India is renowned for its diverse array of short-bladed edged weapons. Among its daggers and short swords, some were distinctly Indian in origin, while others were adopted from foreign cultures. Over time, these imported designs became firmly integrated into the local martial tradition, earning a place within classical Indian weaponry. It is important to note that by at least the 18th century, the martial arts of both Hindu and Muslim communities appear to have existed side by side. Their distinction was likely based more on the religious affiliation of their practitioners than on any significant differences in technique.
The types of weapons used in Muslim training systems are the most comprehensively documented in written sources. In contrast, no consolidated information exists for Indian non-Muslim traditions. Even the term “kasarat,” often used to denote systematic military exercises, is, upon closer inspection, simply an Urdu word meaning “exercise” or “training”. However, due to the folk character of Indian traditions and the survival of living practices and testimonies, their continuity can be traced retrospectively. This allows us to connect the present day to the early 20th and late 19th centuries, a period when these practices were even more strongly linked to older traditions.
A dagger-fighting art known as “bank” has been described (Pic. 1). The term “bank” itself translates to “curved,” a direct reference to the recurved shape of the blade used in this system. It is important to clarify here that numerous accounts left by the British, combined with an analysis of surviving practices, indicate that Indian techniques for using edged weapons differed significantly from European methods. Notably, the arm was never fully extended at the elbow, resulting in blows delivered in circular, arcing motions. When applied to a dagger, this technique produced not piercing, but cutting and “tearing” wounds — an action likened to an animal’s claw. This concept resonated deeply with the Indian worldview, evoking the powerful image of a tiger’s attack (Pic. 2).
Such blows were not necessarily intended to be immediately fatal. In the context of practical martial arts, a single strike was rarely the end of an exchange, unless it was the final, decisive blow in a series of sequential actions. The primary targets were typically the limbs. The objective was first to incapacitate the adversary by wounding an arm or leg, thereby making him unable to resist, and only then to deliver a finishing, deadly strike. This principle was applied even when using the “jamdhar”, a push dagger with a distinctive H-shaped handle. The jamdhar was gripped not by the crossbar itself, but at the intersection of the crossbar and the side bar, a complex grip that positioned the blade at the necessary angle relative to the forearm. However, this technique was most naturally and comfortably executed with curved daggers, which were held in a reverse grip with the blade pointing downward (Pic. 3).
In 1897, P. Bramley, Deputy Inspector-General of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh Police, delivered a lecture on Indian swordsmanship to officers of the 5th Dragoon Regiment in Meerut. He also presented examples of Indian edged weapons. Bramley referred to the art of dagger fighting as “bichwa” and demonstrated a corresponding dagger, without commenting on any of its specific design features.
Colonel Baden-Powell later described the “bichua” dagger as a common type, characterized by a double-curved blade and a sword-like guard, which included an additional hand protection in the form of a knuckle bow connecting the crossguard and the pommel.
The etymology of the name “bichua” is often traced to a perceived similarity between the dagger’s curved shape and a scorpion’s sting, with the implication that the weapon type originated from daggers carved from a single piece of horn, featuring a cut-out hole for the hand. Doubts about this interpretation arise, however, when considering how loosely a piece of horn might resemble a scorpion’s tail, as well as the variations in the pronunciation and spelling of the word “bichua” when used for the scorpion versus the dagger. It is more plausible that both words derive from a shared root meaning “to damage” or “to cut.” It can be assumed that “bichwa” is a regional name for a type of dagger equipped with a protective knuckle bow (Pic. 4, 5).
The jamdhar, an Indian push dagger with an H-shaped handle, is widely known and continues to spark curiosity due to its unique construction and method of use (Pic. 6). A long-held opinion is that this weapon was primarily designed for piercing armor. While a detailed discussion of the prevalence of armor in India is beyond the scope of this article, a few pertinent observations can be made.
Claude Hugo, who was in India during the second half of the 18th century and observed the Hindu military organization as a participant in the Maratha-Mysore wars, noted that armored horsemen were a rare sight. He commented that while such armor was useful in Asia, where combat was typically decided with cold steel, it was highly impractical due to the extreme heat and the vast distances cavalry had to cover. During this period and later, the most common defense for Indian warriors was a stiff, quilted jacket stuffed with cotton. This armor was so tough that British dragoon sabres could neither cut through it nor effectively pierce it — much like the cloth turbans worn on the heads of the Indians. The jamdhar was undoubtedly the most comfortable short-bladed weapon for thrusting against such padded armor, which likely accounts for its widespread use and prevalence among all classes of warriors up to the mid-19th century.
