Falx

[Kosmo]

This curved blade is the most famous dacian weapon. I've seen some years ago a Discovery Channel documentary about it that I found really surprising. The reason of my surprise is that I knew little about it and from this piece it looked really important leading to a change of roman armor. The only dacian weapon that I knew of was "sica" a short curved weapon.

Still I could see the falx used in RTW. Despite this already popular information I found little hard evidence for this weapon.

Archeologists claim that 2 weapons were found near Sarmizegetusa. I don't know were they are, but the National History Museum and the Military Museum have none and I foun no pictures of them (unsurprising).

Beside literary sources some depictions are reported. One it's in a very bad shape. The others are on the Trajan's Column. I've looked at the pictures and I'm not convinced.

 

See for yourself: images 66 and 67 here

http://www.mnir.ro/ro/colectii/columna/lis...pisoade-07.html

 

For me they could be the smaller sica

 

There are some Trajan coins with the image of a falx that I did not found.

 

The little arheological evidence it's strange because it's supposed to be not only a dacian weapon but also a weapon used by dacian units in roman army.

By the way it's depicted the falx resambles closely the blade of an agricultural tool used for cutting grass. A tool that can be found everywhere even today named "coasă". You can find some images here:

 

http://www.mereuta.com/blog/2006/02

 

but I'm sure you have seen it already

 

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/1600/146737hq2.jpg

 

because it's a scythe.

 

And sica looks a lot with a less curved sickle

 

Romanian peasants in the Middle Ages fought usually with this tools as weapons and they were often effective.

 

I think the fame of the falx it's overblown. Or maybe the last thing some roman soldiers have seen was a reaper.

[Melvadius]

Some interesting images but you haven't included those from the Adamklisi (AdamKlissi?) monument, which as it was constructed in Dacia probably show's a fairly accurate image of the weapons used by the Dacian's.

 

This site has an interesting article on the Falx but also includes line drawings of some of the Dacian Weapons shown on Trajan's Column as well as other sources:

 

http://www.gk.ro/sarmizegetusa/ranistorum/site_eng/arma.html

 

I think the key point, as the article indicates, is that some of the best images of the Falx appear not to be on the spiral of the column but at the base which I believe may not have been included in the Rumanian museum copy.

 

Alternatively several of the images of the individual Meotopes from the monument (of special note are XVII & XVIII) are here:

 

http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/arma/cont...klis/metope.htm

[M. Porcius Cato]

Out of curiosity, how do the written sources on the falx compare to the visual depictions above?

[Kosmo]

@Melvadius- The images on the Adamclisi (Tropeum Traiani) are not believed to be depictions of the falx. Mainstream historians belive them to be depictions of sarmatian weapons.

http://www.magazinistoric.itcnet.ro/?modul...amp;format=html

in romanian

"Monumentul triumfal de la Adamclisi este mai sarac

[diegis]

About comparation between Traian Column and Adamclisi monument images of falx, this can be debatable, but is not a mainstream historian opinion that is a sarmatians depiction at Adamclisi, but, as you translate, just of "some authors", since i dont know if was a "standard" in falx construction. The main sword of dacians was, indeed, the "sica", a smaller, lighter, one handed, curved sword, sharped on inside edge of blade, and used in classic combination with an shield. Some fighters ( into a smaller number ) even use "gladius type". Falx was, more probably, a dacian adaptation of weaponry to roman tactics and armor, before romans adapted as well their equipment to dacians weapons. It was developed from "sica", and shes main reason was to breake the roman legions shield wall. It was little probably to be used as in that reenactor image ( even not imposible, if you think it was used by a person who work from childhood in the mountains forest, cuting trees, and more good then that reenactor guy to use a Falx ), because the warrior loose precious time to recover the sword from shield, but as a scythe used to cut grass, cuting tendons or most probably entier legs, or arms, mutilating the enemy, or used on higher level hits, when the top of sword breake thru helmet, over the scutum, do to shes curved shape, and causing head damages. It was more a developation do to wars with romans, and used in small numbers, by some "special troops", who tryed to breake the romans shield walls, so the main bulk of dacian army, armed with smaller swords, enter in the breach and "cut" the roman formation. Because of this special role, the Falx was not used after the Daco-Roman wars, ( maybe just in small numbers by dacian units from roman army, or by some so called "free dacians" ), and was not adopted by romans either, since was not any reason for use, because no one of the romans enemies at that times fight in roman legion style ( the only one who tried to copy them was Dacians and, i read somewhere, if i remeber corect, Partians, who tried to deploy some legion type units, but stil count on cavalry archers ).

