The Indian PATA and the mysterious MANOPLE

[Jim McDougall]

This pata example I acquired over 40 years ago, in circumstances which are somewhat intriguing, but irrelevant. In those days of my collecting, naturally I saw this as a fascinating ancient Indian sword.

Today, it is clear that while it in indeed a 'pata', it is likely a fabrication from Victorian times at best, and likely intended for use in Mahratta festivities and martial arts exhibitions. These demonstrations are using these in pairs and in the windmill style slashing in which they were most typically used in warfare in the 17th-18th centuries by Mahratta warriors. These were apparently termed 'dandpatta' in the Mahrathi language.

While it is known that these pata evolved in Mahratta regions in Central India in about those times, the origins of this form of transverse grip gauntlet sword may be of far earlier antiquity. In iconographic sources as early as 12th century there are ambiguous suggestions of these forms of weapon, as seen on the 'hero' stones (viragal) which are monuments to fallen warriors.

Naturally we cannot look into the 'pata' without considering its dagger counterpart, the katar. These push daggers seem to have evolved likely in the Tamil regions of S. India during Vijayanagara Empire and evidenced to about 14th c., again iconographically.
These examples were of the 'hooded' form which like the pata, had a gauntlet covering the hand over the transverse grip.

Having introduced both these 'gauntlet' transverse grip weapons, in the Museo de la Armeria Real de Madrid (also shown in Calvert "Spanish Arms & Armor" 1907), in a panoply of weapons, there is a bizarre weapon remarkably like the pata, with transverse grip.

It is captioned (#1562) as a MOORISH BOARDING SWORD 14-15TH C MANOPLE"

It must be remembered that in the 19th century, the term Moorish was collectively used to describe Muslims, but most bizarre is where did this weapon actually come from? was the period suggested simply optimistic or with any foundation?

So the image of the MANOPLE, in center of photo is the mysterious weapon. What is worse is this was the only example known of this weapon (it appears in Stone, 1934 with this reference) and any references to it in accounts or literature aside from that noted in Calvert are non existent. Taking it yet another step.....in 1884 a fire in the museum resulted in loss of many holdings, including this single example of the mysterious weapon.

While wanting to open some thoughts and discussion on this MANOPLE conundrum, the pata itself has its own mysteries, in how it was used.
Though regarded originally a Mahratta weapon, which extended into profound use by the Rajputs (one of the most comprehensive collections in Shiva Nivas Palace, Udaipur, Rajasthan), there is some evidence of Mughal use, however it seems these were mostly 'curiosa' with firearm additions to gauntlet.

Returning to my example , the blade, well worn, has the central triple fullers resembling those found on kaskaras, and with the astral symbols (sun, moon etc) and as noted has clearly been sharpened down over many years. The metalwork resembles such work in India in items of Victorian period, thus use of very old blade, European, mounted into a likely traditional ceremonial item.

[Jim McDougall]

To continue this soliloquy, I recall many years back with Jens as he sought the origins of the katar, and we came across the 'manople' as shown in Calvert (1907), and in Stone (1934). This curious weapon with trident like prongs downturned below the gauntlet was obviously a match to the pata and its shorter counterpart the katar.

However we wondered, how did it fit in? Further the date period 14th-15th century was provocative in the earlier period than commonly associated with katar and pata, yet it is shown as a 'Moorish' boarding weapon.
i
The Maratha empire did not officially begin until 1674, so the notions of this weapon being used as a 'boarding weapon' perhaps on the vessels of the Marathas, who had a navy of sorts, in these early times is of course unlikely. Further, the Marathas were not Muslim, thus not Moorish, so on both counts this description is flawed.

The most obvious and glaring perplexity in the description is of course, this strange term MANOPLE, which does not seem to occur anywhere else in arms literature. While notably unusual, I honestly never thought to seek the character of the term further, until now .

Interestingly, by definition, in Spanish, the term 'la manopla' means loosely a glove or mitten ! That fits, so to speak. :)

So it would seem most likely that somehow this curious weapon came into Spanish hands by some means, probably in the 18th century, and writers seeking to classify it, close the eponym 'manople' descriptively, and assumed the early period and use accordingly.

The trident like appendages however were notably unusual for the forms of pata usually seen and it is curious whether this feature actually existed on some examples in earlier periods. We will likely never know, as no other example of this form exists as far as known, and all we have of this one is the telling photo from the Armeria in Madrid.

