Jamdhar katari - a theory

Mercenary · 25th May 2019, 06:04 PM

.

Jim McDougall · 25th May 2019, 06:32 PM

Cool.
What is this from, any info? What is the purpose of the image?
Nice to see this thread again, but what are we looking at?

Mercenary · 25th May 2019, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Cool.
What is this from, any info? What is the purpose of the image?
Nice to see this thread again, but what are we looking at?

Using of katar. Maybe piercing through the mail.

Illustration from Genghis-nama. Mugals, 16c.
"Turkish tribes slay Jenghiz Khan's ancestors in the Land of Argune-Kun"

Jim McDougall · 25th May 2019, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Using of katar. Maybe piercing through the mail.

Illustration from Genghis-nama. Mugals, 16c.
"Turkish tribes slay Jenghiz Khan's ancestors in the Land of Argune-Kun"

Thank you Mercenary, excellent illustration!!

ariel · 26th May 2019, 02:04 AM

I agree!
I still remember Mercenary’s posting of pictures of a battle between Persian and Afghani armies showing guardless sabers ( shashkas?) from the era of Nadir Shah.
The only one comparable in its impact was a pic of Baluchistan warriors carrying sabers with camel head-like pommel and a ring. That one was found by Eric ( estcrh).

I know, I know , some pseudoacademic characters may persist in doubting the impact of those iconographic pieces of evidence against the popularly accepted dating of shashkas or the attribution of Hyderabadi swords.

But IMHO they can just go and beat their heads against the Great Wall of China.

My hat is off to these two guys!

Bob A · 26th May 2019, 04:05 AM

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.

ariel · 26th May 2019, 06:40 AM

Bob,

Agree with you completely. The only similarity between the two is, as you have mentioned, the distance between the bars of the Katar and the upper and lower “ quillons” of the Jamdhar Katari. The explanation is simple: both of them demarcate the grip, the size of which is determined by the width of human fist. Any dagger will have approximately same size grip: chillanum, ch’hura, khanjarli etc.

It is the position of the grip that determines the function, and the transverse positioning of it in case of katars is unique: it is a perfect stabber but an extremely poor slasher.

No matter how Jamdhar Katari and Katar might be similar phonetically or linguistically, they are two different weapons with two different engineering solutions. Linguistics is the only thing that unites them

Once again, I would like to remind Elgood’s definition: “ Jamdhar= Katar”. But that is all that unites them.

What is interesting, IMHO, that blades of South Indian katars were flat to the point that many used a fragment of European rapiers. But the North Indian ones had inherently reinforced points in a manner of Zirah Bouks. Does it suggest that North Indians constructed them with a view to more heavily armored opponents?

fernando · 26th May 2019, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Mercenary, excellent illustration!!

Voilá ... a scene in that katars are not being used in tiger hunting

25th May 2019, 06:04 PM	#1
Mercenary Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 428	. Attached Images

26th May 2019, 02:04 AM	#5
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I agree! I still remember Mercenary’s posting of pictures of a battle between Persian and Afghani armies showing guardless sabers ( shashkas?) from the era of Nadir Shah. The only one comparable in its impact was a pic of Baluchistan warriors carrying sabers with camel head-like pommel and a ring. That one was found by Eric ( estcrh). I know, I know , some pseudoacademic characters may persist in doubting the impact of those iconographic pieces of evidence against the popularly accepted dating of shashkas or the attribution of Hyderabadi swords. But IMHO they can just go and beat their heads against the Great Wall of China. My hat is off to these two guys! Last edited by ariel; 26th May 2019 at 03:53 AM.

26th May 2019, 04:05 AM	#6
Bob A Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 436	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. Attached Images

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

25th May 2019, 06:32 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,297	Cool. What is this from, any info? What is the purpose of the image? Nice to see this thread again, but what are we looking at?

26th May 2019, 06:40 AM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Bob, Agree with you completely. The only similarity between the two is, as you have mentioned, the distance between the bars of the Katar and the upper and lower “ quillons” of the Jamdhar Katari. The explanation is simple: both of them demarcate the grip, the size of which is determined by the width of human fist. Any dagger will have approximately same size grip: chillanum, ch’hura, khanjarli etc. It is the position of the grip that determines the function, and the transverse positioning of it in case of katars is unique: it is a perfect stabber but an extremely poor slasher. No matter how Jamdhar Katari and Katar might be similar phonetically or linguistically, they are two different weapons with two different engineering solutions. Linguistics is the only thing that unites them Once again, I would like to remind Elgood’s definition: “ Jamdhar= Katar”. But that is all that unites them. What is interesting, IMHO, that blades of South Indian katars were flat to the point that many used a fragment of European rapiers. But the North Indian ones had inherently reinforced points in a manner of Zirah Bouks. Does it suggest that North Indians constructed them with a view to more heavily armored opponents?