[Melvadius]

Not having direct access to recent Rumanian debate on the probably origin and use of Flax is an obvious restriction on what I can say and both Kosma and Dieges have suggested what seem reasonable alternatives.

 

I have one concern with both suggestions as to the origin of a Falx being as a scythe.

 

If it is anything like the examples I have seen in British museums and other agricultural implemments from the period then they will have had close parallels with more modern equivalents with one major exception. Iron was an expensive metal and tended to be used sparingly as such Roman period agricultural edged implements normally have relatively thin blades or a small cutting edge backed by wood.

 

We know that the Romans's redesigned their helmets during the Dacian campaign to protect against a heavy over handed blow. A two handed 'axe' type implement as shown in the re-enactor's site is more likely in my view to have been the reason rather than a thin bladed scythe. Although against that the use of a 'scythe' type improvised weapon would have been a good reason to wear gladiator's leg defenses - but so would a long handled axe as used by the Vikings a few centuries later.

 

[Edit] I meant to add that because of it's shape and intended use a scythe can actually be dangerous to the leg's of it's user if he over reaches in 'normal', let alone military use. Also being a thin bladed implement it would tend to bend if used against a helmet.

 

An alternative implement would be something like the English 'billhook', which is a curved implement used for slashing brush and small pieces of timber. It can have quite a thick cross-section as it therefore a relatively heavy-weight agricultural implement - which in the Middle-Ages was converted to military use - if the Falz had similar antecedents for shrub clearance then it would be a short step to similarly using it for military purposes during the Dacian Wars. [Close Edit]

Edited December 8, 2007 by Melvadius

[DecimusCaesar]

An alternative implement would be something like the English 'billhook', which is a curved implement used for slashing brush and small pieces of timber. It can have quite a thick cross-section as it therefore a relatively heavy-weight agricultural implement - which in the Middle-Ages was converted to military use - if the Falz had similar antecedents for shrub clearance then it would be a short step to similarly using it for military purposes during the Dacian Wars.

 

it is funny you should mention 'billhooks' as I thought the same when I saw the Adamklissi monument. It is also rather similar to the Japanese 'naginata' used by the samurai.

 

Checking through an old Peter Connolly book I have, he does display in one of his illustrations something that looks like an excavated remain of a falx. Unfortunately he doesn't give any information where this falx might have been found. It is approximately 90 cm long according to his description - and it does fit in with the falx displayed on the Adamklissi monument.

[Kosmo]

@Diegis - While I'm in general agreement with what you say I have to point that the depiction of special falx units it's unsourced.

 

@Meldavius - Dacia had good mining and good metalworking. Heaving iron weapons it's less surprising here then in any other European region.

Burebista had many soldiers, maybe 80.000, and he won many wars with them. I'm sure that they had iron weapons to be that effective.

Using the scythe as a weapon would make things cheaper. The peasants-soldiers need this tool for peace and war.

In the Middle Ages romanian soldiers were peasants that often used their tools against the enemy and they used scythes and sickles. I doubt that iron was cheaper then.

 

Sure scythes bend easily, but moldovian infantry used them to cut the feet of ottoman horses and I'm sure that if it will bend after hiting a helmet still the helmet will be in worse shape.

 

The kind of army dacians had was one with no centralised supply so everyone fought with what he had. They had cavalry and archers, they had infantry with gladius and sica and maybe some of the peasants fought with their scythes named falx.

 

@Decimus Caesar - Those billhooks look interesting but they cannot be 90 cm long. Indeed on Adamclisi the weapon looks like a pole weapon and the end looks like a billhook or sickle. But the blade in the image it's obviously a short one so it's not a falx (if a falx it's a long bladed weapon)

[diegis]

Well, i was not refering to such units as some "special forces" of today, but as small groups of peoples, armed with

