My Pata

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

... As the katar described, hardly is the first one ‘invented’, it is likely that the katar, as a weapon, is far older.

Sure thing.
May i add up a little detail, Bill, Jens and Jim ?
I have read that the older patás examples known around, are from the XVI century, which match their "joint venture" with European/Portuguese blades, right ?
It is amazing how two distinct atributions for the name patá are available. In Wikipedia they say the term derives froma the Portuguese pata ( with accentuation on the first "A" ) which means hoof , reminding the gauntlet of this sword. In Daehnhardt's work/s we read that the term is patá ( with accentuation on the second "A" ) and comes from the from Patãs = Pahans, whom constituted one of the many subdivisions of the Xatrias = Kchatryas cast, or Indian warriors, whom used them for military purpose, both in their homeland or abroad ( quoting Fray Sebastião Manrique in Viagens = Travels, a work of the 1600's ). Unfortunately i ignore whether he quotes this author only for the Pathan warriors or also for the sword name.
Mybe i will ask him one day.
Anyway i find this second attribution of the term the correct one.
fernando

[Jim McDougall]

I'm glad to see you in on this Jens! Thank you for the Hendley data , which is most helpful material and I had forgotten about that resource. The information on the katar also is outstanding and I knew there was material about earlier presence of the katar that we had discussed long ago, but did not recall Ibn Batuta's narrative. I think one of the concerns was that going by the term 'katar' in such an early narrative are the possibilities that the weapon form so described may have been different than we picture it. It seems there is a weapon shown as 'katar' (I think in Pant?) that is a standard hilted knife or dagger, from northern India regions. Pant was of course stating elsewhere in his "Indian Arms and Armour" that the correct term for the katar was actually 'jemadhar', and the original error in application occurred in Egerton.
I still agree that the katar as a weapon in its transversely gripped form was a much earlier weapon as you note, but where in the world did this idea come from? We know that so many weapon influences entered India from other places, noteably China, Persia for example, with European influences much later around 16th c. but such transverse grips do not occur outside the subcontinent ..aside from the mysterious 'manople' which remains simply an anomaly.

Fernando,
Thank you for adding the excellent detail! and some very good data on the terminology for the pata. The only etymology I was aware of was the term Pata deriving from Hindi (= long straight leaf) suggesting the long straight broadsword blades. I had not seen the Wikipedia entry noting the term as it is typically pronounced and surprisingly indicating a Portuguese apparantly colloquial term for horse hoof. That would make sense as the use of Portuguese blades was so prevalent in these and of course the 'firangi' or khanda (that term supposedly referring to 'foreigner' or more specifically Portuguese). The Portuguese may well have viewed these heavily enclosed gauntlet hilts as clumsy considering thier preference for thier own intricately fashioned guards on the rapiers they presumably carried, and the horse hoof term was likely meant somewhat derisively.

I had not thought of the Pathans being associated with the weapon as most of the focus on its use is applied in more southern regions with the Marathas the group primarily associated with the pata. It is of course known that, as Daehnhardt has noted, the Pathans were indeed warriors of numerous tribes in the north that did often serve as mercenaries for the Mughals. While I am aware that the pata did find use in limited degree far the the north, I am not aware that it would have been used by Pathans. I am inclined not to consider the Pathan term for a source for the etymology of the term for this sword type. Regardless, good observation!!

I am unclear on who the military monks of Jeypore were, and am not aware of Nagan use of the pata....can we clarify who these were and can anyone provide more on the Nagans?
Also, there seems to be variations of the term Maratha/ Mahratta. Why the difference in spelling and is one considered more correct than the other?
Were Rajputs known to have used the pata? We know of course they used the khanda/ or Hindu basket hilt.

Best regards,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

In answering my own questions, I'll assume the term Maratha and Mahratta were simply spelling variations pending any possible input It seems I once read that the Maratha term applied to the language rather than the people. Source unfortunately cannot recollect.
As for Rajput use of the pata, I can only presume that it would have found such use, there seem to have been Mughal examples, and in Egerton one is shown with Punjab provenance. I just thought it would be interesting if anyone had specific knowledge.
I do hope the material I compiled and wrote in my post might be of assistance to any readers who might be interested in these distinctly recognizable weapons of the Indian armoury, and wrote with this in mind.

Best regards,
Jim

[rand]

In Burtons book, page 110, relating to the Rajaput guantlet sword he has this anecdote accompanying description of number 402,

"Used by the Sikhs in their sword play and by Mohomedans at the festival of Mohurrum. Also by Maharattas in Southern India. Gauntlet swords are supposed to have been used by the cavalry of the Great Mogul, and probably of Tartar or Turcoman origen.

Cf. long two edged blade in the Taylor collection, "Suhela", so called from a kind of steel that is always flexible and highly prized according to the proverb " Baudde Suhela, ruhu akela." Put on a Suhela, and you may remain alone."

end quote,

rand

[rand]

Hey Bill,

Seems one could make a case for the relationship of a pata to a katar based on the grip shape. The katar has a rigid blade sometimes with an armor piercing tip that is clearly able to deliver a substantial forward impact concentrated into the tip of the blade. The transverse grip would allign the arm and wrist to best absorb impact from a forward thrust. There have also been studies that a straight punch delivers the most force.

The pata has the same transverse grip with the addition of an enclosed guard, there the similarity ends, for it is coupled with a much long sword blade that is normally flexible. The flexible blade would be opposed to thrusting use and indicate a cutting or slashing style of use that could better absorb impact without breaking.

There are also studies on what shapes of blades would better cut through bone. The shamshir and tulwar have references for cutting through armour, limbs and horse, not familiar with any accounts of a pata doing the same.

There are known uses of the pata by a maharaja during battle so it must have been considered a valuable and dominate weapon at times by the people using it. There is an account of two patas being used florentine (one in each hand) by a raja until he had one arm severed in battle.

rand

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks rand!