Jamdhar katari - a theory

[Jim McDougall]

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]

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]

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]

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?

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by ariel

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?

An interesting point, so to speak.

I'm not sufficiently versed in battle wear of North or South Indians to come to a conclusion, but I suspect that the further south you travel on the Indian subcontinent, the lighter one's clothing must be. Stabbing through several layers of cloth and leather would require a sturdier blade than one that has little or no barrier between the attacker and the target's flesh.

This begs the question whether my jamdhr katari, with its 2mm blade thickness, hails from a southern area?

For comparison purposes, the thickest section of the katar blade illustrated above is about 9.6mm. The tool, ideally, defines its purpose.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Bob why dont you show us your katar?
Yes the difference of the blades can be big, especially on the early katars, and it could be due to the different way they dressed, but as Henderly wrote, the wounds from katars were very bad, I think he must have meant the wounds from the katars with the armourpiersing tips.

[ariel]

Wasn’t “ bad wound” a desired effect of using katars for their alleged main function, i.e. tiger hunting?:-)

Fernando, we seem to be on the same page ( both literally and figuratively).

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Bob A

An interesting point, so to speak.



This begs the question whether my jamdhr katari, with its 2mm blade thickness, hails from a southern area?

For comparison purposes, the thickest section of the katar blade illustrated above is about 9.6mm. The tool, ideally, defines its purpose.

Bob,
Your last sentence perfectly captures the gist of this discussion. Engineering construction of any well-developed weapon is the strongest indicator of its intended mode of action. This, IMHO, is perfectly reflected in the Persian name of short bladed daggers with reinforced point: Zirah Bouk, Mail Piercer, a purely function-describing approach.

This is also why attempts to propose evolution of Ch’hura from “Karud” as a consequence of transitioning from real mail to padded clothing makes no sense: their blades are indistinguishable, and better defined lower stop of the Ch’hura’s handle further prevents hand sliding during stabbing action.

Why were Jamadhar Katari blades thin? I do not think that can serve as the evidence of its Southern origin; rather I would be interested to know whether mail was widespread in Kafiristan early on.

Any information?

[Jim McDougall]

In looking into the 'jamadhar-katari' there are a number of things to consider about these daggers as far as ethnographically as well as martially (in manner of use).
These were weapons of the Kafir tribes of Hindu Kush, regions of Eastern Afghanistan near Chitral areas. This region was known historically as Kafiristan as the tribes (collectively Kafirs) practiced an animist religion nominally with Hindu associations. When Pushtuns invaded and eventually converted many these areas became known as Nuristan.
The tribes relocated to avoid conversion to Islam, and here it becomes complicated. There are tribes known as Kalash believed to descend from the Kafirs in Chitral, while other Kafirs known as Siah-Posh (back robes) are in other areas (who claim they are not 'directly related to the Kalash).

Apparently these Kafir tribes were not easily subdued, probably mostly for their guerilla style warfare, and they were known for use of axes, bow and arrow, as well as the dagger. In images I have seen of one holding a dagger, it is like a 'fist' dagger grasped for downward stab.

I would note here an interesting detail, the tribes of Kafirs had of course different names, and one tribe decribed were known as the 'Katars'
This was found in an online reference about the Kafirs of Nuristan.
One of the sources listed was "Notes on Kafiristan" by H,G.Raferty , 1859.

In considering the construction of these jamadhar katari it seems there is concern directed to the thinness of the blade. It would appear these daggers have, like the khanjhar in Arabia, become a status symbol worn by men as an element of traditional wear. Obviously, these accoutrements are not made with the same martial soundness as earlier weapons intended for combat.

It does not seem like these Kafir tribes fought in pitched combat formations and as noted used bow and arrow and axes, with these daggers probably in close quarter contact. I would look forward to others insight into the case for use of mail by their opponents, but I strongly doubt that the Pashtuns who primarily fought them wore such armor.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

... 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?

