The use of European RAPIER blades in Maratha Pata and Khanda swords

[Jim McDougall]

In a concurrent discussion on the 'jamadhar-kitari (katarah) daggers of Hindu Kush, the topic of fragmented European rapier blades used on katars led to a sidebar on rapier blade use in the pata and khanda of the Marathas.
From an apparently incorrect notion I had in place from a now forgotten source, I had the idea that the Marathas disdained the thrust, regarding slashing cuts as de riguer in their swordsmanship.

This led me to believe that post contact use of European rapier blades mounted in Maratha swords such as pata and khanda were more of a status oriented novelty for court type wear. This idea was influenced by the supposed European influence of hilt development from the traditional khanda to the so called 'Hindu basket hilt' from the hilts of European swords.

Since Maratha sword fighting technique was of course not aligned with European fencing, I thought that the use of a thin rapier blade would be unlikely by them. However, I have found examples of both these type swords mounted with rapier blades and clearly intended for thrusting in the manner of a 'tuck' (as described in Pant, 1980) or estoc.

On p.62, Pant describes the pata with a long, flexible 'regularly tapering' straight steel blade, almost always double edged and frequently of European make ...generally Italian or Spanish FLAT RAPIER BLADES.

Here there is some confusion, as often European swords with the heavier arming blades but having hilts as seen on rapier forms are termed 'rapiers' in narratives. In some cases there are blades with ANDREA FERARA inscribed of course spuriously, but these are typically Solingen produced heavier blades of the arming type.

Also in Pant (p.14) he describes the pata , "...sometimes we find NARROW bladed straight rapier with a gauntlet hilt. In this weapon British influence is visible". On p.70 he notes that after the British occupation of India rapiers became popular, and that the rapier blades were fitted to firangi and other Indian swords. In another note he states that 'INDO-BRITISH rapiers of 18th-19th c. have 'long heavy blades'.

So we have here a bit of a conundrum:
Did the Marathas indeed use pata and khanda with NARROW rapier blades in actual battle situations?

Or were the descriptions of Indo British 'rapiers' with arming blades simply termed 'rapier' in the colloquial manner previously noted.

As I mentioned, I have seen examples of the narrow blades mounted on both pata and khanda hilts, but clearly in seemingly considerably less common number.

What are thoughts here on this?

[fernando]

Jim, your resilience in the rapier blade saga is no more than mine in opposing some points i find hard to digest in it. They say one can only be a stubborn if his neighbor also is .
Let me start by the Khanda. I now you have a vast library in your bookmobile and a heavy luggage of knowledge; whereas i only have two or three publications and an incipient experience, comparing to yours.
I will not put in my own wording my questioning your certainty towards the "whatever rapier blade format" fitting Indian blades, as well as their function. Instead i will bring a few authors to the stage, those i am sure you do know for ages, with the difference that i am potentially misinterpreting their texts.

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... fragmented European rapier blades used on katars led to a sidebar on rapier blade use in the pata and khanda of the Marathas.
... mounted in Maratha swords such as pata and khanda were more of a status oriented novelty for court type wear...

.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

Jim, your resilience in the rapier blade saga is no more than mine in opposing some points i find hard to digest in it. They say one can only be a stubborn if his neighbor also is .
Let me start by the Khanda. I now you have a vast library in your bookmobile and a heavy luggage of knowledge; whereas i only have two or three publications and an incipient experience, comparing to yours.
I will not put in my own wording my questioning your certainty towards the "whatever rapier blade format" fitting Indian blades, as well as their function. Instead i will bring a few authors to the stage, those i am sure you do know for ages, with the difference that i am potentially misinterpreting their texts.




.

Fernando, the rapier blade in Indian swords 'dilemma' is one that I think requires a certain tenacity to resolve, and I think you and I share in stubbornness in looking at these kinds of matters. As Bob had mentioned on the thread where this rapier thing evolved, we have to keep an open mind as we investigate and discuss these topics.

Actually most of my 'vast' library is not here in the bookmobile, especially not STONE...….whose weight would certainly exceed the payload in this thing!

Thank you for your support in looking into this dilemma on rapier blades in India, and beginning with the khanda. I looked into "Arts of the Muslim Knight" ( B.Mohammed, ed. , Furissiya, 2009) and on p.24 notes,
"...very long thin blades single or double edged were also useful thrusting weapons, particularly for piercing armor. Such a sword worn in tandem with a sabre, is depicted on a 9th-10th c painting of a mounted warrior at Nishapur, but no Islamic double edged blades of this type survive before the Mamluk period. A unique late Timurid blade and an Ottoman sword with a tughra of Murad III( 1574-95) however give us some idea of the type in Europe known as estoc and which the Ottomans call mej."
The blades seemed to average around 100cm (36-39") .
Long thrusting blades remained in use in Europe, these were typically worn under the saddle ('tuck') and western blades or "...imitations of them were popular in India in the 16th and 17th c. They were known by the name 'firangi'".

