Jamdhar katari - a theory

Jim McDougall · 29th July 2016, 07:40 PM

We seem to have a consensus ....interesting...like retrying an old case, this one over four years old......this time. Original research on these was about 13 years ago.

Jens Nordlunde · 29th July 2016, 09:32 PM

Hi Stan,
It was a try, and not a bad one.
What you have shown is important, you try to think in different ways, and that is very important, for someone who is interested in researching.
I dont know how many books you have, but like Nidhin (one of the members of this forum) said, "if you buy two pounds of weapons, you should buy four pounds of books" - and he is right, of course.

Making questions like the one you have, shows that you are on the right way - you have found the light - so to say.

Happy researches in the future.

Jens

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 30th July 2016, 01:39 AM

I refer readers to an excellent description of this weapon at Atkinsons swords on http://atkinson-swords.com/collectio...ghanistan.html and by the author above at # 10.

I extract from his fine summary the following; Quote"There is much debate about the origin of the name and in fact which name is “correct” (jamadhar, jandad, jamdhar, jumdud). The spelling jamdhar seems to indicate Hindi origin yet “Jamdar” may also be a Persian word with the suggested etymology of janb-dar, that is, 'flank render.' An alternative theory is that "jamdhar" is an evolution of the words "Yama" (Lord of death to Hindus) and "Daushtra" (tooth, in Sanskrit). This became "Yama+Dadh", Jamdhad, and now "Jamdhar". In support of this derivation, the word "katar" was originally termed "jamdhar" and loosely translated as "tooth of death." The term "katar" is now applied generally to transverse grip "push" daggers".Unquote.

Jens Nordlunde · 30th July 2016, 02:01 PM

Here you can read an abstract from the article How Old is the Katar?
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...nalCode=yaaa20

In India, Art and Culture 1300-1900 Stuart Cary Welsh on page 271 writes thet the katar probably originated in southers India. Unfortunately he does not explain how he came to that conclusion.
But as you can see ffor the abstract mentioned above I agree with him. The katar in question is no 205 on the drawing. A photo of the statue holding the katar is shown inthis book. Donaldson, Thomas E.:Hindu Temple Art of Orissa, vol. III. E.J.Brill, Leiden 1987.

Miguel · 30th July 2016, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Here you can read an abstract from the article How Old is the Katar?
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...nalCode=yaaa20

In India, Art and Culture 1300-1900 Stuart Cary Welsh on page 271 writes thet the katar probably originated in southers India. Unfortunately he does not explain how he came to that conclusion.
But as you can see ffor the abstract mentioned above I agree with him. The katar in question is no 205 on the drawing. A photo of the statue holding the katar is shown inthis book. Donaldson, Thomas E.:Hindu Temple Art of Orissa, vol. III. E.J.Brill, Leiden 1987.

Hello Jens, I seem to remember a fairly recent thread where Katars with one bar were shown, possibly the same image together with old carvings, were discussed and I still do not understand how you can effectively hold a Katar with no side arms and only one round grip bar to stab someone, surely it could not be gripped firmly enough for this. I suppose it could be used as a club by striking with the flat of the blade but this is obviously not its purpose so how was a strong enough grip realised? I would love to know.
Regards
Miguel

Jens Nordlunde · 30th July 2016, 08:33 PM

Hi Miguel,
Yes you are right, and I cant really tell you, to me it also seems to be impossible, I have tried to guess as well, and the only thing I have, so far, been able to come up with is, that maybe it was not a weapon from the start, but developed into a weapon over time.
Should I guess, I would say that a lot of the weapons were not meant as being weapons, but over time developed into weapons. I think some of the very early weapons were in a developing state, in the first century or so of their 'lives'. I may be very wrong, but that is the best I can say at the moment, but I am researching it, as it interests me a lot.
So end of story - I cant answer your very interesting question.

ariel · 30th July 2016, 09:49 PM

It is also conceivable that the drawing was not accurate: the bar might have been not straight and smooth, but more complex or deeply checkered. Old engravings often distorted reality.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 6th August 2016, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miguel

Hello Jens, I seem to remember a fairly recent thread where Katars with one bar were shown, possibly the same image together with old carvings, were discussed and I still do not understand how you can effectively hold a Katar with no side arms and only one round grip bar to stab someone, surely it could not be gripped firmly enough for this. I suppose it could be used as a club by striking with the flat of the blade but this is obviously not its purpose so how was a strong enough grip realised? I would love to know.
Regards
Miguel

Salaams Miguel, As an observer in this debate I seem to note that no one can say where this weapon started life...I see references to Southern India and wonder where it entered the equation...but that it appears to have bounced around changing shape and developing like so many Indian weapons but leaving only traces of historical detective clues... The weapon appears in Sri Lanka see below and to my knowledge in what looks like its basic form in Martial Arts records from the same region. It occurred to me that it probably originated in Southern India because that is so close to Sri Lanka to where it may well have migrated early on.

