Ethnographic Arms & Armour - A question about katars

Ethnographic Arms & Armour (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/index.php)

- Ethnographic Weapons (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - A question about katars (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1617)

A question about katars

Oi!
It's connected to armour in a way, so I could've asked it there, but it seems that that topic is not too visited by others than Aqtai and me... :)

I love katars, and such weapons, but I don't really like that they don't really have quillons or the like, which leaves the hand very voulnerable... I found it out in a rather painful way when I was sparring with two katars against a bastard sword...

So, to the point. :) I'd like to know if there's anything like an "armoured katar". By this, I mean a katar which is either built into a gauntlet like this, or simply a katar which defenses the back of the hand AND the wrist.

Afterall, I'd love to see any pics of katars with more hand defence than the standard. :D

The gauntlet version of Katar is called Tooroom and a grossly oversized one, a sword actually, is a Pata.

Hi Ahriman, I doubt that any Indian in the earlier times would have used two katars against a sword, if he could have avoided it – so why do you think it is a good idea?

If you think there are only the two of you interested in katars, you should, maybe try the search button.

True that the south Indian katars often had a hand guard, and the north Indians seldom had one.

Jens: I know that almost everyone likes katars... I was talking about that if I asked the same in the armour topic, etc... :)
Of course, that method is far from good or preferable, but we like cross-training quite much... Rapier vs greatsword, knife vs saber, double buckler vs sword&buckler, grossmesser vs katana, etc. Very helpful in developing good skills. :)
But standard katars leave your hands open so much that I don't have too much chance against meisterhauen even if I use two katars... and I have absolutely no chance if I use only one. :D
Thanks for the info, and the beautiful pics... maybe I shold collect a little money to buy that book. ;)

Hi Ahriman. I have seen pictures of gauntlet katars, but only pictures. There are of course also the katars with hand guard.

Thanks... could anyone show pictures of these toorooms? I can't find any, but I'm rather curious. :) Is it different from patas in else than size?
Other thing. How thick is the metal guard, and from what it is made? If it was tempered steel, I'd bet around 1.5-2mm, if it's mild, I think it would be around 3.5-4mm, or more, but this would double the weapon's weight.
Last thing. Taken from blade widht and lenght, most katars can be used for cutting and stabbing, while patas are thrust-only weapons, right?

Ahriman, sorry for the 'late' answer.
I dont have a Tooroom, and maybe what Ariel is thinking about is the one shown on p. 149 in Robert Elgood's book Hindu Arms and Ritual. I have never seen one, and it is the only time I have seen a picture of a gauntlet katar.

The hand guard on the katar shown over your last post is about 1½ mm, but made of steel, but I would estimade that it could take quite a blow without the hand holding it got hurt.

Mostly when fighting, the katars without a hand guard would be held in the left hand, and used for stabbing when close enough.

My estimate is that the pata could be used for stabbing and slashing. However, imagine you come riding at full speed and want to attack someone, then it would be used for slashing. If you used it for stabbing, your arm would be torn off at the shoulder when you passed the one you had just stabbed, as you could not easily let go of the pata when it was stuck.

It is always great to see these old threads again, and often to see these discussions in the light of the often notable advances that have been made in our understanding of various topics and weapon forms.

What is interesting here is seeing the various approaches often taken toward this understanding in observations and discussion. Some go toward structure and features of a form, and lead toward a pragmatic solution as to manner of use while others look to historic and traditional aspects. Gratefully we have serious collectors such as Jens in the Indian arms field, who look into all approaches and writers such as Robert Elgood who peruses the very important symbolic and religious aspects of these arms.

Seeing this topic for example, brings the questions asked then to the fore, and a look into what we have learned since that time years ago. While the term 'tooroom' is essentially irrelevant as focus on these terms often is counter productive. What is important is the history and development of the katar and pata as weapons, which seem to have prevailed primarily in the 17th and 18th centuries. Their finite origins remain clouded and speculative and their use as weapons of course continued nominally after these times, but we look toward the years they were notably in use.

The use of the pata seems to have been primarily for infantry but is noted in some cavalry use. As Jens has well pointed out, use from horseback would be less than effective in stabbing especially if moving …..however used in 'cut and run' slashing as used by Marathas would have been plausible. For infantry, the longer blade would have provided the 'reach' needed.

I think what remains unclear with the katar and pata is whether there is a case for distinct evolution between the two or whether they are simply variations of the same concept. While the earliest known 'pata' or gauntlet 'sword' is believed c. 1570 (Elgood "Hindu Arms and Ritual", 8.58)
it is remarkably similar to the 'katars' used by the figure at the temple in Srirangam mentioned as shown in Elgood (op.cit. p.149). As I have learned from Jens, the case for much earlier katars does exist, and it seems reasonable to expect that to be likely. The idea of a transverse grip may have evolved from the method of holding a shield and the use of a blade in the place of the boss where the wielder could stab using the shield in left hand.

It seems that examples of katar and pata which are typically seen with highly embellished and decorative themes are most likely 'courtly' items. They are perhaps intended to represent these forms in the more rudimentary character probably seen in actual weapons in combat situations.

In actual combat I would point out that most rank and file would not have these weapons, and that in actual combat one would use what weapon they had if attacked. There were no rules toward who attacked who with which weapon, and one would use what they had in defense. While of course staged combat, as in the performances or events using katar and pata dispay martial skills with one in each hand in almost windmill like dynamics.

In actual warfare, it is most likely the katar was used as a close quarters melee type weapon in dismounted situations where longer bladed weapons would have been ineffective without room for swinging cuts. The thrust was it seems disdained by Indian warriors as less than skillful, thus dishonorable I would presume.

As for the use of double katar, there are statues in south India that do depict warriors with a longer, Vijayanagara type hooded katar, one in each hand! But these do offer a lot more protection than the simplified katar that got common later.

I personally think that the later katar developed the way it did for ease of carrying as an everyday item and backup weapon that one didn't expect to use a lot, whereas the Vijayanagara hooded katar (and pata) seemed to have been primary weapons.

You are right Peter, and Robert shows it in Hindu Arms and Ritual p. 148 ill. 15.6. However in this case the katars are used against an animal.
This does, of course, not mean that two katars could not have been used in combat, if the enemy was close enough, and when he was, one/two katars would have been better than a sword.

Jens and Peter, very well observed on the Vijayanagara hooded katars and I honestly had not thought of their size and structure which does seem to suggest them as a primary weapon. As Jens notes, whether in a hunt or in combat the use of them in tandem would make them a deadly force.
Also, I agree with Peter that as the katar moved to its position as a secondary weapon it size and character changed accordingly.
The larger size of the Vijayanagara style katars presented it as almost a heavy short sword, at least in the ones we are considering in iconographic sources.