: No description of length that I can remember, but Gandalf did use the other sword in combat. I don't remember any mention of him laying down or putting aside his staff to do so. This would indicate that Gandalf's sword was usable in one hand. Therefore, a blade around three feet is probably close. I don't remember any reference or mention of one sword being larger than the other. It appears that both swords were approximately the same length. Although the Noldor were tall, there is almost always a reference to the use of a shield. Wielding a 5 to 6 foot sword in one hand is, I think, would be quite a feat even for an Noldor elf.~Aelmer

More snip

I am 6'- 6'1'' (183,7cm) tall and weigh 75 kg/165,34lb (learn the metric system;-)) and am quite strong (being educated as a carpenbter of the old "do it by hand" school and training 1-2 times a week with my sword as well as working as a handyman at a riding centre). I have no problem wielding my swords;
Fast Freestyler/lefthander: 67cm blade, 86,5cm total-
weight ~1200 gr, Strong, heavy, slow Show/righthander: 73,5cm blade 90,5cm total 1800- 1900 gr. I have experimented with a one and a half hand swords and I can wield one of max 100cm blade, 130cm total ~2000 gr with little difficulty (more I start to get unsafe in one hand). The last one is rather slender and much as I would imagine a Noldo Sword to look, while my viking ones are one heavy hacking weapon (I would compare it to a Rohir one) and one somewhat slender but still with much weight in the blade for strength as it is short enough that I can easily employ it thus. However, the long one is unwieldy from length and takes another technique than the viking ones and that would be Thorin's biggest problem, especially with a shield (in my experience a shield is often more an inhibition to close combat than an aid, but I am fast. And then there is spears...).
NT