After a bottle of Drambuie I will find the peacocks on a bottle of Heads n' Shoulders!

Optical illusion

I can see this flower, but is this flower the real motive on the first pata?
I'm not so sure.
First, you can see three squares (or rectangles) on the blade.
The first one - to the left- is almost erased.
The second - and central one - is not very well preserved and only the outlines of the so-called flower are visibles. The eyes of "our Guru" Jim were attracted by this "flower". He is probably the victim of his knowledge because he connected immediately this pattern to his impressive experience.
But the third motive - to the right - and half under the rivet shows a more elaborated and better preserved design, that I tried to reproduce on my drawings. It's clearly a cross.
Human eyes / we focus on what we want to see and it's related to our experience...
Blank or empty spaces can be seen as the main motive but they are not.
I hope that I'll convince you (including our guru).
Best,
Kubur

Jim, Have a look at Elgood (2004), chapter 13, page 129, note 6 - go to page 295 and read note 6 :-).
The Ixora coccinea can now and then be seen on sword and dagger hilts.

I agree that many European, Persian and blades from other places were used in India, and it is mentioned in many old and newer books.
Many Indian weapon smiths were very skilled and made not only good, but very good blades, which the different museums and private collections show.

Back to Kubur's blade. It could be European, but you have not been able to convince me yet, so I will let the case rest till someone comes up with proof of from where the blade origins.

I am pretty sure that for this type of dilemmas we will never have a clear cut answer. In the best case we might get a more likely/probable answer but we can never be sure. :shrug:

That doesn't meas we should stop trying! :)

Very interesting "out of the box" perspective! Thank you! Your drawings are quite self-explanatory. :)

However, I can still see the "flower" symbol and no Maltese cross. :cool:

Sorry I dont know where I 'hid' the flower.

reminds me of the 'flowers' on choora.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=choora

including mine :)

LOL!!! Kubur, when you first posted your pata, I spent some hours going through notes and trying to formulate a useful assessment on your sword (my post #6). It is unusual as I personally have not seen such a motif, in triple cartouches, on an Indian sword blade.

In your post #9, you note that 'like Jim, I see Maltese crosses', further noting you had trouble believing that 'nobody on this forum could establish origin of this blade!
It seems my observations were not of notable value, and you suggested (your post #14)that African makers certainly were not capable of making good blades.....and that you were hoping for 'other comments'.

I admit that my research on both African and Indian swords only spans several decades, and the last time I researched this particular floral motif was probably 5 or more years ago. I do remember that there were certain occasions when African and Indian influences did appear compellingly connected.

Today you disparagingly have overlooked my insufficient comments and observations from the noted posts, and have 'promoted' (?) me to 'guru?
It is funny that you claim that I am a 'victim of my knowledge' , must admit I have not heard that one before :)!!!
But surprisingly you are saying because of my predeliction, I only see the flower, yet in post #9, you note that 'like Jim I see Maltese crosses'?

So apparently since the earlier posts, I have gone from astute observer with irrelevant observations, to a guru blinded by my experience and knowledge ?

Please understand, this is an interesting discussion on a most interesting sword you have, and my efforts have not been to 'be a guru' or any such nonsense, but trying to help when you insisted on better suggestions than those I offered.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding ???

Jens,
Thank you so much for the data on the four petal flower Ixora Coccinea which indeed does have remarkable similarity, and very well might suggest Indian application.
The interesting footnote in Elgood is I think #7, which suggests that the 'X' is often used in place of the 'sh' in pronouncing Shiva. The red flower 'vetchi' is sacred to Shiva.
Combined with Wayne's interesting note on flowers on choora, that crenellated design characteristic on these and Khyber knives is a compelling comparison to the inscribed design on this blade within the squares.

This seems strong potential for Indian origin for the blade, as you have suggested, and I would note that contrary to the many references to inferior Indian blades, it seems mostly toward the wootz having infractions. With regularly forged blades, they were of much desired quality and sought after in Arabia, thus probably often entering those trade spheres.

This seems contradictory, but it seems there are many variables, and often European blades were favored, but clearly Indian blades were equally satisfactory.

I hope these further notes might be useful in assisting Kubur with the pata in the OP. It does help to expand the discussion to note these variables.