In looking at the khanda, it seems like the blades 'typically' end in spatulate (pattisa) and rebated or rounded tips, so the idea of slashing rather than thrusting does seem characteristic . The khanda itself was a very early sword type of course, which was revamped in the 17th century as the 'Hindu basket hilt', but its use extended from not only Marathas, but to Rajputs, Sikhs and Mughals.
In Pant, there is another plate of khandas (attached here) where the thin rapier blade can be seen.
Also from "Arts of the Muslim Knight" (#66) attached is a picture of another khanda (firangi?) which is identified as a sabre(shamshir) ? and as a 'long sword with flexible blade for stabbing and thrusting'. While this is of course a 'basket hilt', it is clearly Mughal, as the inscriptions in koftgari are in naskh.

It would seem that obviously there were occasions for these 'basket hilt' swords, typically with extraordinarily long (over 3 ft. blades to nearly 4ft.) to have thin, flexible, narrow blades as in 'rapier'.
Clearly the Ottomans had some use for such thrusting blades, and India was not without influences from them.

Is it possible that these 'rapier' type bladed swords were secondary to other weapons and used as a 'tuck' (estoc) as required? With the notion of a secondary or auxiliary weapon seeming questionable, we are aware of maces which also have 'khanda' hilts. Perhaps the same concept of 'as required' weaponry being employed by the warrior, with several options?

Turning to the pata (gauntlet sword), it is often noted these used from horseback as a lance. Obviously that would seem improbable as the rider would be unhorsed with the weapon lodged in a victim. However, lances were not typically used as impaling weapons, but stabbing, thus the rider does not lose use of the weapon.

It would seem that these narrow blades on khanda or pata, though relatively unusual, would be used in similar fashion, stabbing, not run through thrusting.

[fernando]

Have you a rapier, or ever had one, Jim ?
This is not the game game; skip over the etymology of the term and just ponder on what a rapier is. Not easy though but then, nothing is exact, and each one is the judge on his own right.
Forget Capoferro, Pallavicini, John Clements and all mediatic Gurus. Paraphrasing Judge Potter Stewart; i don’t know what a rapier is, but i know it when i see it.
Actually as the term rapier became a idolized at its, resistant countries (like Portugal) preferred to keep calling espadas (swords).
The rapier was a civilian sword, although apparently it is recorded that military regiments also used it.
Its blade could (should) be rather thin, even at times extremely thin, some with blunt edges. Some say they should be 2,5 cms. wide, although that is already within the range of a narrow sword blade; 2 cms. maximum being more within typology. But in the opposite, their narrowest section could reach 1 cm. thus touching the estoc range. My school fencing example measures 13 m/m in its widest square cross section. Only two of my eight cup & swept hilt swords are rapiers, for what i consider. Only three or four out of Eduardo Nobre’s collection he considers rapiers, those with blades width + or – 1 cms.
One thing is a narrow blade, another is an extremely narrow one. Same goes for flexibility; true rapiers, to my understanding, could not be extremely flexible, with risk not to do the job, which is perforating; notwithstanding some authors would admit they could also be used in the cutting but then, you are allowed to do what you feel like, and don’t go to jail for that. Same as with the pata; some say it could be used as a lance, but i don’t buy that, thinking is only authors imagination. Pata blades were bought (imported) with an intended flexibility, in order to slash as much as possible in combat; what Caravana calls arm abduction movement and Mundy’s considers them to be able to severe a bull’s neck. Furthermore, while katars could be mounted with European blade fragments (not my term) entire blades for patas were made to perform the intended purpose. But let me not talk about katars in this thread, with risk to be reprimanded for posting off topic material .

[fernando]

C'mon Jim, don't misguide me ...
Isn't the Firangi a different thing; the Dhup or Sukhella, changing its name to Firangi when with an European imported blade? European but not English, as the Mahrathas were not in favour of their blades. Famous commander Angrey is quoted as saying that English blades were only fit to cut butter.
Tell me i am not wrong, Jim .

[ariel]

Khanda... What's in the name?
If we adhere to Stone and Rawson, then.. it is straight, has a a basket handle, spatulate tip, edge reinforcements with the resultant one-and-a half edge, etc.
However, here are 3 swords from the Elgood's Jodhpur book: all labeled as Khanda, all with " tulwar" 17 century handles, blades 16-17 century. One is single-edged, another double-edged, and a third one altogether saber-like. Obviously, he got the names from somewhere, and I tend to believe his veracity and judgement.
I was puzzled and asked him for an explanation. His response was that it was all in the local language use.