So theres the update, now the questions remain.......has anyone ever seen a pata with this kind of projecting blades from the gauntlet?
Were patas actually used as weapons on the Maratha vessels? I would note here that the term Maratha is often spelled in older accounts in English, MAHRATTA.

Has anyone ever seen the term 'manople' used in literature in other languages ever been used, particularly of course that in Spanish or Portuguese (I miss Fernando!).

[richardshelton]

That's an absolutely fascinating read and thank you for sharing such a personal and deeply reflective look into your pata example. The journey from believing it to be a battlefield relic to recognizing it as a more performative or ceremonial piece is something many of us collectors go through, especially with items acquired decades ago when access to research was far more limited.

The idea of the dandpatta use in Mahratta martial traditions is something that really resonates. Those windmill-style techniques you mentioned are still echoed in modern demonstrations of mardani khel, and it makes perfect sense that many of these weapons, especially from the 19th century onward, were crafted for showmanship as much as for combat. The reuse of older blades especially those European trade types, like the ones found on kaskaras is something I’ve noticed as well, particularly on Victorian-period Indian arms where practicality met aesthetic tradition.

Now, the manople what a rabbit hole that is. That one image from the Armería Real, paired with Calvert’s passing mention, has sparked more questions than answers for a long time. Like you said, the term “Moorish” was pretty loosely applied in the 19th century, often used more to evoke an exotic or Islamic connotation than to offer a reliable ethnographic label. The date range of 14th–15th century seems speculative at best especially when there’s no known functional lineage or surviving parallels.

What intrigues me most is the possibility of cross-cultural influence or even parallel development. Could the Spanish example have been a curiosity brought back from colonial expeditions? Or perhaps even an artistic interpretation inspired by Eastern arms? The lack of provenance and its destruction in the 1884 fire sadly leaves us with more myth than material.

As for the broader mystery of the transverse grip, it’s one of those design choices that feels so oddly niche and yet managed to develop in both dagger and sword form in India, and perhaps (if the manople has any truth to it) in other places entirely. Was it just an ergonomic coincidence? Or was there some long-lost transitional form we haven’t unearthed yet?

Anyway, this has been a great dive into a weapon that rarely gets this kind of thoughtful attention. Would love to hear if anyone else has come across any obscure references or illustrations that could shed light on the manople or more broadly, these gauntlet-style weapons.

[Jim McDougall]

For those still with me, the 'manople' is the curious 'Moorish boarding weapon' with unusual trident like appendages extending from the bottom of the gauntlet hilt. As noted, this is the term used by A.F.Calvert in the captions in his 1907 book "Spanish Arms and Armor" and virtually the singular source for the use of this term (Sp.; Port.=gauntlet, glove).
Subsequent works have rarely parroted the term.

As indicated in OP, an uncited source shows a plate with one of these among a panoply of edged weapons, and suggests it is the only photo of one of these rare weapons, which is suggested to have perished in an 1884 fire in the Royal Armory at Madrid.

While this reference is with the equally mysterious content of entries regarding various fantasy weapons which it has apparently inspired, such as 'Dungeons and Dragons" etc. the photo and historic interest in this weapon is not diminished.

In research, including looking into a first edition of the Calvert reference (1907), I noticed that the photo plate online was entirely different than that in the plate (193) with the item number still 1562. However the term 'manople' does not appear....the caption reads 'MOORISH BOARDING GAUNTLET 14TH TO 15TH CENTURY'.
Another Moorish boarding weapon of 15th century is also present, but unclear which item is being referred to as items in photo are not numbered .

The fire in 1884 did not destroy the entire armory, and was rebuilt with reopening in 1893 with new catalog in 1898 (Count Viudo of Valencia de Don Juan). According to Calvert the photo plates (which comprise over half his book) were primarily 'calotype' (phototype) by Oscar Hauser & Adolfo Menet who operated a photography business in Madrid 1890-1979.

Presumably this firm was the source of the over 200 plates in Calvert in 1907 as they all seem of the same style and composure.

Interestingly, returning to the subject plate initiated this query (image 1) and which is unfortunately (often the case) uncited.......compare this image of the 'manople' with the plate in the original Calvert reference of 1907. It appears different in size witb one more like a full size sword, the other like a large katar. Also, importantly, the weapons in each plate are totally different, suggesting the images are from different times.