Found an example of pata with African blade:
This is just one I found, but as I mentioned I have owned one much like this for any years, and I have seen numbers of them.
The blade is a North African blade known in Saharan regions as 'masri' which according to Rodd (1928) has triple channels in the center of the broadsword blade. The two outside channels each at the terminus has a small crescent moon termed 'dukari'.
These blades are exclusive to North Africa, and are typically regarded as of Hausa production and found in Saharan (takouba) and many kaskara (Sudanese) swords (Briggs, 1965).

The fact that many of these are thus found in Indian swords, usually pata, suggests that somehow, most likely the result of post Omdurman situations, a considerable number of African blades ended up in Southern India.

European Blades on Pata's where common
 

Hi Guys

Pata's are one of my favourite Indian weapons. However, when it comes to the blades they where often battle field pick ups recycled hence usually 17th Century or earlier. Given there length potentially started life as European Riding swords, hand and a half or even two handed swords. All of these have the large straight flat blades often seen on Pata's and Ferangi's, however uncommon on typical eastern blades.

Previous Pata post http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10945

We have four Pata's in our collection and all appear to have European blades. European blades from the 17th Century or earlier are also extremely flexible and whilst some Pata blades may feature eastern designs these could simply have been added latter and may not have been original to the blade when forged.

PATA Circa 1700 (18th Century)
Nationality: Southern India Marathas
Overall Length: 129 cm 50 ¾ “
Blade length: 94 cm 37 “
Blade widest point: 4 cm 1 ½ ”
Hilt widest point: Gauntlet 34.6 cm 13 10/16” long 11.5 cm 4 ½ ”wide

This Pata consists of a combination of a long double-edged blade and a gauntlet. A pair of plain metal settings attaches the blade to the hilt of a gauntlet. These settings run down the face of the blade on both sides. The Iron gauntlet covers the arm almost up to the elbow. The gauntlet has an iron strap attached by hinges that hooks around the arm. The grip is located inside the gauntlet, at a right angle to the blade. The outside of the dark brown gauntlet is decorated with brass and copper metal-work featuring floral and geometric designs.

General Remarks
The pata is a single-handed Indian gauntlet sword. This sword was predominantly found in the southern regions of India. The Marathas invented the Pata, and it was their most favoured weapon. The patta consists of a combination of a long double-edged blade and a gauntlet. The blade is usually European, Italian or Spanish. A pair of metal settings attaches the blade to the hilt of a gauntlet. These settings run down the face of the blade on both sides. The gauntlet covers the arm almost up to the elbow. The gauntlet has an iron strap hinged to the upper end that hooks around the arm. The grip is located inside the gauntlet, at a right angle to the blade.

The inside of the gauntlet is often padded to reinforce the grip and to reduce the shock of blows. The outside of the gauntlet is often covered with metal-worked decorations or embossed. A few were even studded with jewels. Some of the decorations depicted battle scenes. Others had prayers, or pictures of gods or large animals on them.

The patta was used by all military classes, particularly by experienced swordsmen. For one who is inexperienced with the patta it can be difficult to use but it is the most effective of all Indian swords. It is wielded by the strong muscles of the fore and upper arm, and not by the wrist. This allows the sword to deliver more powerful blows and thrusts at any angle. This method also greatly reduces the amount of fatigue, due to the use of the upper arm muscles (Rawson 46).

References:
Pant, G.N. Indian Arms and Armour Volume II. New Delhi, S. Attar Singh Army Educational Stores. 1980. Pgs. 61-68
Rawson, P. S. The Indian Sword. London: Herbert Jenkins 1968. Pgs. 44-47
STONE, George Cameron, A GLOSSARY OF THE CONSTRUCTION, DECORATION & USE OF ARMS & ARMOUR IN ALL COUNTRIES AND IN ALL TIMES Pp 484-486

Cheers Cathey and Rex

I looked at your references, but I can't see any pictures, photos or drawings, that can support your interpretation for the Pata #1.
Please, it doesn't mean that I don't agree with you "in general". I agree, this decoration is common on Indian weapons. And the blade of the Pata #1 can be Indian, I have no problem with that too. I just need material evidences, not a note or an opinion.
:)

This is extremely interesting, it could mean that these European blades came from Egypt, maybe via Alexandria...

I think that one of your first post was correct: a lot of fakes were made from the relics of the British colonial empire: Sudan & India... Then of course, Indians imported European trade blades.

First, it's good to laugh, a lot of people take it too seriously. I don't.
In fact, I don't care if it's a flower or a cross. I just wrote and drawn that the motive is different from the one that you described. Apparently you didn't notice my comments and drawings (1 point each).
:) It's about what you see. And i don't agree about your African connexions. But I like your idea of the British colonial links between Sudan and India. In general, Jim, you stay my main source of inspiration on this forum!
:) Indian or European blade, I'll take it, but I need evidences...

Hello Cathey and Rex,

Thank you very much for the photos and info you provided!

I found rather confusing you mentioning that 17 century or earlier European sword were very flexible. :shrug:

From all that I know European swords were exactly the contrary. They were very stiff and heavy as they were designed to deliver powerful blows against heavily armoured oponents. Powerful blows that were not necessarily supposed to cause any cuts but to shatter bones and throw opponents out of balance. Practically none of the European swords I know (and I handled quite a few) had blades flexible enough to be suitable for Patas.

Second, the citation you give from Rawson is very misleading at least.

Patas may have been effective weapons in certain circumstances but they are extremely ineffective in others. For example, Patas are effective fighting multiple enemies wearing no armour in relatively wide open spaces but are very ineffective in crammed battles or against armoured opponents. Moreover, Patas are effective at delivering slashing/whipping blows, but are definitely not effective at thrusting/stabbing as their greater flexibility and length will make them easily bend if they encounter the slightest resistance like chainmail or even bone. Also the whole arm grip, makes the Pata very unsuitable for close combat in crammed spaces because of difficulties in handling the blade.

So, I believe Rawson got his information from anecdotal sources that cannot stand thorough scrutiny, and this would be a good example where flawed information has become to be considered as reference.

It would be interesting to see what others have to say about this subject.

Regards,

Marius

Marius,
I am with you. In another thread long ago it was suggested that the pata could be used as a lance. No it cant. The blade is far too flexible, and should you stab a man with a pata, you are likely to break your arm/shoulder or get the arm ripped off, as you can not let go of a pata as easily as you can with a tulwar.

Jim,
In the article Robert writes in Sultans of the South (pp. 218-233), he discusses the Indian and the European blades, and he ends the article by writing: "The Nomerous weapons of the Deccan reflect this diversity, and it remains difficult at attribute arms to a spacific court or to determine with certainty the origin of many of the firangi blades that are mounted on Indian gilts."
Francois Bernier who stayed in India from 1656 to 1668 writes: "...some Indian craftsmen can imitate European blades that the difference between the original and the copy can hardly be discerned." This quote is also from Robert's article.

Kubur.
You are right that Robert does not show the flower, so I did Google the name, here it is.

I bet you guys are familiar with Elgood's work "Swords in the Deccan in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Cenmturies: Their Manufacture and Influence of European Imports."
I know this is a recurrent approach, but ... :o
Among the various interesting passages, i would venture this one to be of some opportunity here:

.

Hi Fernando :-),
Your quote is, of course, from Sultans of the South - goes without saying :-).
Did you also read where it says, that the swords from EAC can not be sold in India, as the quality is too low????
You can find quotes matching most arguments - so why argue, as non of us lived then, and our knowledge comes from books written by someone living, and travelling in India at the time.
We do know, however, from several collections that Indian sword smiths did make both genuine Indian, as well as copies of European blade, of a very high quality.
We now discuss the high quality of the European blades, but I am sure that you will be able to find blades made in Germany of a lower/low quality than the ones from Solingen, and the same goes for the other blade exporting countries.

Salaams Jim , Your examples on sword and dagger are almost identical to the designs on the Patta. It occurred to me that both Indian and European blades were used in this weapon and either African / European trade blades or home grown African or straight forward export to India European blades could easily have been produced... In this case certainly carrying African motifs...for sure.
I note that these weapons could be deployed one in each hand and the flexibility was reasonable ~ I assume if used in a cyclic action the slash and cut potential of these blades would be substantial although one could be used in unison with an axe or other weapon and later a combination pistol and Patta was invented.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Hello Jens and Fernando,

My issue is not so much related to the quality of the blades as high quality blades were manufactured both in Europe and in India, but more with the TYPE of blades manufactured.

My point is that the Pata requires a very specific type of blade, long, wide and very, very elastic that is incompatible with any type of European or otherwise sword I know.

Now Jim has mentioned the Kattara (sounds like a type of Katar :shrug: ), but I am not familiar with this type of sword and I am planning to research more about it. However, there might be the possibility those swords use imported Indian blades, rather than the other way around.

In my line of logic, I believe that since the Pata blades were that peculiar and specific, it would be most logical they were manufactured locally, even if some of them were adorned with European-like decorations and markings. In other words, I find hard to concieve that European swordsmiths were producing this type of very special blades specifically for export to India.

