Jamdhar/katar why do we call it a katar?

Help · 8th February 2009, 09:38 PM

Hi, I came across your excellent site whilst doing some research and wondered if you would be interested to know that I have been led to believe that the initial error was GC Stone's as he states in 'A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration' etc.(from my notes, I don't have a copy in front of me) that "Jamdhar Katari ...under this name Egerton figures the Kafirs of the Hindu Kush" (pg. 314)
However in 'The Arms and Armour of India' Egerton places Jamdhar Katari as Nepalese weapons.
Stone also mentions the British Museum Handbook which shows a Katir of the Hindu Kush, and the error has apparently led to much confusion between two daggers which only have a similarity.
What do you think?

Lew · 8th February 2009, 10:10 PM

Found this.

http://books.google.com/books?id=SPJ...um=3&ct=result

Help · 8th February 2009, 11:28 PM

Thank you for the link,

yes the reference is to 'the knives' of the Kafir... I was trying so hard to be accurate too as that was my first post...

Jens Nordlunde · 9th February 2009, 04:00 PM

Hello Help, welcome to the forum

.

It is difficult to say when, what we call a katar, was called so. It could be Egerton, but it could also have been a number of others, like Hendley, Watt, Burton or someone else, all writing about the same time. The name could even be a lot older, and I am afraid we will never know for sure.

Help · 18th February 2009, 09:32 PM

Hi there,
Thanks for the reply Jens and the extra information. As I mentioned it's something I've been researching- not the entymological origin, so I'm probably in the wrong thread, my apologies for that - but the origin of the error of what is commonly known as Egerton's error. I obviously have a huge amount of respect for G.C. Stone's work, I just think the wrong person got the blame on this one.

Jens Nordlunde · 5th January 2014, 04:28 PM

Hi All,
I was making a search for 'Katar', and read some quite old mails on the subject.
This made me remember an article I have written about the age of the katar, which I could trace back to Orissa in the tenth century. The first accepted written description of a katar is by Ibn Battuta in the 14th century, but in the article a drawing of the early one is shown, made by the renowned Indian historian Rajendralala Mitra (1823/24-1891).
Should anyone be interested in reading the article, it can be found here.
Arms & Armour, volume 10, no 1. Royal Armouries, Leeds 2013.
I cant put it on the forum as the publisher has the copyright - sorry.
Jens

bhushan_lawate · 6th January 2014, 09:36 AM

Hi All,

My two cents..!!!

Jamdhar -- originated from the Sanskrit word "Yama Daunstra" literally meeting tooth of Yama -- God of Death

Katar -- is a distorted form of "Kattarak" in Sanskrit -- which means a weapon carried on waist belts. This was used as a dress dagger in the Indian peninsula for a long time similar to the likes of Chillanum or Pesh Kabz.

I can't find anything at the moment to show how these words distorted and came into vogue.

Regards,
Bhushan

ariel · 8th January 2014, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Help

However in 'The Arms and Armour of India' Egerton places Jamdhar Katari as Nepalese weapons.

Even funnier: Egerton's plate of Nepalese weapons has a picture of a typical Ottoman yataghan.

I think he grouped the weapons according to the place where he or his agents bought them. Had he managed to buy a Balinese Keris that somehow found its way to Afghanistan, we still might have argued about its true origin :-)

Well, he spent literally only a couple of years in India as a tourist and did not have Stone or suchlike as his reference book:-) Forgivable errors of a novice collector. Pity it acquired a patina of authority.

Jim McDougall · 8th January 2014, 05:32 PM

Absolutely Ibrahiim, and one of the true conundrums of studying ethnographic arms is the confusion in terminology which constantly plague students using old resources and contemporary accounts. In many cases transliteration and regional semantics, particularly in India where so many languages and dialects are present, certain forms are called by varying terms.
Ariel, good note on Egerton, and actually his work was so well venerated as it was indeed a seminal work on ethnographic arms (it was 1880 while Burton came out in 1884). While other writers such as Walhouse and others had written articles slightly earlier, his work was far more comprehensive and overall actually reasonably accurate aside from these errors . I believe his book was a catalog but cannot recall the occasion, and the items were listed according to the donors or submissions.

It is interesting that early writers indeed relied on other works, and some errors in Burton (1884) are traced to Demmin (1877). I can recall an instance where an item was identified as Tibetan from the Oldman catalog (1909?) while the exact same sword was classified as from Benin in West Africa with an example collected by French donor to a museum in Belgium. Research revealed the item in Belgium was indeed African.
If I recall correctly Stone has a sword identified as Italian which is actually British cavalry 1780s.

