Hi guys, I will try and formulate this question so it makes sense. I am interested in the shortest (knife/sword like) blades considered battle worthy.Or to make it less general that were proven to work in battle as the primary implement( or primary after the spear or whatever they carried was out of action). Something they were happy to go toe to toe with whether it was a military arm or implement.
Not including shortspears, secondary arms like daggers, very ancient battles/wierd stuff like khopeshs (and probably a variety of other things you guys have the extensive knowledge to come up with!) :).

Thinking more along the line of roman era forward- fighting knives, messers, gladius , short swords etc.

Thanks for any suggestions. I'd also like to know why that shortest length was arrived at and considered still effective in battle so to speak but will leave that open.

I know that in the case of Irish Iron age short swords, these were valued and prestigious weapons. There's a great looking example of one of these that can be easily found here under Nathan Bell's collection, I think the blade on it is 16 ish inches long. There were some of this type both longer and shorter, but these were generally speaking, shorter than the Roman gladius. Another type of short sword would be the spartan (lakonian?) short sword, which I believe was usually even shorter. I don't know much about the spartan sword, but I can tell you that there's plenty of great information and examples to be found of this early Irish iron sword type, here at myArmoury and on kelticos.org.

Hope this helps

There are five small swords from Olympia in Greece, probably 5th to 4th century BC. Three are fragmentary but seem to be very similar, while the other two are complete enough to show that they had blades about 12 inches long. They look like this:

[ Linked Image ]

They are very similar to swords shown in several vase paintings. Short swords are often associated with the Spartans, though they don't seem to have been the only ones using them. And hoplites really don't seem to have carried "daggers" as such--you could call these daggers, but from what we can tell they were carried on a baldric like a regular sword, and were used like swords.

I haven't made one of these yet, though it's on my list! My current front-line xiphos has a 16-inch blade and is copied from an example found at Vitsa:

[ Linked Image ]

I've also got an older one with a 14" blade, but it's a "conversion job" so it's just a loaner piece, now.

I know there are gladius blades as short as 16" as well, but I don't have any images or specifics on hand.

Matthew

Thanks fellas, very interesting! Great pic of the xiphos, I had forgootten about them.

Can I ask what the advantages or disadvantages of blades this long would be.

Can you perform many fencing/1-1 manouveres against a longer sword/weapon or is it strictly a massed battle stab under the shield type thing?

Can it deflect in any way longer/heavier arms like axes?

Will it have any cutting ability at that length?

Just thinking its the ancient armies carrying these shorter swords. What changed between then and say early medieval requirements relating to length? Something to do with greater emphasis on cavalry needing longer swords in later periods ?

(This is my opinion, it may be incorrect)

Regarding the statement about only earlier armies using short blades, I don't think it's entirely true that shorter blades were put out of use in later armies (later meaning post Early middle ages, or dark ages). Looking at the warriors in medieval Ireland for example, we see the use of a 'scian', or long Irish war knife, used as a primary side arm. It is true that many Gaelic warriors in the middle ages had swords, and used these knives as well as these swords, but I believe it true that more of them had only these knives as a primary sidearm. As armor became more common in European warfare, it didn't make as much sense to produce broader smaller blades, as opposed to a long thin blade. I think that these short swords may have 'evolved' into long daggers or knives. Katzbalgers ( I'm unsure of the spelling) are a shorter sword which were used by the landsknecht (spelling?). These were, IIRC about the length of a Roman spatha, so perhaps not quite as short as the blades you are interested in.

In modern times, the primary close quarter combat edged weapon is often short. Daggers, trench knives, sharpened shovels, tomahawks, various 6" knives. For trench raids, these could be the primary weapon (rifles and pistols not taken).

In SE Asia (Indonesia and the Philippines especially), the main non-spear hand-to-hand weapon was often 12" to 20" of blade. Kris, barong, various bolos and parangs.

Thanks for the replies all. Some realities of close quarters fighting versus the perception of long swords to the uninitiated like myself. Would anyone know what the heaviest/thickest of the short blade types would be? Did any fulfil utalitarian functions like axes did? I know people sometime make this claim for falchions but then heard this may be a myth.

Falchions, by and large, would have been too thin and light for utility use. The few surviving examples look like dedicated fighting implements. If you want something that works as a tool, then get something that's primarily intended for use as a tool (like a machete).

Many Confederate bowies were short-sword length

You might like to consider the Khyber Knife as the primary weapon of tribesmen in the Afgan wars of th 19th century.

---

 Attachment: 172.79 KB

Thanks all, have started researching the other items mentioned- kukris, aghan knives and longer bowies.

I'm all but certain that the Spartans have the win, they at times used Lakonian/Xiphos type swords as short as 12 inches. I can't find much mention of anyone going shorter for a primary arm.