Yes, there are some, maybe many, examples with Patas fitted with European rigid blades, but those Patas would have been extremely difficult, impractical and ineffective as weapons.

Well observed Kubur, actually the Arabic term 'masri' means loosely 'Egyptian' as found with many instances of the Mamluk swords in the outstanding reference by Yucel .
What was meant by post Omdurman refers to the British and French condominium occupying Egypt and Sudan after 1898. Certainly these Saharan and Sudanese swords which had moved into those regions could well have transmitted to India just as they arrived in England. Oakeshott in his "Records of the Medieval Sword" describes how many instances of contrived 'medieval' swords actually were mounted with blades from these cannibalized swords of Africa that had been brought back by the thousands.

Hi Marius,
I will not contest your knowledge of how patas were used in combat, in such way that they had to have extremily flexible blades, otherwise becoming impractical. I do not possess or have read any literature on that specific field, other than a written work mentioning that they required an intense school training.
But i make a point in questioning that the majority of pata blades were manufactured locally, as what i heard is the contrary.
In HOMENS ESPADAS E TOMATES by Rainer Daehnhardt he pretends that the majority pata blades were European, deliberately imported for such purpose, being brought by Portuguese and Venetian traders ... notwithstanding that the earlier examples of pata the author knows are from the end XV century and, in such cases, blades may have been repurposed from captured swords. Interesting to notice that, from the nine examples from the author's collection that illustrate the quoted book, only two are of Indian manufacture.
Of course this is worth what is worth.

Thank you Kubur, clearly I did misunderstand, and absolutely right, it is good to maintain a good perspective through humor and patience as these complicated matters are difficult enough to sort through.
Having noted that, thank you for the compliment as well, though quite honestly I am no guru :) and my 'knowledge' is simply the cumulation of the hours I spend sorting through notes and references before I write.

You are exactly right to expect evidence, the mark of a sound researcher. Also, it is important to often alter opinions and views on subjects as that becomes available, that is if what is presented is viable or compelling, if not positively resounding.
That is the reason for our forums, to discuss and share information and work together in finding resolutions. As Marius has well noted, the absolute answers may not be found....YET....but we never stop trying! :)

As seen with the excellent entries by Jens with views of this important four petal flower, now that is compelling!!!
There are most certainly NO flowers like that growing in the Sahara!
Therefore, it would seem likely such a design would have diffused FROM Indian to the African sphere, which as earlier noted, is profoundly recognized with weapon forms as well as instances of blades etc.

As Jens also notes, he is yet unconvinced of this blade being European, and I also must note that my theory on that is surely not yet firm. The only thing on the blade which leads me toward European origin is the notable outlining of the sides of the blade, which if I recall was occasioned on certain blades of Spanish and Italian origin. This would be in line with the notes on 'firangi' (Elgood, 2004, p.245), which notes the volume of blades in India on katars in Tanjore (usually cut down of course) bearing the names from Italy, Portugal, German and England. Obviously Spanish would also be present but blades were often of the markets for other countries.

There are numbers of other references concerning the use of 'foreign' blades in India, even before the opening of Portuguese sea routes in the early 16th century (narratives dating pre 1507) (Elgood, 2004, p39).

On p.12, Elgood notes the volume of foreign goods sought and the enthusiastic adoption of European steel blades by Hindus, then mounted in local hilts. In fact, it is noted that in these early times arms were included in the volumes of goods from Venice to India. The numbers of 16th and 17th century blades present in a wide scope of decorated hilts varying in style suggest according to Elgood, that they had clearly been in use in India for some time and cannot be from a single shipment or victory.
Here, I would suggest that the option of surplus or worn blades from Europe might well have been exported, much as with the post crusades swords out of Malta into North Africa.

Which brings me to the flower/cross dilemma.
Actually when I first saw these floral designs on takouba hilts, I actually first saw the Maltese cross!!!! That was years ago, and I recall thinking that perhaps these were a native allusion to the cross pattee known to have been used by the crusaders. One of the longest lived notions of European writers was that the swords of the natives WERE the swords of the crusaders!
Actually the earliest volume of broadswords coming into Africa via the ports and entrepots of the littoral from Tunisia to Algeria was from Malta, which was an interim port carrying surplus goods from Europe and trade ports in those networks.

