Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fernando
The example in fig. 8.58 would be a Pata Jim, not a Katar (Met Museum, 36.25.1534); reason why i thought this was worthy of note.
I wonder on what basis did Elgood quote this example as 'arguably' been the earliest pata known but, for the case, if fits well in Rainer Daehnhardt's assumption (presumption ?) that the earliest known example is in his collection, and should date from the first quarter XVI century; a battle specimen naked of all luxury, with a gauntlet of turned/carved wood, reinforced with iron straps ... again with an European blade, probably from a navigator's sword, from the transiction XV-XVI centuries.
.
|
Thank you Fernando for adding this! With Mr. Daehnhardt's knowledge and acumen with arms esoterica, it is fascinating to know of this example. At the early date of this blade it does seem to compellingly be presumed a Portuguese blade. While some degree of European blades apparently were coming into India in this early period, the notable volume was more into the beginning of the 17th.
It does seem that the pata itself was primarily a 17th century innovation, and you are right, the image in Elgood 8.58 only shows the hilt and no mention is made of the blade length.
Obviously the hooded katars were already in place by the c. 1570 date placed on this example, and thus it may be a katar, but curious why the 'pata' term was noted.
I know that Jens' extensive research on the katar has projected start dates centuries earlier based on iconographic and other sources still being reviewed. These seem to center on Orissa, and I am wondering when and where the sword length (pata) began (17th century noted).
It is always confusing when we are trying to establish what is a long dagger vs. a short sword.
We know that early katars were using what is noted (Elgood p.245) as volumes of 'cut down' European blades in Vijayanagara and Tanjore in the 17th century, having begun with latter 16th blades.
It would seem as noted by Ariel, the Marathas (Mahratta apparently the archaic spelling used in most western narratives) in fact were likely the innovators of using the entire gauntlet weapon on full length blades . They were as I understand key in trade and maritime activity, thus the European blades were as noted, plentiful by the 17th well through18th .
The pata clearly transmitted into use by Rajputs, as well established, but to lesser degree with Mughals and Sikhs.
With the renowned use of the pata by the Marathas and of course their leader Shivaji, the use as a cavalry weapon is we established. The descriptions of them as a military force of course will vary. It seems that such views were filtered through English narratives often from Rajput perspective, thus probably somewhat biased. In any case, they were it seems a quite formidable force and as noted by Fernando, quite successful in their campaigns.
Clearly the 'gauntlet' emplacement onto a blade must have simply been an innovation of the amalgamation of the vambrace (bazu band) on the forearm with a blade in combined function. In past research on the evolution of a transverse grip weapon, there have been considerations on the concept of that manner in holding the buckler or shield where the boss incorporated a spike or blade, effectively becoming a stabbing arm with opportunity .
Attached are the images of Shivaji and page from Stone (1934).