[ariel]

I would guess that an 80 cm stabbing weapon with a 50 cm blade is a precursor of Pata . We all remember earlier form of Pata, colloquially called Jamadhar Katari that was a transitional stage between a hooded katar and full-blown Patah. See Stone, Fig.434, #13. Your example as well as Fiegel's example may be a short-lived transitional stage between a classical hooded katar and Jamadhar Katari. Inevitably these weapons weighed more than regular katars , but gained an advantage of a longer reach. See Stone, Fig 434. ##14,16,32. Tanjore katar with a 36 cm-long European blade and elaborate " hood" is shown in Stone Fig.433, #1. Weight is another consideration, but such weapons must have been created by special order, taking into account the size and the physical strength of the customer. Anup Singh's brother, Padam Singh, trained with a 10.14 kg (!) sword and his fighting sword weighed 2.96 kg ( Elgood, Jodhpur collection, vol. 1, pp. 176-178).

The question arises: are Fiegel's and your example contemporary Indian creations? I would doubt it: the auction of Fiegel's collection took place in 1998, 24 years ago and his book went out in 1991, 30 years ago. Fiegel collected Indian arms for many years and went to India several times because there were few if any examples on the market during those times. Thus, his objects were acquired well before 1998, when a deliberate forgery of Indian weapons was practically non-existent. I say " practically" leaving out the possibility of the contemporary Indian masters seeing the Fiegel's katar in the auction booklet and making a copy.

Could they be a production of royal workshops dating back to the end of the 19th century? Possible. In which case they are still honest artistic creations.

In short, I like it.