I always maintain great respect for all authors of books and articles on the difficult topics of arms history and classifications, and I believe virtually all of the books carry certain disclaimers in the introductions, as well as sincere hopes for others to continue the research to resolve the inevitable errors.

I like to think that we are among those who sort of 'pick up the torch'

8th February 2009, 09:38 PM	#1
Help Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 3	Egerton's error? Hi, I came across your excellent site whilst doing some research and wondered if you would be interested to know that I have been led to believe that the initial error was GC Stone's as he states in 'A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration' etc.(from my notes, I don't have a copy in front of me) that "Jamdhar Katari ...under this name Egerton figures the Kafirs of the Hindu Kush" (pg. 314) However in 'The Arms and Armour of India' Egerton places Jamdhar Katari as Nepalese weapons. Stone also mentions the British Museum Handbook which shows a Katir of the Hindu Kush, and the error has apparently led to much confusion between two daggers which only have a similarity. What do you think?

8th February 2009, 11:28 PM	#3
Help Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 3	Thanks Thank you for the link, yes the reference is to 'the knives' of the Kafir... I was trying so hard to be accurate too as that was my first post...

9th February 2009, 04:00 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hello Help, welcome to the forum. It is difficult to say when, what we call a katar, was called so. It could be Egerton, but it could also have been a number of others, like Hendley, Watt, Burton or someone else, all writing about the same time. The name could even be a lot older, and I am afraid we will never know for sure.

18th February 2009, 09:32 PM	#5
Help Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 3	Katir/Katari Hi there, Thanks for the reply Jens and the extra information. As I mentioned it's something I've been researching- not the entymological origin, so I'm probably in the wrong thread, my apologies for that - but the origin of the error of what is commonly known as Egerton's error. I obviously have a huge amount of respect for G.C. Stone's work, I just think the wrong person got the blame on this one.

5th January 2014, 04:28 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	How Old is the Katar? Hi All, I was making a search for 'Katar', and read some quite old mails on the subject. This made me remember an article I have written about the age of the katar, which I could trace back to Orissa in the tenth century. The first accepted written description of a katar is by Ibn Battuta in the 14th century, but in the article a drawing of the early one is shown, made by the renowned Indian historian Rajendralala Mitra (1823/24-1891). Should anyone be interested in reading the article, it can be found here. Arms & Armour, volume 10, no 1. Royal Armouries, Leeds 2013. I cant put it on the forum as the publisher has the copyright - sorry. Jens Last edited by Jens Nordlunde; 5th January 2014 at 04:55 PM.

8th February 2009, 10:10 PM	#2
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Found this. http://books.google.com/books?id=SPJ...um=3&ct=result

6th January 2014, 09:36 AM	#7
bhushan_lawate Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: India Posts: 77	Hi All, My two cents..!!! Jamdhar -- originated from the Sanskrit word "Yama Daunstra" literally meeting tooth of Yama -- God of Death Katar -- is a distorted form of "Kattarak" in Sanskrit -- which means a weapon carried on waist belts. This was used as a dress dagger in the Indian peninsula for a long time similar to the likes of Chillanum or Pesh Kabz. I can't find anything at the moment to show how these words distorted and came into vogue. Regards, Bhushan

8th January 2014, 05:32 PM	#9
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Absolutely Ibrahiim, and one of the true conundrums of studying ethnographic arms is the confusion in terminology which constantly plague students using old resources and contemporary accounts. In many cases transliteration and regional semantics, particularly in India where so many languages and dialects are present, certain forms are called by varying terms. Ariel, good note on Egerton, and actually his work was so well venerated as it was indeed a seminal work on ethnographic arms (it was 1880 while Burton came out in 1884). While other writers such as Walhouse and others had written articles slightly earlier, his work was far more comprehensive and overall actually reasonably accurate aside from these errors . I believe his book was a catalog but cannot recall the occasion, and the items were listed according to the donors or submissions. It is interesting that early writers indeed relied on other works, and some errors in Burton (1884) are traced to Demmin (1877). I can recall an instance where an item was identified as Tibetan from the Oldman catalog (1909?) while the exact same sword was classified as from Benin in West Africa with an example collected by French donor to a museum in Belgium. Research revealed the item in Belgium was indeed African. If I recall correctly Stone has a sword identified as Italian which is actually British cavalry 1780s. I always maintain great respect for all authors of books and articles on the difficult topics of arms history and classifications, and I believe virtually all of the books carry certain disclaimers in the introductions, as well as sincere hopes for others to continue the research to resolve the inevitable errors. I like to think that we are among those who sort of 'pick up the torch'