To understand the jamdhar’s design, one must consider its application beyond human adversaries. Proponents of the theory that the dagger’s construction was solely optimized for a powerful thrusting blow often overlook an additional, crucial effect: the handle’s design allows the user to better withstand the force applied to the hand and arm when being attacked by a heavier assailant, whether human or animal. A hand wielding a conventional dagger or knife lacks this structural advantage. So, what was the purpose of a weapon that combined enhanced armor-piercing capability with this unique “stopping” power? The answer may lie in the dagger’s secondary name, known in India: the tiger dagger.
By its very construction, the jamdhar is exceptionally well-suited for defense against an attack by a large predator (Pic. 7). Surgeon-Major Thomas H. Hendley wrote in 1883, describing the katar (another name for the jamdhar): “… adapted for thrusting, and makes a wide and dangerous wound, which is enlarged in the act of withdrawing the weapon, as both edges are very sharp. Some katars are made to open like scissors blades, others have two small pistols, and in a third variety the open sides reveal a small point within. All these arrangements are devised to make the wound more horrible, and as, in hand to hand conflicts with tigers and other large savage animals, it is essential to produce a considerable effect at once on the beast, this quality of the kattar, which is often used in such sports, is very advantageous”.
The jamdhar also provides greater comfort and control when delivering a downward thrust, whether from a hunter on horseback or elephant against a attacking beast, or from a mounted horseman striking down at an animal (Pic. 8).
The construction of early South Indian daggers, also referred to in literature as jamdhar or katar, deserves special attention. These objects often feature a long, narrow blade, frequently of European origin (Pic. 9). Their design likely correlates with early forms of sword-gauntlets. The earliest examples of this type appear to have the blade and gauntlet aligned on a single axis along the outside of the forearm. In this configuration, the blade functions as an extension of the outer forearm, while the hilt is located underneath, similar to the handle of a shield. The overall design is much closer to that of a shield with an attached blade than to a conventional push dagger (Pic. 10).
Another well-known form of South Indian dagger is similar in design to the North Indian jamdhar. Unsurprisingly, this type of dagger was also employed in animal encounters, specifically for what can be termed “beast-fighting” or theriomachia (Pic. 11).
While the primary weapons for hunting tigers and lions were undoubtedly bows and arrows, and later firearms, numerous accounts describe incidents where a wounded animal would attack a hunter on foot, on horseback, or even from an elephant. In these desperate, close-quarters situations, anything at hand — sabres, staffs, or even the buttstock of a toradar musket was used. However, these objects were ill-suited for fighting in the grasp of a powerful beast. Tragically, the attacked hunter sometimes died, even as fellow warriors rained blows upon the animal.
The sheer toughness of an animal’s skull, hide, and, most importantly, its powerful skeletal muscles, left little margin for error. An effective, albeit brutal, technique was developed: the hunter would offer his left hand, wrapped in thick fabric or protected by a small round shield, into the beast’s mouth. This allowed the animal to feel it had already seized its prey, reducing the chance of it redirecting its attack. With the animal’s attention focused on tearing at the offered limb, the hunter would then use the jamdhar in his right hand to deliver a series of thrusts. Depictions from the period suggest that specially trained hunt assistants were also present, ready to intervene and face the animal’s charge if the main royal hunter misses when shooting at an animal from his elephant (Pic. 12).
During the 16th to 18th centuries, the number of hunts undertaken by the Indian nobility far exceeded the number of battles in which they participated. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that the jamdhar, which initially entered the nobleman’s arsenal as a specialized hunting tool, later became a common item carried for self-defense in everyday life and on the battlefield.
The straight, double-edged dagger used by Indians warrior-ascetics was widely known as a “katar” (Pic. 13). Generally speaking, the word “katar” served as a collective term for many types of daggers and is derived from the root “kat,” meaning “to cut” or “to wound”. Some authors use this word to describe straight, stiletto-like weapons or objects resembling a dirk (the Scottish dagger). It is noteworthy that authentic Indian schools of martial arts also made use of straight daggers.
Among these short-bladed weapons, a unique type existed: the double-ended dagger, featuring a blade at each end of a central handle (Pic. 14). A similar design is found in the “madu” (or “maru”), a two-bladed dagger constructed from two antelope horns joined at their bases. The madu remains in use in certain martial arts traditions to this day (Pic. 15).