Later I saw the figure as a four petal flower, and regarded this symbol as another means of conveying the key device in Saharan, and much of these native folk traditions and religions as representing the four cardinal directions in an ecumenical sense.

Admittedly, at that point the possibility of connection to India had not yet been considered.
So Kubur, thank you for the drawings and perspective, and as always, Jens for your ever keen insights into the mysteries of Indian arms.

I wanted to write on some of the other aspects, but this treatise has turned into another Indian epic already!!! So many talking points and had to write to get them together, so thank you for those of you with the endurance to read this.

Well Fernando and Jim it is precisely this common established knowledge, that I am challenging based on logic and common practical sense.

It is precisely this common knowledge that very often can be fundamentally flawed as it was based on flawed original information.

Now what if Rainer Daehnhardt is wrong about this information (I don't say that he is)?! You get one piece of information like this from here, one from there and have a well founded and accepted opinion that may be considered by some as irrefutable truth... yet, be fundamentally wrong.

I do not challenge that many Tulwars or Pulwars have European blades, as they were common blades that could be used with diferent mounts, and thus it would be normal to be widely traded as a much demanded commodity. Moreover, at the time this trade occurred, much of Indian local production was shut down by the deliberate colonial policy.

However, with the Pata is something particular: it requires a particular type of blade, and a blade that isn't useful in any other mount and fighting style. So I find highly improbable the Indians invented the Pata and the fighting style associated to it while having to rely on imports from Europe of precisely that type of blades, made to order...
... all while they had at hand, capable bladesmiths and know-how to produce those blades themselves.

And I believe that here is a mistake in over generalizing. If many European blades were imported in India and mounted in local mounts, does this automatically imply that this is true for the Patas as well?! Based on what since Elgood seems to refer to blades in general?! And there is a long way between a generic sabre blade and Pata.

Dubito, ergo cogito. :)

Pata sword with European blade:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7niTpIW7dEk

Pata sword with Indian blade:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QHTBq2DzSM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTwVfHkLtK0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkakKuGuI3s

With the Pata with stiff European blade the parry of a full blow will result in a dislodged elbow or shoulder or, in best case scenario with the wielder seriously out of balance and vulnerable.

With a Pata with flexible Indian blade the parry of a full blow would have almost no impact on the wielder as the blade will elastically bend and absorb the shock, allowing the wielder to continue his movement and deliver a second and third blow, while continuously moving so not to be vulnerable to a quick approach attack.

Ok Marius, I agree with you when you say 'local' - if it can be meant in a broader sence in India.
I do also believe that there must have been a number of firangi pata blades, although I do not have any idea how widely they were spread.

I would note here that this is a great discussion, and fantastic to have this traffic and interest in Indian arms. Typically through the years, it seems many collectors and historians have avoided this field probably due to the exact complexities we are tenaciously challenging.

I will also note that Dr. Robert Elgood is probably one of the most thorough and aggressive researchers in his chosen subjects that I have known (besides Jens of course!). I do not know Mr. Daehnhardt as Fernando does, but over many years, his observations and opinions have always proven sound. I note this as we have all been connected variably in these studies on these arms for well over 15+ years, and of course Robert Elgood's book "Hindu Arms and Ritual" has served as a landmark study since its release in 2004.

In trying address these points, first I would say that while both the pata and khanda had distinct southern origins, they typically would not necessarily have been appointed with the same type 'firangi' blades. The khanda, which was a purely Indian sword which developed the 'Hindu basket hilt' with the progression of European swords into India at the beginning of the 16th century, evolved characteristically by the 17thc into a backsword.
These moved northward into the Rajput sphere with their victory at Adoni in 1689, when huge volumes of arms etc were taken to Bikaner in Rajasthan.
Here the Hindu basket hilt became a well known Rajput weapon along with their familiar tulwars.

The pata was a quite different sword, though its areas of use were throughout the south. These evolved from the katars of Vijayanagara and Tanjore in around 16th century (with earlier cases still somewhat unresolved but pending, though recorded) which were essentially long bladed daggers using volumes of cut down European blades (Elgood p.145). These early katars were hooded and also used Indian made blades, but were notably slashing weapons.
These transverse grip slashing daggers by the early 17th c. evolved into what Deraniyagala termed 'equestrian swords' but were these 'gauntlet' swords using full length sword blades. This was the 'pata' and despite the bizarre notion these were used as a lance, this was not possible for rational reasons.
Therefore, the transverse grip dictated mostly the same slashing use as the katar, its dagger length predecessor.