Was the first photo from earlier? but by same photographers ? NOTE: the bordering and format is the same in the Calvert (1907) reference, but aside from the gauntlet weapon, different subject items.

If earlier, it would seem unlikely it was pre 1884 as the format etc, is identical to the 1907 published plates, and the catalog number is the same...if items were lost in that fire, there would be notable renumbering.

So the question is, WAS this weapon actually lost? and clearly NOT the ONLY surviving record of this weapon ? Obviously the Indian gauntlet sword is the well known form which is the source for this weapon......and further the mysterious example in the online hyperbole was probably not lost as suggested.

How did this weapon end up in the Royal Armory at Madrid?
The armory itself was the creation of Charles V and his son Philip II through the 16th century, mostly comprising regal arms and armor and historic and diplomatic arms, primarily it seems armor. By the 17th century the collections were enriched with military and personal family items as well as diplomatic gifts.The entry of these kinds of items increased via the House of Bourbon notably by mid 18th c.

The Portuguese were well situated in India in Goa, and on the west coast. In these waters the Maratha were a well established maritime power, and were also well known for early use of the GAUNTLET SWORD (pata) in early centuries into 17th and 18th. The sea powers and trade along these coastal regions also later included Mughals and the Malabar coast was keenly Muslim (Moorish).

It is not hard to conceive that these gauntlet weapons would have been used by crews aboard Indian vessels, whether Maratha (Hindu) or Mughal (Moor) in the 17th century or earlier and later. The trade routes and ports would bring Portuguese ships to Goa as well as the various pirate predators into these lucrative networks.

I would suspect that the Moorish items in the Spanish holdings likely came through trade and other contacts with these Indian regions, which in turn might well have ended up via Portuguese contact in Spain. Spain itself was largely 'Moorish' in the SE until 1492.

So it would seem our MANOPLE is actually a variant form of pata or katar and likely might indeed have been used as a 'boarding weapon'.

Fig 1: the uncited online reference, probably from Calvert related source" ? later edition?
Fig. 2: Plate from original Calvert 1st edition 1907, plate 193, fig. 1562

[Jim McDougall]

Returning to the example pata of the original post. This example was acquired from a well known dealer, collector who was a most unusual character, and his acquired holdings and holding were almost legendary in the arms circles of the times nearly 50 years ago.

I knew little in those days on Indian swords, but this thing was compelling!
In ensuing years I learned more of course, but knew this humble example paled next to the amazing examples I saw posted through the years.

However, in looking at it now, through very different eyes, with at least nominally more knowledge, I realize there is far more to this weapon than I had previously realized.
It appears to me that the blade is European, most likely German (Solingen) and of early to mid 18th c. Though the triple central fullers remind me of the familiar broadsword blades found in Sudanese kaskaras of the 19th c. We know that huge volumes of these blades from Germany were coming into the North African sphere from 1830s onward. It is believed that many were actually produced by Solingen later in the 19th specifically to the markets in Sudan.

With this blade however, I once thought it was in fact a kaskara blade, which had somehow ended up in a traditional pata type hilt later in 19th c. likely for ceremonial martial arts ritual and performance by Maratha men.
After seeing this sword again after many years, I think this was likely a German blade which ended up in probably an Indian firangi at some point in the 18th c. I could not see why a well worn kaskara blade would end up in India, also the central fuller extends virtually the full length of the blade. While obviously some kaskaras have this, these seem typically European.

It seems by the irregular edges of the blade, well worn by vigorous sharpening by individuals using stones rather than sharpening properly by armorers with proper equipment. IMO this suggests actual use in the native element and over considerable time. The astral symbols, typically sun, moon, star etc were at the forte, only traces can be seen, mostly obscured by the bolsters riveted to the blade.

[Ian]

Jim,

Your pata seems a little unusual in orientation to me. The grip and forearm protection appear to be at a distinct angle to the orientation of the blade. If the blade tip pointed upward when held, it would appear to have been made for a left-handed person. If the tip pointed down, then a right-handed person. What do you think?

Also, the smiling moustachioed face on the guard is a representation that I have seen during my travels in Ghujarat (NW India). Perhaps it is more widely distributed also. The round face was depicted on a palace gate as the Sun with the face of a Rhajput warrior.

Ian.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you so much Ian! I was afraid I'd be solo here, I know this stuff is a bit esoteric and not much interest in Indian arms since Jens left.

