Do it yourself Pata!!!

Andy Davis · 27th February 2006, 10:39 AM

Ive been after one of these for a while, so when offerd this found it hard to refuse, even if it isnt in my opinion a great example....or possibly even real!.
I thought patas were high status cavalry weapons. Would an example like this, heavily and rather crudely repaired have existed.
Opinions very much appreciated.
Cheers
Andy

Andy Davis · 27th February 2006, 10:41 AM

The other side. I would guess the small holes at the side are supposed to hold an internal lining but what are the large rings for?

TVV · 27th February 2006, 10:44 AM

I would guess they were used to hold leather straps for fastening the pata onto the hand, and the small holes probably had maille once, but is there welding that I see?

ariel · 27th February 2006, 08:25 PM

Well, it is not a museum piece for sure and I would not pay more than $1.95 in 3 easy payments for it, but... if you are caught in a shopping mall wearing this "glove", call Andy: you sure need a lawyer

One can skewer a lot of chicken for a neighborhood BBQ on this Pata!

Jim McDougall · 27th February 2006, 09:13 PM

Hi Andy,
The single pata I own also is on the very 'rough' side, and I have owned it for over 30 years. I wanted a representative example, and frankly despite not being able to afford the 'museum quality' pieces, these rough examples more appeal to me, and I have always treasured this piece.Certainly the higher end items represent well stationed individuals that were able to afford such distinctive quality weapons, but the Mahrattas were a tribal people, and not everyone was a Raja or a chieftain.
Individual fighting warriors were required to arm themselves, and it would not be surprising to see such 'blacksmith' quality weapons among these forces. The reason these typically no longer are found is that they were thrown into scrap heaps during the Raj (such as those destroyed at Tanjore and other armouries) after being captured whether in battle or confiscation.

These rough examples in my opinion are too clumsy and rough to be intended to be tourist pieces, and far too rough to be reproductions intended for the deceptive market. Therefore, they are more likely rank and file interpretations or refurbishings to be used as is whether in combat or possibly even village examples for ceremonial use. This may explain the rings, which may have been intended for decorations or festoons.

Possibly being too romantic, I sense this piece may have stories to tell

Very interesting pata, I would have bought it too!!!

All the best,
Jim

Andy Davis · 27th February 2006, 09:43 PM

Ah Jim you are a romantic similar to my own heart.
That aside! I agree with you, so rough that it cant be modern and as a tourist piece its hardly the sort of thing that can be easily put in your luggage. The multitude of different grades of steel, brass and copper, all seem to indicate repairs and rebuilds over a period of time. The one thing that doesnt look rough is the blade and that I guess should be the true indication, that it is intended for use.

Jim McDougall · 27th February 2006, 10:24 PM

Spot on Andy!!!!
Congratulations on your well placed acquisition!!! I'm glad that it has found a good home!!!

All the best,
Jim

27th February 2006, 10:39 AM	#1
Andy Davis Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: England, Northumberland Posts: 85	Do it yourself Pata!!! Ive been after one of these for a while, so when offerd this found it hard to refuse, even if it isnt in my opinion a great example....or possibly even real!. I thought patas were high status cavalry weapons. Would an example like this, heavily and rather crudely repaired have existed. Opinions very much appreciated. Cheers Andy Attached Images

27th February 2006, 10:41 AM	#2
Andy Davis Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: England, Northumberland Posts: 85	One more photo The other side. I would guess the small holes at the side are supposed to hold an internal lining but what are the large rings for? Attached Images

27th February 2006, 10:44 AM	#3
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,625	I would guess they were used to hold leather straps for fastening the pata onto the hand, and the small holes probably had maille once, but is there welding that I see?

27th February 2006, 08:25 PM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Well, it is not a museum piece for sure and I would not pay more than $1.95 in 3 easy payments for it, but... if you are caught in a shopping mall wearing this "glove", call Andy: you sure need a lawyer One can skewer a lot of chicken for a neighborhood BBQ on this Pata!

27th February 2006, 09:13 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,957	Hi Andy, The single pata I own also is on the very 'rough' side, and I have owned it for over 30 years. I wanted a representative example, and frankly despite not being able to afford the 'museum quality' pieces, these rough examples more appeal to me, and I have always treasured this piece.Certainly the higher end items represent well stationed individuals that were able to afford such distinctive quality weapons, but the Mahrattas were a tribal people, and not everyone was a Raja or a chieftain. Individual fighting warriors were required to arm themselves, and it would not be surprising to see such 'blacksmith' quality weapons among these forces. The reason these typically no longer are found is that they were thrown into scrap heaps during the Raj (such as those destroyed at Tanjore and other armouries) after being captured whether in battle or confiscation. These rough examples in my opinion are too clumsy and rough to be intended to be tourist pieces, and far too rough to be reproductions intended for the deceptive market. Therefore, they are more likely rank and file interpretations or refurbishings to be used as is whether in combat or possibly even village examples for ceremonial use. This may explain the rings, which may have been intended for decorations or festoons. Possibly being too romantic, I sense this piece may have stories to tell Very interesting pata, I would have bought it too!!! All the best, Jim

27th February 2006, 09:43 PM	#6
Andy Davis Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: England, Northumberland Posts: 85	Ah Jim you are a romantic similar to my own heart. That aside! I agree with you, so rough that it cant be modern and as a tourist piece its hardly the sort of thing that can be easily put in your luggage. The multitude of different grades of steel, brass and copper, all seem to indicate repairs and rebuilds over a period of time. The one thing that doesnt look rough is the blade and that I guess should be the true indication, that it is intended for use.

27th February 2006, 10:24 PM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,957	Spot on Andy!!!! Congratulations on your well placed acquisition!!! I'm glad that it has found a good home!!! All the best, Jim