Pata sword with European blade

[Cathey]

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

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Cathey

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.

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.

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).

Cheers Cathey and Rex

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.

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

[Jens Nordlunde]

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.

[fernando]

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 ...
Among the various interesting passages, i would venture this one to be of some opportunity here:

.

[Jens Nordlunde]

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.

[mariusgmioc]

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 ), 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.

[fernando]

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.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi Marius,

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.

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.

[Jens Nordlunde]

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.

[ariel]

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.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

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

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.

Originally Posted by ariel

Mahratta cavalry was irregular, and poorly disciplined. Their tactics was a rapid attack, one or two uncoordinated slashes and speedy withdrawal.

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.


.