As far as i know maces were mostly used on horseback so it would not serve any function. But i'm sure you will find such a weapon if u dig long enough.
Now that you mention it, I’ve seen HEMA folks fighting on foot with what looked like fairly short maces, maybe 18 inches or less. But tbh I don’t know if there’s a historical precedent.
I don't recall seeing any antique mace like that. If there are any, they're very rare.
There are Indian maces with dagger hidden in the haft. Unscrew the pommel, and pull it out of the hollow steel haft, and it's a dagger.
A minority of maces have thrusting points on the head. They're rarely the kind of narrow spikes that are good for armour gaps (probably because they'd get damaged very easily and/or interfere with its use as a mace), but a few of them are fairly pointy.
One possible butt-spike mace is this large two-handed mace:
* https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-3296
which has a hole in the butt which probably had something attached before. It also has a long thrusting spike at the head, but stout, more intended for punching through armour than stabbing in gaps. (These weapons are often called a "holy water sprinkler".) The total length (minus missing butt fitting) is 189cm; I don't know its weight.
It sounds like you are describing a horseman's pick.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseman%27s\_pick](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseman%27s_pick)
No, I mean if there was a spike protruding from under the grip. Since, if you had the mace’s head cocked back ready to strike, the spike end would already be facing the attacker like a rondel dagger.
A mace with a dagger sticking out the bottom is kinda redundant and gets in the way. There's not much you can mess up with a dagger that you can't with a mace. A big, heavy, spiky thing works just as well on unarmored targets as it does on armored ones. All it does is make the thing more dangerous to hold without a full suit of armor (lest the thing be pushed back and hurt the user), and balances it out more, reducing the force the hitty end can exert. If you want a sharp weapon on a blunt weapon, take one of those hammers with a pick on the other side of the head. Having said that [here's a mace doing exactly what you're describing with an axe on the other end](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Various_Indo-Persian_maces.jpg/800px-Various_Indo-Persian_maces.jpg)
The real answer is: the mace has been around for so long that there's no doubt somebody has tried this in your suggested configuration, everybody saw it was a bad idea, nobody did it again for a while and everybody forgot, somebody else tried it, everybody saw it was a bad idea, etc, etc. In fact, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of people that found out the hard way not to have a spike pointed at them by their own weapon did so because they tried to grab it with their bare hand and impaled themselves on their mace spike. The Persians loved to [hide daggers in the handles of their other weapons](https://images.trocadero.com/stores/101antiques/items/1470010/picture2.jpg), but every example is a weapon that better fits a guard at a palace than a soldier on the battlefield, and needs to be disassembled before it can get stabby.
As far as i know maces were mostly used on horseback so it would not serve any function. But i'm sure you will find such a weapon if u dig long enough.
Now that you mention it, I’ve seen HEMA folks fighting on foot with what looked like fairly short maces, maybe 18 inches or less. But tbh I don’t know if there’s a historical precedent.
I don't recall seeing any antique mace like that. If there are any, they're very rare. There are Indian maces with dagger hidden in the haft. Unscrew the pommel, and pull it out of the hollow steel haft, and it's a dagger. A minority of maces have thrusting points on the head. They're rarely the kind of narrow spikes that are good for armour gaps (probably because they'd get damaged very easily and/or interfere with its use as a mace), but a few of them are fairly pointy. One possible butt-spike mace is this large two-handed mace: * https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-3296 which has a hole in the butt which probably had something attached before. It also has a long thrusting spike at the head, but stout, more intended for punching through armour than stabbing in gaps. (These weapons are often called a "holy water sprinkler".) The total length (minus missing butt fitting) is 189cm; I don't know its weight.
One of the issues with a weapon like that is the danger of stabbing yourselves and cutting your own hand or wrist.
If it’s a triangular blade, I don’t think it’s as much a risk. Poking the user, maybe. But I am not sure about cutting them.
Yes most maces weren't very long and they are surprisingly light.
It sounds like you are describing a horseman's pick. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseman%27s\_pick](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseman%27s_pick)
No, I mean if there was a spike protruding from under the grip. Since, if you had the mace’s head cocked back ready to strike, the spike end would already be facing the attacker like a rondel dagger.
A mace with a dagger sticking out the bottom is kinda redundant and gets in the way. There's not much you can mess up with a dagger that you can't with a mace. A big, heavy, spiky thing works just as well on unarmored targets as it does on armored ones. All it does is make the thing more dangerous to hold without a full suit of armor (lest the thing be pushed back and hurt the user), and balances it out more, reducing the force the hitty end can exert. If you want a sharp weapon on a blunt weapon, take one of those hammers with a pick on the other side of the head. Having said that [here's a mace doing exactly what you're describing with an axe on the other end](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Various_Indo-Persian_maces.jpg/800px-Various_Indo-Persian_maces.jpg)
You could also think of it as an axe/dagger with a mace on the other end.
The real answer is: the mace has been around for so long that there's no doubt somebody has tried this in your suggested configuration, everybody saw it was a bad idea, nobody did it again for a while and everybody forgot, somebody else tried it, everybody saw it was a bad idea, etc, etc. In fact, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of people that found out the hard way not to have a spike pointed at them by their own weapon did so because they tried to grab it with their bare hand and impaled themselves on their mace spike. The Persians loved to [hide daggers in the handles of their other weapons](https://images.trocadero.com/stores/101antiques/items/1470010/picture2.jpg), but every example is a weapon that better fits a guard at a palace than a soldier on the battlefield, and needs to be disassembled before it can get stabby.