I will humbly look forward to hear those knowledgeable (as you are) opining that, the different type of blades (reinforced or flat tipped) is more a circumstantial choice (read resource) than a selective one, thus armour piercing not being the obliging factor. As an example would be the Mahratas, being more in contact with Europeans, whether capturing their blades in combat or acquiring them in trade.
I have read someone (gratuitously) saying that, the reinforced tip does not necessarily have more efficacy in piercing armor than narrow and slender blades, their primary function being that of preventing them from bending or breaking, such is the force applied to their thrust.

[Jim McDougall]

In rereading some of this thread, I came across some notes I had made last February (#156), concerning the use of these daggers by the Kafirs, and that the distinction of the term jamadhar katari apparently derived through Egerton (1880) in some confusion on weapon descriptions.

As I noted, the dagger form we are apparently referring to as used by the Kafirs is termed a katarah (or katara) by the Kafirs, as I found in the 1999 book "Kafirs of Hindu Kush: A Study of the Waigal and Ashkun Kafirs" by Max Klimburg.

Many salient facts and notes are often lost in the volume of these long standing threads so sometimes helpful to bring forward certain notes for the benefit of current readers.

These katara daggers, at least the ones I have seen are not 'armor piercing' blades, but more leaf shaped straight, or with slightly curved khanjhar like blades.

I think we are confusing these apparently mistermed jamadhar-katari with the katar (jamdhar) of northern regions (Rajasthan, Lahore etc.) which indeed had malle perce (reinforced) tip blades. The katars of the Deccan and southern regions did indeed use fragments of European blades for katars, but these were not typically 'rapier' blades but those of the heavier European arming swords. The use of actual narrow rapier blades was it seems usually confined to full size khanda type swords intended more as prestigious court type weapons in my view.

[Jim McDougall]

As I have noted previously, this is a pretty monumental thread, begun with Stan S. who was posting thoughts on the JAMADHAR KATARI in April of 2012.This drifted into a 4 year chat on the katar, and lost sight of the original query on these jamadhar katari daggers.

In my previous post I noted that the jamadhar katari term seems to have come from Egerton (1880, #344,345) where he uses this to describe these H shape hilt daggers. They are curiously noted as from Nepal.

As has been noted many times over as many years here, the term katar was apparently somehow used by Egerton to describe the transverse grip 'punch' daggers which according to Pant (1980) are properly termed 'jamadhar'.

The original post by Stan some 5 years ago observes that along with the confusion in terms to these two dagger forms, he suggests that perhaps the grip or hand hold has a similarity, though in different disposition as far as position.

Some years ago while researching with a German colleague on the Kafirs and their unique weapons and culture, I was shown numbers of these daggers, which in actuality are termed 'katarah'. These are as I describe in the previous post yesterday, used in areas of Afghanistan to the east by Kafirs (also Kalash) and their tribal groups in Chital to Nuristan.
Apparantly these were held in a fisted grasp, indeed much like the 'katar' and the bar like pommel and crossguard form similar support afforded to the hand of the wielder by the side bars.
(see attached of Kafir man holding one).
Also attached are the entries in Egerton (1880) with the daggers illustrated accordingly.

Also: Regarding the curious attribution to Nepal. My German friend would often travel to Nepal to acquire weapons, and gathering quite a number of these there. Apparently there was a notable diaspora of Kafirs out of the Nuristan regions when subjugated by Abdur Rahman in the late 1890s, however there must have been a flow of them to Nepal prior to this as Egerton did his research many years prior to this. The reason for the movement was of course the Kafir folk religion and avoidance of conversion to Islam. They were animists as well as closer to Hinduism, which along with Buddhism was prevalent in Nepal.
Attaching also examples of katarah (jamdhar katari) .

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The use of actual narrow rapier blades was it seems usually confined to full size khanda type swords intended more as prestigious court type weapons in my view.

Ah ... Jim, don't forget the pata, often mounted with European blades. My late example had a long slim one (960X25 m/m).

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Mercenary, excellent illustration!!

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