10-16-2008, 08:38 PM
Quote:About swords, the main one was definately "sica", founded in greater numbers all over. It was more like a huge battle knife, or a short sword, with one or both edges sharpened,
Do you have a picture or a reference for a sica with both edges sharpened?
Quote:Another type of sword was a persian inspired one, called "akinakai",
A reference, please.
Quote:Another type are from celtic inspiration, a longer right type, as well from a little spread, like the pommel ringed one presented here.
Exactly like the pommel ringed ones presented at the begging of this discussion. I think that was the point of this discussion.
Quote:However, in AC era,
You mean to say "AD" era? The modern calander of today?
Quote:and after some exchanges with romans ( including prisoners, desertors from roman army-much probably dacians from southern provinces like Moesia, or even roman instructors send for ex. by Domitian ) gladius sword apear in dacian army too, but the "national" one sword, if we can call it like that was definately "sica".
Maybe size doesn't always count, but at maximum 40cm (including the handle) I don't think we can say that sica is a sword. I don't want to go in battle with only that to fight away my enemies.
Where did you read about Roman desertors leaving the Roman army to join the Dacians? I am sure that the gladius type sword used in Dacia is from the Celts (or Sarmatians) but not from the Romans. It is not the Roman form. The Romans had gladius because they copied also the Celts.
The most common swords from artefacts are gladius (usually with ring) and something like Germanic saex (a big fighting knife). Sica was common, but was a knife. Falx is also found but few.
Quote: About the falx, i still see someone pres the idea that was not a dacian weapon, but a bastarnae one. I argue on another topic, and not want to start again, but the fact that falx was considered by romans at that time a Dacian sword, it was founded just in Dacian sites, and not in other places
OK. Is true, its only found in Dacian sites, but only 5 are found. What conclusion can we draw from that? Maybe it really was just a weapon of allies (ex. Bastarnae) or wass just a temporary idea for fighting Romans, but it is not a common weapon (from artefact finds).
Ioan Berbescu