Note that BM 179 below is a British Museum reference from https://books.google.com.om/books?id...ograms&f=false

The Martial Art reference is here on Library at

ariel · 6th August 2016, 01:01 PM

Miguel,

Perhaps Sainti might have been one of the side descendants of proto-katars ?

Miguel · 7th August 2016, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Miguel, As an observer in this debate I seem to note that no one can say where this weapon started life...I see references to Southern India and wonder where it entered the equation...but that it appears to have bounced around changing shape and developing like so many Indian weapons but leaving only traces of historical detective clues... The weapon appears in Sri Lanka see below and to my knowledge in what looks like its basic form in Martial Arts records from the same region. It occurred to me that it probably originated in Southern India because that is so close to Sri Lanka to where it may well have migrated early on.

Note that BM 179 below is a British Museum reference from https://books.google.com.om/books?id...ograms&f=false

The Martial Art reference is here on Library at

Hello Ibrahiim, thanks for your reply. I think that your conclusion that it originated in Southern India is most likely correct and interestingly arrived at.
Regards
Miguel

30th July 2016, 01:39 AM	#3
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	I refer readers to an excellent description of this weapon at Atkinsons swords on http://atkinson-swords.com/collectio...ghanistan.html and by the author above at # 10. I extract from his fine summary the following; Quote"There is much debate about the origin of the name and in fact which name is “correct” (jamadhar, jandad, jamdhar, jumdud). The spelling jamdhar seems to indicate Hindi origin yet “Jamdar” may also be a Persian word with the suggested etymology of janb-dar, that is, 'flank render.' An alternative theory is that "jamdhar" is an evolution of the words "Yama" (Lord of death to Hindus) and "Daushtra" (tooth, in Sanskrit). This became "Yama+Dadh", Jamdhad, and now "Jamdhar". In support of this derivation, the word "katar" was originally termed "jamdhar" and loosely translated as "tooth of death." The term "katar" is now applied generally to transverse grip "push" daggers".Unquote. Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 30th July 2016 at 01:52 AM.

30th July 2016, 02:01 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Here you can read an abstract from the article How Old is the Katar? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...nalCode=yaaa20 In India, Art and Culture 1300-1900 Stuart Cary Welsh on page 271 writes thet the katar probably originated in southers India. Unfortunately he does not explain how he came to that conclusion. But as you can see ffor the abstract mentioned above I agree with him. The katar in question is no 205 on the drawing. A photo of the statue holding the katar is shown inthis book. Donaldson, Thomas E.:Hindu Temple Art of Orissa, vol. III. E.J.Brill, Leiden 1987. Attached Images

29th July 2016, 07:40 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,467	We seem to have a consensus ....interesting...like retrying an old case, this one over four years old......this time. Original research on these was about 13 years ago.

29th July 2016, 09:32 PM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Stan, It was a try, and not a bad one. What you have shown is important, you try to think in different ways, and that is very important, for someone who is interested in researching. I dont know how many books you have, but like Nidhin (one of the members of this forum) said, "if you buy two pounds of weapons, you should buy four pounds of books" - and he is right, of course. Making questions like the one you have, shows that you are on the right way - you have found the light - so to say. Happy researches in the future. Jens

30th July 2016, 08:33 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Miguel, Yes you are right, and I cant really tell you, to me it also seems to be impossible, I have tried to guess as well, and the only thing I have, so far, been able to come up with is, that maybe it was not a weapon from the start, but developed into a weapon over time. Should I guess, I would say that a lot of the weapons were not meant as being weapons, but over time developed into weapons. I think some of the very early weapons were in a developing state, in the first century or so of their 'lives'. I may be very wrong, but that is the best I can say at the moment, but I am researching it, as it interests me a lot. So end of story - I cant answer your very interesting question.

30th July 2016, 09:49 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	It is also conceivable that the drawing was not accurate: the bar might have been not straight and smooth, but more complex or deeply checkered. Old engravings often distorted reality.

6th August 2016, 01:01 PM	#9
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Miguel, Perhaps Sainti might have been one of the side descendants of proto-katars ?