As such, these pata required broadsword blades as the alternating slashing cuts would be more suitably effected with double edges.

The pata however, was not as widely diffused in number as the khanda (firangi basket hilt) and while remaining primarily in the Deccan and Southern regions, moved northward in degree via Mughal courts.

I think one of the most salient points regarding estimating the use of these weapons is to remember that parrying, and European style swordsmanship was not in Indian form. Parrying was the work of the shield, not the sword.
This is not to say it could never happen (to disclaim the inevitable exceptions), but that in general, it was not in place.
It is interesting to note that the ancestor or counterpart of the pata, the katar, did move northward with use by Mughals, Rajputs and others but gained the notable feature of reinforced blade tips for armor piercing.
These continued as well to be mounted with European blades cut down just as in the earliest beginnings, however it is doubtful that these blades could have succeeded in that capacity, while the Indian made ones would.

Returning to the pata, it seems Elgood notes in the article on the Deccan linked by Fernando, that the preponderance of pata blades were indeed European, and in fact only a few were known to have had Indian blades.

I think it is important to agree that these kinds of observations must be relegated to their context and the period in which they are discussed. There were clearly large numbers of European blades arriving in India 16th and 17th century, probably well into 18th. The British campaigns in the latter 18th certainly impacted trade and normal commerce, and the resumption of blade traffic probably resumed in degree in various areas in the 19th.
The British intervention was in wootz production and that was in the 19th century.

In the south, the preference of Mahrattas and other regional instances were straight blades. The larger volume of sabre blades was situated more in the entrepots on the west and north. As mentioned in the 17th century long firangi blades were a status symbol as at the time Indian swords were brittle, so the flexible blades brought by the English (probably German) went for high prices. Most of these issues with Indian blades had I think mostly to do with ill forged wootz, and it is noted that Jahangir as well as followed by Shah Jahan favored 'Almaine' (German) swords. These would have been probably sabre blades of course in Mughal tulwars.

BTW, on the worn motif on Kuburs blade (OP), the cartouches are likely worn away from the constant burnishing of the blade, apparently a key affectation of Indian blades to be of high polish. The upper one is still discernible nearest and under the langet.


Cogito ergo sum

Hello Jim and thank you for your very interesting comment! :)

I guess that in the end, we will end up with an open-ended conclusion as it would be probably impossible to establish certainly how many Pata swords had European and how many had Indian blades.

What is certain is they had both types of blades, and they evolved over time. It is quite possible that the earlier Patas had more rigid imported blades but then they evolved and so did the fighting style towards more flexible ones. If you are looking at the modern day Patas, they have a blade that is so flexible that it has become completely ineffective for a real battle, as it cannot deliver neither a thrusting nor a slashing blow strong enough to incapacitate an opponent.

However, I don't think that is really that important to reach a clear cut conclusion, as such a conclusion will carry little if any practical value. :shrug:

I think the process by which we are trying to reach a conclusion is much more important than the conclusion itself, as this process helps us learn and understand more about this subject. :)

PS: Now, while I still think that Jens' blade and mine are Indian, I believe that Kubur's blade is European, but has been decorated with some North Indian symbols.

Well noted Marius, and thank you.
It seems I recall a very sage comment once read, which said something to the effect, 'the thing I love most about history...is how it's always changing!!!'.
Naturally we cannot paint these kinds of topics with too broad a brush, as there are so many variables and distortions in narratives, records and other forms of evidence.

In Oman, the straight blade sword commonly known as the 'kattara' which has an open cylindrical hilt, developed in that form in the early 19th century, possibly earlier, has become a sword used ceremonially in exhibitions of martial prowess and celebration known as the Funun.
While these spectacular events show amazing skill and dexterity, it is important to note that blades which are deliberately thin and adapted to showcase the movements are used.
These particular versions of these swords mounted with unusually flexible blades for this purpose have in recent years become interpolated with other versions of the same style hilts, which were in earlier times mounted with genuine European blades and worn as status symbols by merchants and figures of key standing.

I know that in Kerala and in Southern India there are martial performances using certain traditional Indian weapons in similar circumstance, and often I have wondered just how connected these kinds of displays are to each other. Even Burton (1885) noted such performances using various weapons in Arab context and others, but as a fencing master of the sword, groused over such performances.

It does seem that one sword used in India in such performances of swordsmanship skill is the pata, and they are used in pairs, creating a spectacular windmill type effect.

