View Single Post
Old 27th February 2006, 08:13 PM   #5
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,745
Default

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
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote