The use of European RAPIER blades in Maratha Pata and Khanda swords

[fernando]

Have you a rapier, or ever had one, Jim ?
This is not the game game; skip over the etymology of the term and just ponder on what a rapier is. Not easy though but then, nothing is exact, and each one is the judge on his own right.
Forget Capoferro, Pallavicini, John Clements and all mediatic Gurus. Paraphrasing Judge Potter Stewart; i don’t know what a rapier is, but i know it when i see it.
Actually as the term rapier became a idolized at its, resistant countries (like Portugal) preferred to keep calling espadas (swords).
The rapier was a civilian sword, although apparently it is recorded that military regiments also used it.
Its blade could (should) be rather thin, even at times extremely thin, some with blunt edges. Some say they should be 2,5 cms. wide, although that is already within the range of a narrow sword blade; 2 cms. maximum being more within typology. But in the opposite, their narrowest section could reach 1 cm. thus touching the estoc range. My school fencing example measures 13 m/m in its widest square cross section. Only two of my eight cup & swept hilt swords are rapiers, for what i consider. Only three or four out of Eduardo Nobre’s collection he considers rapiers, those with blades width + or – 1 cms.
One thing is a narrow blade, another is an extremely narrow one. Same goes for flexibility; true rapiers, to my understanding, could not be extremely flexible, with risk not to do the job, which is perforating; notwithstanding some authors would admit they could also be used in the cutting but then, you are allowed to do what you feel like, and don’t go to jail for that. Same as with the pata; some say it could be used as a lance, but i don’t buy that, thinking is only authors imagination. Pata blades were bought (imported) with an intended flexibility, in order to slash as much as possible in combat; what Caravana calls arm abduction movement and Mundy’s considers them to be able to severe a bull’s neck. Furthermore, while katars could be mounted with European blade fragments (not my term) entire blades for patas were made to perform the intended purpose. But let me not talk about katars in this thread, with risk to be reprimanded for posting off topic material .

[fernando]

C'mon Jim, don't misguide me ...
Isn't the Firangi a different thing; the Dhup or Sukhella, changing its name to Firangi when with an European imported blade? European but not English, as the Mahrathas were not in favour of their blades. Famous commander Angrey is quoted as saying that English blades were only fit to cut butter.
Tell me i am not wrong, Jim .

[ariel]

Khanda... What's in the name?
If we adhere to Stone and Rawson, then.. it is straight, has a a basket handle, spatulate tip, edge reinforcements with the resultant one-and-a half edge, etc.
However, here are 3 swords from the Elgood's Jodhpur book: all labeled as Khanda, all with " tulwar" 17 century handles, blades 16-17 century. One is single-edged, another double-edged, and a third one altogether saber-like. Obviously, he got the names from somewhere, and I tend to believe his veracity and judgement.
I was puzzled and asked him for an explanation. His response was that it was all in the local language use.

[ariel]

Kind of continuing ( this is more for Fernando).
Three Indian swords of mine.
Top to bottom:

Classical " Stone-Rawson-Pant's" Khanda

Khanda's old variant ( predecessor?), 18th century the latest, more likely 14-16th: it traditionally goes as Patissa in European sources.

The lowest one is Firangi with a European rapier blade ( see markings). In Deccan it was called Dhup, in Northern India it was Asa Shamshir.

And this opens yet another can of worms: apparently, the word " rapier" was used in Germany, whereas in Italy, Spain and France the very same sword was called spada, espada and epee ( all of which meant simply " sword" in their respective languages).
These cut-and-thrust weapons ( broadswords?) were popular during the late Renaissance times, but in ~ 17-18th centuries got out of fashion and were replaced by a purely thrusting smallsword ( "court sword", "dress sword"),with a needle-like blade based on newer fencing systems. Despite being still called rapiers, they were not suitable for Indian use where a cut was the king. A minor modification of the smallsword's blade gave birth to Colichemard. Having deeply blued, almost black, handle the same smallsword was called in Germany Trauerdegen ( "mourning sword"), which is still in use in Northern Germany during funeral processions.

The bottom line, not only in India, but in Europe as well one encounters same weapon called by different names depending on the language, location, intended function etc.

Likely, the same principle was operating in India with Jamadhar, Katar, Katara, Narsing-Moth and Maustika . Bich'hwa, Baku and Vinchu are established examle. Probably, Chillanum and Jamadhar Katari might have followed the same suit.
Sorry for digressing from the topic.

[fernando]

Thank you Ariel,
Do i see my point prevailing in that, associating the same blade mounting style to either Pata and Khanda, is a flaw ... such as extensive to what this thread title implies.
I do not have Pant or (this) Elgood; my sources may not be top stars but, you know, those who don't have a dog ... hunt with a cat
I never had a Khanda ... but once had a Firangi.

.

[ariel]

Sorry Fernando, but I seem to miss the gist of your question. So let me reinforce mine.

My point was that our definition of Khanda according to Stone/Egerton is unnecessarily rigid. Perhaps down South Khandas were uniformly “ classic”, but up North the same word applied to dramatically different examples. Indeed, your reference to German’s book mentions Tulwar handles. Elgood goes even farther. To simplify: physical objects may or may not be identical in appearance, but languages rule.


I have seen Patas with European blades, but have never seen one with a Tulwar handle: always a basket one and riveted to the blade.

Thanks for you trust in my ability to understand Portuguese, but my entire vocabulary is limited to Bom Dios, Vinho Verde and Obregado. Said in this order and in rapid succession it always guaranteed me a drink in any bar:-)

[fernando]

As i have said Ariel, (אריאל=Lion of God) my Hebrew almost so good as your Portuguese; my authors are not top stars, neither is the way they put their works. I have used a sub-reference (?); didn't notice the misguidance. The correct weapon was uploaded in post #8 (first picture) and the right description is:

.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

... ( this is more for Fernando).
... And this opens yet another can of worms: apparently, the word " rapier" was used in Germany, whereas in Italy, Spain and France the very same sword was called spada, espada and epee ( all of which meant simply " sword" in their respective languages).
... The bottom line, not only in India, but in Europe as well one encounters same weapon called by different names depending on the language, location, intended function etc....

I would definitely reduce the quantity of worms in what relates Europeans name ambiguities, when comparing to those in the Indian immense multicultural subcontinent. The rapier thing is an isolated case ... at least to support my theory .
As approached in my post #4, in a simplified manner, calling rapier a "sword" in the different idioms, was a reluctant way from fencing masters, or common man's uncertainty, to not address a weapon with such a 'fashionable' term, considering that its form in particularities was under competition, so to say.
I know your Portuguese is good enough to read that:
" É importante notar que a palavra "rapieira" não foi usada pelos mestres Portugueses, Italianos, Espanhóis, e Franceses durante o zénite desta arma, os termos spada, espada e épée (ou éspée) eram usados normalmente (palavras genéricas para "espada") ".
To add that, even nowadays, calling a determined sword a rapier, is so often no more than a fancy (read appealing) attribution.