I am not saying this is the case with any of the swords we are discussing, but offering the possibility of some explanation for extremely flexible blades which were probably more for effect than combat.

Obviously the blades of those patas Marcus linked to youtube are meant for show business; you would not call them flexible but undulating … or floppy … or whips, a great challenge for cutting apples and lemons, good for tribal rituals but unreal for battle. Certainly the sense of flexible as opposing to stiff was something that period warriors were certainly used to deal with. When we hear that the use of patas required intense training, we may assume that one of the purposes was to prevent users from muscular stress. In paging Elgood’s HINDU ARMS AND RITUAL we see a pata in page 97, quoted as (quote) arguably the earliest example known, in which the (Indian) blade has a pronounced central rib reaching to the point and obviously intended to stiffen the blade.
Certainly patas were not invented to deliberately use import blades but these surely played a substantial role. Obviously Rainer Daehnhardt opinion is worth what is worth (as i cared to mention) but evidence is strong enough to assume that European blades having been largely mounted in patas is not only an association of ideas built from such blades abounding in katars, pulwars and talwars.

Exactly! One of the links provided in a previous mail is to a video of such a performance. However the Patas used there are so flexible that they are completely useless in a real combat.

:)

Exactly, and as I noted, the Omani performances called Funun, are actually based on many such tribal rituals before battle, where warriors brandished their swords and built up adrenalin and energy to build up their stamina for combat. This is not confined just to Arabs, Omanis, Baluch and others but seems almost a standard activity in warfare as such preparations are made to face the enemy.

Obviously, as swords became secondary weapons, it is well known that their traditions have remained firmly in place, and there are many 'sword dances' and performances which transcend cultures.

In the Omani Funun, one of the key elements of the performance, is the brandishing and quivering of the blade to produce a resounding whir with many simultaneous blades, and the flash of shining metal.

It is not surprising that such activities with swords, derived from training and practice exercises evolved into startling performances.

In the Elgood reference, it is noted that this katar has a stiffened central rib which clearly would suggest thrust or stab. This of course is keenly the case with this example proposing it as the earliest known example (c 1570).
While this use of the katar may have existed in this time (the deeper origins of the katar form itself may date centuries earlier) it does seem by the time it evolved into even longer versions (up to the pata) it became more a slashing weapon. I believe I earlier mentioned that large numbers of European blades were coming into India by 17th and many were cut down for katars.
The extremely limiting condition of the transversely held grip of the katar and enclosed pata did not lend well to combative action in established swordsmanship techniques, but in the sweeping slashing motions could be quite deadly.

Jim, do not forget to mention that a lot, if not all, of the troops were drugged before figthing.
Few mention it, but some does, and it was no different than with the Vikings and a lot of other fighting nations - but it is not so well know.

Hi Marius - I'd like to comment briefly on the tangential discussion regarding stiff versus flexible blades. I think I have to respectfully disagree with you.

Whether the blade is stiff or flexible you will still cut with the edge. If the blow is blocked then the contact presumably will be made with the edge. I'm not an engineer so don't have the terminology to describe this well I'm afraid, but the energy of the impact will be transmitted edge-to-edge through the blade - not flat to flat.

No matter how flexible a blade is, it is completely rigid in the edge-to-edge plane. So logically there should be little difference in the energy of the impact and its transmission into the attacker's arm, other than that caused by the blade being lighter.

Indeed, if the flexible blade had the effect you describe it would actually minimise the percussive power of the blow reducing its effect as a weapon.

If you were describing an angled deflection strike rather than a completely perpendicular one I could see some of what you're describing - but then you'd be minimising the effectiveness of the blow it seems to me as the blade would want to flex away from the target greatly reducing the power of the impact. Would that logically be a choice one would make?

Bear in mind also that the fixed grip on the forearm would dictate a different positional use of the body in creating the strikes - so the impact of a blocked blow would be absorbed in the body slightly differently, and I would suggest, more efficiently - less likely to create the potential damage you describe.

Having worked with flexible blades a couple of times I can tell you that the energetic rebound through the weapon is as strong as a stiff blade but transmits with what I can only describe as an odd 'wobble' effect which can momentarily adjust your balance more strongly than the impact of a stiff blade. Primarily because of the randomness of the effect, so it can't be completely planned for.

Another thought regarding flexibility - in my experience, very often the longer the blade the more flexible it appears (or perhaps is) as its own weight causes it to bend. Outside my field of knowledge, but perhaps there's a correlation between flexibility-length-poorer quality steel? Which might be pertinent to the local v. imported blade debate perhaps?