Very astute observations, and honestly I had not thought of. Actually I thought the canted blade was just lousy mounting job. I also never noticed the lines which indeed might suggest facial hair. The face reminds me of a Buddha.
There were other suggestions of the Indian pantheon it seems some years ago.
I cant tell what this type of metal is, but seems like a bronze/copper ? alloy.

What you note on the Rajputs makes sense, as their clans focus a lot on sun oriented symbolism. I really appreciate this Ian, gives me whole new perspective on this, which I like better than the ideas I had resolved to from further south.

[Jim McDougall]

In the Stone reference, there is a three way view of the 'manople' and he notes as his reference the catalog of the Royal Armory in c.1840, by A. Jubinal.

[Mercenary]

Jim, thank you, you are right, this object is from a "living" culture and was used as a weapon in traditional martial arts. And if the handle is new (19th-20th centuries), then the blade, as you pointed out, has a much longer and more complicated history.
The pata sword was not only a weapon of the Marathas, but much more often a weapon of their opponents: the principalities of Rajasthan and the sultanates of the Deccan, and was also used throughout the rest of India.
I was interested not so much in the "face" on the handle (usually it is either a stylized image of a tiger or a person; in the case of a tiger, these would be the animal's ears, and in the case of a person - mustache or a third eye), as in the image of Garuda. This is a rarity in medieval and modern India - the cult of Garuda is more common in Nepal and Southeast Asia. This allows us to localize your object in South India, where the cult of Garuda has survived to this day as part of the Vaishnavism tradition. And this cult is directly connected with the warrior traditions, although to a lesser extent than the cult of Hanuman: in the South Indian kingdom of Hoysala there was a group of the bravest warriors, especially devoted to the ruler, who were called the Garuda warriors (Garuda served Vishnu as his vahana, so these warriors served the king).
Thank you for sharing this unusual item!

[Jim McDougall]

Mercenary, thank you so very much for such valuable input! I know from years of reading your posts you are incredibly well versed in these arms and the complex cultures they are from.
As I have noted, this unusual pata is among the number of swords I have acquired through lifetime, and now part of sort of 'bucket list' to try to close their cases and finally determine what they are exactly.

As you note this is an unusual item used in traditional martial arts, but in more of a ceremonial sense I believe, as it is not substantial enough to serve as an actual weapon. I am so glad you pointed out the image of Garuda, which I honestly would not have recognized even if I had noticed it. As I am totally uninitiated in the incredibly complex theology of these Indian religions, I am grateful for your adding this.

If I understand correctly, this pata may be associated with the cult of Garuda in Hoysala, so then the martial demonstrations or ceremonies might have used weapons such as this?

The celebration of warriors is well represented in the areas of Hoysala as seen in temples and warrior stones seen through its regions. Perhaps then this very old blade possibly might be a venerated old blade that has been remounted for use with this recognition?

[Mercenary]

It is very possible. Usually in akhara, kalari, festivals and ceremonies any weapon made recently and even from aluminum or something else is used. So in the case of your sword, such a combination of a real (not flexible, like most modern pata) and "very ancient" blade from the point of view of its owners in the 19th-20th centuries, and a handle with the image of Garuda may not be accidental. The image of Garuda is not just a decoration, especially on a simple weapon made not for sale, but for martial arts or fests. It is a sign, a symbol. It means that there was a semantic connection between the martial traditions and the cult of Garuda in this region for hundreds of years, which in turn means that your pata also comes from a warrior culture, regardless of when it was made. The main thing is that it lived in this culture. Not every item in our collections can boast of this.

P.S. That is why we are interested in Indian culture, where nothing had disappeared without a trace. Even for 5000 years.

[Jim McDougall]

That is a wonderful perception of exactly how we SHOULD approach the study of Indian arms and for that matter all material culture. In the dynamics of their Faith, the culture is vibrant, living and essentially timeless.

When Robert Elgood was writing "Hindu Arms & Ritual" in 2004, he addressed many aspects of this in perspectives not typically seen in references on Indian arms. He had concerns that perhaps this approach was too 'deep' but as we agreed it was exactly the way we should be studying these arms.

Again, I thank you for detailing these elements of this most important view into this fascinating culture.....above all having new appreciation for this wonderful old pata, knowing it served in such a profound way in it.