10-11-2010, 02:54 AM
Ave Diegis!
I am pleased that my analysis of the basic evidence "amuses" you - but then I was not expecting to convince you!
There is, as I said, much more in the way of 'pieces' to this puzzle yet to come...and I am hoping that you will, as the thread unfolds, contribute a few of those yourself.....
D
For the moment, let me answer the points you raise as briefly as I can before looking at the points raised by others....
The general area north of the Danube more or less opposite Adamklissi is shown on most ancient maps I have seen as occupied by the Peucini around this time, a tribe of the Bastarnae people - though I have not checked, I expect the information comes from Strabo or another Roman Geographer.
1. I did post a picture of the three ethnic groups portrayed on the crenellations - on a previous thread back in March 2008, but here it is again...If you examine the metopes, of the 49 extant, over half show the combat of the 'wagon massacre',( apparently the only action depicted) and only the Bastarnae ethnic group are shown in battle, many wielding the two-handed chopper/bill-hook. The only Dacians shown are chained prisoners in metopes XLVI and XLVII.
2. There is no evidence to suggest the 'Dacian Falx' was two-handed - on the contrary, on the Birdoswald inscription of the Dacian cohort, a clear single-handed weapon is depicted. Similarly the inscription of Legio IV FF shows only the single handed variety, as do many coins of 'Dacia Capta'.
3.We agree that the 'two-handed chopper' is an agricultural tool, it seems. Many say that a 'weapon' form was 'developed' from this, but the reality is that the 'battle choppers' shown at Adamklissi and the trophy base of Trajan's column are identical to the tool - no differences at all - so 'developed' in what way ? The 'brush-cutter/bill hook' is a separate tool unrelated to sickles, so cannot be 'inspired by' or related to the sickle....
4. It is difficult to tell from coin depictions the size of weapons due to distortions inevitable in the medium, and it is apparent that some coin motifs of 'Dacia Capta' were taken straight from the Column base depictions - where the equipment of all three groups who fought Trajan are shown jumbled together.
To deal with your conclusions:-
1. There are NO Dacians shown on the Adamklissi monument ( I have photos of all metopes) wielding 'two-handed curved blades', only those Bastarnae in 'Germanic' dress with 'Germanic' hair topknots....my turn to challenge you to produce a picture of a figure in Dacian dress wielding same.
2. There is no evidence that he Romans meant a 'two-handed' weapon when they spoke of the 'Dacian Falx' - it translates literally as 'Dacian curved blade'.
3. There is no evidence of any 'battle swords' specially made for warfare - as someone here has pointed out, the archaeologists simply can't tell whether the curved blades found at Sarmizegetusa are weapons or tools - not surprising since the 'weapons' were identical with the tools !!
4. There is no evidence that the Romans changed armour types in mid-campaign, certainly older helmets were modified by having cross-braces added, but we don't know when this occurred.The supposition that the 'manica' was utilised especially to counter the Falx came when the only depiction came from Adamklissi, and the Newstead example had been identified by Russell-Robinson as a "cavalry thigh guard". The suggestion that it was taken up as a counter to the two-handed falx came originally, I think, from Phil Barker in the early 1970's in his book "Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome".
We now know the 'manica' was quite widespread in use - see Sean's post.
5. see comments on coins above.
I am pleased that my analysis of the basic evidence "amuses" you - but then I was not expecting to convince you!
There is, as I said, much more in the way of 'pieces' to this puzzle yet to come...and I am hoping that you will, as the thread unfolds, contribute a few of those yourself.....
D For the moment, let me answer the points you raise as briefly as I can before looking at the points raised by others....
The general area north of the Danube more or less opposite Adamklissi is shown on most ancient maps I have seen as occupied by the Peucini around this time, a tribe of the Bastarnae people - though I have not checked, I expect the information comes from Strabo or another Roman Geographer.
1. I did post a picture of the three ethnic groups portrayed on the crenellations - on a previous thread back in March 2008, but here it is again...If you examine the metopes, of the 49 extant, over half show the combat of the 'wagon massacre',( apparently the only action depicted) and only the Bastarnae ethnic group are shown in battle, many wielding the two-handed chopper/bill-hook. The only Dacians shown are chained prisoners in metopes XLVI and XLVII.
2. There is no evidence to suggest the 'Dacian Falx' was two-handed - on the contrary, on the Birdoswald inscription of the Dacian cohort, a clear single-handed weapon is depicted. Similarly the inscription of Legio IV FF shows only the single handed variety, as do many coins of 'Dacia Capta'.
3.We agree that the 'two-handed chopper' is an agricultural tool, it seems. Many say that a 'weapon' form was 'developed' from this, but the reality is that the 'battle choppers' shown at Adamklissi and the trophy base of Trajan's column are identical to the tool - no differences at all - so 'developed' in what way ? The 'brush-cutter/bill hook' is a separate tool unrelated to sickles, so cannot be 'inspired by' or related to the sickle....
4. It is difficult to tell from coin depictions the size of weapons due to distortions inevitable in the medium, and it is apparent that some coin motifs of 'Dacia Capta' were taken straight from the Column base depictions - where the equipment of all three groups who fought Trajan are shown jumbled together.
To deal with your conclusions:-
1. There are NO Dacians shown on the Adamklissi monument ( I have photos of all metopes) wielding 'two-handed curved blades', only those Bastarnae in 'Germanic' dress with 'Germanic' hair topknots....my turn to challenge you to produce a picture of a figure in Dacian dress wielding same.
2. There is no evidence that he Romans meant a 'two-handed' weapon when they spoke of the 'Dacian Falx' - it translates literally as 'Dacian curved blade'.
3. There is no evidence of any 'battle swords' specially made for warfare - as someone here has pointed out, the archaeologists simply can't tell whether the curved blades found at Sarmizegetusa are weapons or tools - not surprising since the 'weapons' were identical with the tools !!
4. There is no evidence that the Romans changed armour types in mid-campaign, certainly older helmets were modified by having cross-braces added, but we don't know when this occurred.The supposition that the 'manica' was utilised especially to counter the Falx came when the only depiction came from Adamklissi, and the Newstead example had been identified by Russell-Robinson as a "cavalry thigh guard". The suggestion that it was taken up as a counter to the two-handed falx came originally, I think, from Phil Barker in the early 1970's in his book "Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome".
We now know the 'manica' was quite widespread in use - see Sean's post.
5. see comments on coins above.
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