In all of this I am of course talking about period weaponry, not the modern items produced for demonstration/performance.

Hi Jim - maybe one might draw parallels in the sweeping slashing actions to the Germanic doppelhander fighting styles?

Happy to have any of my assertions proved wrong or point out if I've misunderstood anything - just my tuppence...

Hi Jens,
Very well noted on the 'priming' of warriors before battle, and this seems always to have been the case where sometimes simply adrenalin is not enough, at least at the outset.

Jerseyman, thank you so much for your most interesting and well explained dynamics concerning these blades. It certainly adds perspective to the kind of circumstances which might have brought certain types of blades into favor over others, and the ultimate outcome in their use.

Indeed, the tandem use of two swords, daggers etc. does bring to mind the early fight studies of medieval Europe. It is always interesting to consider the aspects of cross cultural influences as the post exploration period led to colonization of so many continents.

In India, we know that the development of the Hindu basket hilt from the incorporation of the concept of developed hilts of Europe with the already established khanda certainly reflected a physical change in the weapon.
However it does not seem that the styles of swordsmanship changed to adopt European forms.
The longer 'firangi' blades became more of a status symbol and though these carried rapier blades, it does not seem sword to sword fencing became known to the Indians.

AFAIK, Pata was a predominantly Mahratta weapon ( even Shivaji was portrayed carrying one).

Mahratta cavalry was irregular, and poorly disciplined. Their tactics was a rapid attack, one or two uncoordinated slashes and speedy withdrawal. For that , Pata was a very appropriate weapon: far-reaching, with wide area of potential damage, powerful strokes ( driven by the entire arm rather than just elbow or wrist) and a built-in arm protection. No fancy fencing here :-)))
The elasticity of the Pata blade was a very Southern feature, reaching its apogee in Urumi, also not designed for any precise cuts, but for rapid and unpredictable slashing.

Thank you very much for your observation!

You are right that for a perfectly straight blow the impact forces will be transmitted through the width of the blade, but how many blows are PERFECTLY perpendicular to the target surface in a real battle?! Even the slightest minute inclination would generate a transverse force that will tend to bend the blade. And even for a perfectly straight blow, at the moment of the impact the wielding arm will continue movement and necessarily have to change the angle, and then the blade will bend allowing the arm to continue the movement.

Regarding the relationship between elasticity and length, there is none. Elasticity is an intrinsic property of the material and is independent of the size or shape of the object. However, deformation is dependent on size an shape. So a coin will not bend even if you apply a huge force, but a long stripe made of exactly the same material will bend easily with the lightest force.

more opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7niTpIW7dEk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1uo8Y1Mz2c

he discusses flexible blades used in the dancing demos and fruit cuttings. reminds me of shinese dao, the fighting ones have stiff thick blades and the ones used in wushu 'dancing' have very flexible ones, especially near the tips, because they make a cool sound as they wobble & thus enhance the dance.

i have examples of both & yes, if sharpened the wushu one will cut, but i'd rather have the thicker dao if i were in serious need.

The example in fig. 8.58 would be a Pata Jim, not a Katar (Met Museum, 36.25.1534); reason why i thought this was worthy of note.
I wonder on what basis did Elgood quote this example as 'arguably' been the earliest pata known but, for the case, if fits well in Rainer Daehnhardt's assumption (presumption ?) that the earliest known example is in his collection, and should date from the first quarter XVI century; a battle specimen naked of all luxury, with a gauntlet of turned/carved wood, reinforced with iron straps ... again with an European blade, probably from a navigator's sword, from the transiction XV-XVI centuries.


.

Well noted 'predominantely', if i may; Sikhs and Rajputs also gave it a little hand. And, confirming that the exception makes the rule, there is a XVIII century beautiful Pata at the Met, doubtlessly made for a Muslim, inscribed with Qur'anic verse and a reference to Dhu'l faqar ... and with an XVI century European blade, for a change.

Interesting approach ! A different version may also be concluded from written stuff and historical evidence.
Shivaji is said to have built a disciplined military force. He innovated military tactics, pioneering the guerrilla warfare methods, which leveraged strategic factors like geography, speed, and surprise and focused pinpoint attacks to defeat his larger and more powerful enemies.
If not, history tells us that, at the beginning of the XVIII century, the Marathas led by Chimaji Appa fought several battles against the Portuguese, by then a weakened adversary, managing to drive them out of Western India.


.