Falces, who have the role of break the legion shield wall, at the begining of clashes. We can just speculate, trying to be as logical as we can, because there is no many writings about Daco-Roman wars, because strangely and unfortunately, almost all disapear or was destroyed, begining with one of Traian "De bello Dacico", or his personal doctor "Getica" ( i read somewhere, and this is just an opinion, not necesary the truth, that early roman church do that, because in that writings was depicted "miracles" ). In my opininon, Falx was a development of Sica ( inspired most likely by a sickle - secera in romanian ). And haved a more tick and hardened blade, with a smaller grip then a scythe, beeing special destinated for fight. Ofcourse, do to shes shape, can be used in the same manner as a scythe ( who, btw, was spread through Europe much later ), for cutting legs, or as well, for hooks and slashings, like a giant claw, or with axe / hammer type hits, using the top of sword. Later, in the Medieval times, yes, the simple scythes was used for almost the same role. About iron weapons, in center of Dacian kingdom was found many iron workshops and iron objects, who rivalize with centers from Roman empire, so building a big cantity of weapons was not imposible for dacians. And, beside that the biger part of the army was composed by peasants, there was for sure a permanent army, with smaller dimensions, and who haved a standardized equipment, thus i am not sure if Falx have a building standard thru all Dacia, beeing posible to be make in diferent dimensions, depending of places and materials available there, but having the same "design" in mind, builded for the same manner of use.

[diegis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dacian_Weapons.jpg This is images from a history museum in Romania, showing in the upper part of panel a falx blade ( under that is a gladius / spatha ) type one, spears heads, and down a Dacian "umbo" shield, and a drawning from a parade shield. The very top of the Falx is missing, and, for sure, the sword haved a wood grip at least as half or 2/3 of the blade lenght.

[Kosmo]

Very nice Diegis.

On the lower left side of the picture there is something that looks like a recurved spearhead that it's much more similar with the Adamclisi picture then the long blade on top.

Could it be that dacians had several recurved weapons?

A short sword - sica, a long sword - falx and a pole weapon.

If they are tools used for warfare or weapons that are improved versions of tools it's hard to tell.

[Melvadius]

Very nice Diegis.

On the lower left side of the picture there is something that looks like a recurved spearhead that it's much more similar with the Adamclisi picture then the long blade on top.

Could it be that dacians had several recurved weapons?

A short sword - sica, a long sword - falx and a pole weapon.

If they are tools used for warfare or weapons that are improved versions of tools it's hard to tell.

 

It's good to see you now seem to agree there is validity to the point we have been making.

 

The bottom line with anything that is identified as a possible weapon is context. This includes such details as where it has been found and also how it appears to have been mounted. As far as agricultural tools are concerned like scythes which are now used 'side on' this may mean that the fixing point to any haft showing signs of being remade for use with the 'point'or edge now facing forward.

[Kosmo]

I did not agree with everything

The blade could be a scythe or a falx. If they are largely the same thing we can not tell them apart. We need a thorow analyisis for that and we can't make it ourself. Maybe dacian scythes were thicker than today's implements.

[Melvadius]

I did not agree with everything

The blade could be a scythe or a falx. If they are largely the same thing we can not tell them apart. We need a thorow analyisis for that and we can't make it ourself. Maybe dacian scythes were thicker than today's implements.

 

I agree that thorough analysis would be required to have any chance of determining possible origins and use as a scythe or falx. There is one point that most people may not be aware of when it comes to iron objects recovered from the ground.

 

Over time iron (adn some other metals) tends to react to the soil and either rust or in some soil conditions have elements of it effectively migrate into the surrounding soils. This can give the impression when excavated and using earleir conservation methods that metallic objects are lighter and/or larger (in the case of thin tools making them thicker) than they really were. Within the last few years a new technique has been developed with some success that, as far as I understand it, basically passes a charge through any metal object along with the block of soil that surrounded it. This technique migrates the some of the metallic elements in the soil back into the original object so returning much of its original shape and composition.

 

This does however require that a reasonably large block of the surrounding 'mineralised' soil is lifted along with the object and not removed from it until after the technique has been used as part of the conservation process.

 

[edited to correct one point]

Edited December 11, 2007 by Melvadius

[Antiochus III]

The falx was fearsome indeed. The roman helmet structure actually changed as a result of it. They added a cross bar on the helmet. Can you even imagine the brutal casuallties this thing must have inflicted? A good falx would go right through a helmet and down to the nose. At the sight of that I would desert immediately. The training and discipline of legionaries always amazes me. Even the troops in the republican legion seemed to be hardened and well trained.

 

Antiochus III