engaging in the adventure that is finding the former.