On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

About the article in post one. The author writes. "From two independent sources the descriptions of traditional martial practices in Muslim Lucknow, which ceased to exist by the late 19th century, are known." It would have been interesting to know, which two indipendent sources the author refers to[/i]

Dear Jens
I can not put all the article here . It was published in Russian journal and I hope will be soon published in English. But I can write to you in PM.

Under katar. A pity it is not mentioned where Egerton wrote that the katars origin from Nepal and when.

Robert Elgood in "Hindu Arms And Ritual", p. 163 wrote "For many years they were attributed to Nepal on the basis of a purchase and attribution by Egerton". Further it is very well written that this kind of dagers rather "a conservative survival".
Oh... I am sorry. In the article it is not about "jamdhar" but simple "katar" or "katari". It is about Egerton's #345 and others like it. Of course, I have got your article.

Looking forward to see what you have found out about the 'Phul-katara'.

I will add this part of text to the article in English. May be after translate I will put this part right here.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Thank you for your answer.
I believe that the katar origins from the south. Stuard Welsh and others believed so too. But for me it is a believe, till I am convinced it origined from somewhere else.
Researching Indian weapons or weapon names is a passion, where the outcome of the research is not always sure. You can work for a long time, and reach a point where you believe in something, but this does not mean that what you believe in is correct, so you have to go on searching, till you can prove what you believe in.
Jens

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Thank you for your answer.
I believe that the katar origins from the south. Stuard Welsh and others believed so too. But for me it is a believe, till I am convinced it origined from somewhere else.
Researching Indian weapons or weapon names is a passion, where the outcome of the research is not always sure. You can work for a long time, and reach a point where you believe in something, but this does not mean that what you believe in is correct, so you have to go on searching, till you can prove what you believe in.
Jens

Very, very well said Jens.

[Timo Nieminen]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Researching Indian weapons or weapon names is a passion, where the outcome of the research is not always sure.

In English, we tend to borrow terms used in other languages and apply them to a specific category of weapon. This is very common, and it teaches us to expect that specific categories of weapons have specific, and fixed, names.

But the words we borrow are often much more generic in their original languages. For example, "gladius" in English means "Roman short sword", and in Latin just means "sword", generically. For example, in Curtius Rufus' "History of Alexander", "Copidas vocabant gladios leviter curvatos, falcibus similes" which we can translate as "They call their lightly-curved sickle-like gladius a "kopis"". While the Romans were happy to call a kopis a "gladius", this doesn't work in English.

If we were trying to find about the evolution of the Roman gladius via literature, we might be misled by sources like this.

http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/curtius/curtius8.shtml

[mrcjgscott]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

You can work for a long time, and reach a point where you believe in something, but this does not mean that what you believe in is correct, so you have to go on searching, till you can prove what you believe in.
Jens

Very true Jens!

Just when I convince myself something is certain, is usually the moment I realise how much further I need to go to prove my conviction.

It is so important to keep an open mind, and continue the search.

[Jens Nordlunde]

In Robert Elgood's book Arma and Armour at the Jaypur Court. The Royal Collection, Robert gives several examples, like on page 216.

Mace. Shashpar (sash in Persian means six - a six-flanged mace). Rajput courts would have seen this as a destinctly Mughal weapon.
If a bladed weapon was added at the top of the mace, would today be called a gurz with a zaghnol mounted at the top. Other Rajput names for a mace are musala or parigha.

My guess is that the Muslims had several words for the same weapon, depending on if they were under Persian, Turkish or maybe Mongol influence.
The Hindus would also have different names for the same weapon, but that would likely have something to do with where in the country they lived, and which language they spoke.
Jens

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

The Hindus would also have different names for the same weapon, but that would likely have something to do with where in the country they lived, and which language they spoke.
Jens

Exactly! And when someone of European tourists of second half of 19th century heard some of local names and now we have to see it in albums and repeat it as mantra it is not serious.
But even more ridiculous when the tourist asked someone "What is it" and Indian seller answered "It is for cutting, crushing, killing..." so now we have a lot of confusion from "katar", "katari", "katara", "bank", "bichwa", "kirch" and so. I am not talking about that sometimes Indian weapon was called like the material from which it was made ))

[ariel]

To accomplish a serious study of the names of Indian weapons one needs to know a multitude of local languages and carefully go through mountains of primary sources. To make things even worse , one needs to verify the meaning of the name of each weapon through careful interrogation of its actual users, and there are none left.

I am very pessimistic about the outcome of this endeavor......

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

I am very pessimistic about the outcome of this endeavor......

But you can read that the others know. This is a normal process of learning.