Talk:Types of swords

Shouldn't this be called types of swords? --LMS


 * Yes. In fact, that's what it's called now. --Ed Poor

There is a list of swords in Swords. Why have two pages? Neither is a subset of the other.


 * I think you mean Sword, and it has been shortened to let this list take over. It still mentions a few kinds. --Andrew 05:12, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

--

Oh, and yes, a kris is a kind of sword as well as a kind of knife. --Andrew 05:12, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

Long sword
In this list, 'long sword' is listed as a two-handed weapon. According to the long sword article, this is not correct in most cases. Ought this not to be fixed? SpectrumDT 22:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Swords
I saw that, in this list, there's no mention of Chinese swords. While I don't have the expertise to rectify this, isn't this something that should be there? Kuroi-Kami 00:13, 5/31 2006

Yataghan
Considering they started in southwestern Turkey and were produced as far as Plovdiv, I'm placing them under "Europe". Alphros 02:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Ongoing list of things where help is needed
I've put this on a couple other pages already, but. . . I need help finding out what a dolon is and whether it fits this category. The reference to it is at Swordstick. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.95.23.122 (talk • contribs).

Me again. Anyone know where the San-Ku-Chu comes from? I think Okinawa, since that's where the Sai is usually traced back to, but I'm not sure.

And again. Turns out the link for Briquet goes to disambiguation, and there is no main page for the weapon. Anyone care to write a one-sentence stub for it? (I can't because I don't have an account.)

Once more. Ken and Barong have the same problem as Briquet. And Talibon has a similar problem: the link goes to a town's page, and there's evidently no page for the weapon.

And also, it really would be nice if Bastard sword had its own page instead of being a subsection of Longsword.

And also, does anybody know where the pappenheimer goes on the list?

I see a ton of sword-related pages out there. It seems most swords ARE war-swords. Also, a lot of this information is already in the Types of swords article. Deatonjr 23:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC) The preceeding comment was placed on Talk Talk:Types of swords

Pictures
Not everyone out there can immediately identify a sword by its name, there should be a picture of every type of blade under the name of the blade so that users can quickly identify the swords they are looking for instead of haveing to sort through article and article until they find what they are looking for. 12.72.41.194 10:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah...or make it into a table with a row for names, a row for where, and a row for pictures...Admiralsith 13:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I cannot remember the name of the type of sword that is built for the purpose of razing cities, and it's driving me crazy. It's the kind that's long and rectangular with the triangular out-jut on the end. Images on this page, or at least a table as the above person mentioned would be excellent. Is there a sword aficionado willing to undertake that task? As is, the page is thorough but inscrutable and simply a bit impractical for the majority of referential purposes.--74.235.10.103 (talk) 11:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Typo?
For the sword of Pier Gerlofs Donia, it says that it's "2,15" meters long and "7/8 kg." What's going on? --Another Andrew
 * Why? The statistics sound much too large for a realistic two-handed sword? Well, while Pier Gerlofs Donia is certainly a historical figure, much of the story of his deeds has been mingled with legendary and mythical elements, and his sword is just the most notable instance of this mix-up. I've heard some scholars expressing their doubts about 1) the ascription of the weapon to the historical figure and 2) the identification of the sword as an actual battlefield weapon as opposed to a parade-/bearing-sword, but I don't have the reference immediately at hand. Let me look go and look for it first. Lay (talk) 09:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Árije?
The section on European two-handed swords mentions the "Árije," which is not a hoplological type that I've ever heard of before. I've also been unable to find any further information (aside from fictional fantasy role-playing game statistics) for this type of sword. So, unless somebody can provide a source for the appearance and statistics of the "arije" as a real-world typological category of swords, I propose to delete the line from the list. 114.58.64.90 (talk) 09:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Since no one has answered with a reference, I've gone ahead and deleted the line. Feel free to discuss any disagreements here.114.58.89.82 (talk) 14:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Eragon? Seriously?
Does a sword from Eragon of all things belong alongside 1000-year-old legends? Removed. Look for a "swords in popular culture" article if you want to read about it so bad. 66.207.23.59 (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

