The "Myth" of the "Dacian Falx" as a super weapon

[diegis]

I do not believe the falx to be a super weapon, but it was effective in it's purpose. As to it causing the Romans to change their armor:

M.C. Bishop and J.C.N. Coulston-“Roman Military Equipment”-Adoption of additional limb-defenses in the face of Dacian scythe-weapons (falces), as seen on the Adamklissi metopes, would at first sight provide a clear example of short-term innovation. However, greaves and armguards were in use on other frontiers, earlier or contemporaneously, without the involvement of Dacian adversaries(see Chapter 5) Pg. 203.

There would have been no reason for the Romans to pick up this weapon nor any other two handed weapon as that would go against the tactics and formations they were using. Where you might have seen the falx would have been among Dacian auxiliaries, and I don't know how rare that would be, though it could be an indicator of how useful of a weapon it might be. Would the Dacian auxiliary give up his falx in favor of the gladius?

Hi Frostwulf

A good documented post, as usual.
About Falxes used by Dacian auxiliares, i dont know, but is very possible. I remember i read somewhere, a while ago, about a representation (on a coin or other image) of a Roman emperor, i think Septimius Severus, who had Dacian bodyguards wearing Falxes (two handed swords). There is as well a representation on a tombstone of one of comanders of a Dacian auxiliar units in Britania, with a longer curved blade but a one handed handle