What about Anduril??? It's not as lame as Eragon, of course, but while all others have some chance of being real, Anduril doesn't. I am removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.91.130.13 (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I highly doubt that Zar'roc counts as a real sword. Yes, King Author's sword(s) are put here, but everyone knows what Excalibur was. No one (besides those readers of Paolini) know who Morzan was, and since he did not have a big of an affect on culture as Arthur, I feel that it should not be here as well. I shall be removing it. Hawkeye8 (talk) 00:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Tanto
Dirk gets listed, but not a Tanto? Cyberakuma13 (talk) 18:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A tanto is strictly a knife or dagger, while Bronze Age dirks were considered swords, and there were examples of dirks throughout their heyday with blade lengths of up to 21 inches, which qualifies as a short sword. Naval dirks were also considered long daggers/short swords.  Q.E.D., dirk gets listed but not tanto. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 19:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

There's alot of daggers in there
I know there's no official line between a short sword and a long dagger but the sgain dubh and dirk? Both were daggers both in size and use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.252.79 (talk) 02:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The difference is that dirks are considered a form of very small sword. I don't know much about the sgain dubh or whatever, but I imagine that if it was included it had similar use. You might as well say that the rapier shouldn't be included because many didn't have cutting edges. Snowskeeper (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, but balisong? It literally redirects to the article Butterfly knife! How is that a sword? I know the line is hard to draw, but it has to be somewhere; otherwise we might as well just have one "list of blades". Ike Lek (talk) 08:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

What is a Khorgo?
In the article Durga, in the end of the section 'The Divine belief' it is stated "The goddess cut off his trunk with her Khorgo and "...cutting Mahishasur's head down with her Khorgo. Could someone clarify what this Khorgo is? Is there an English language equivalent for it? Wiki-uk (talk) 13:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have created a redirect from Khorgo (weapon) to Sickle (Sickle-sword redirects to Khopesh). Wiki-uk (talk) 10:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Serious editing needed
This article has always been a bit all over the place, but it needs a serious and coordinated rewrite.

The article is titled "Types of swords". Specific named swords from folklore and fiction are not types of swords, they are specific swords. This entire section should be deleted. There are several other articles that already patronize this kind of fancruft.

Someone has begun a section titled "Swords of war". With the exception of barely a half dozen items (of the several dozen named) from the earlier portion of the article, all of these swords are swords of war. It seems somewhat ridiculous to create a subsection that reiterates some (but not nearly all) of the war swords already listed in the article. In addition, the intro paragraphs for this unnecessary section makes a couple of claims that require citations or some kind of explanation. 12.233.146.130 (talk) 19:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Definition of "sword"
The word "sword" does not mean, narrowly or otherwise, straight and double edged. If sabre and scimitar are included in the list anyway most of the introduction is meaningless. Radj397 (talk) 17:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

And Homo Sapien means "thinking man," but not all humans are men. Snowskeeper (talk) 16:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Merge Classification
the classification article has some problems, but essentially is an incomplete list of sword types. Tinynanorobots (talk) 01:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The point of this article was to bring together all the different pages describing things as longswords, shortswords, broadswords, and so on. It serves to teach our readers that these terms, though popular in fantasy fiction and role playing games, have no set meaning. I am not opposed to the proposed merge, so long as it makes clear that with each claim for a classification comes great ambiguity. bd2412  T 01:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The article on classification of swords actually gives the impression that those terms have specific meaning and is how experts classify swords. Tinynanorobots (talk) 04:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Category naming confusion
Various Greek swords are placed under "Early History", and a couple of Roman swords are placed under "Western Swords". I hope everyone can see the obvious confusion here: the Greek and Roman swords in question are all early AND western, so they belong in both categories. Either we must re-name the categories or change the swords listed in them. 76.10.147.176 (talk) 03:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Middle east had straight swords as well
Middle east had straight swords as well.--24.52.201.176 (talk) 14:59, 28 February 2016 (UTC)