11-03-2010, 06:02 AM
Sitalkes/Chris W. wrote:-
The problem is, as was explored on the thread, coin depictions are small and lacking in detail generally, and the soldiers seem to have shields - which means their 'falxes' (curved blades) are probably single-handed 'sicas' - which we know were in use by Dacian auxiliary troops. Whatever object the figure is holding on the Marcus Aurelius 'adlocutio', it doesn't bear much resemblance to the two-handed 'falx' of Adamklissi - the shape is different, the handle 'flares out' to a thickness too big to grip, there seems to be a small handle on the end of the object etc. and, as was noted in the thread, this is long after the Dacian Wars ( but then Caracalla wanted to revive the Macedonian phalanx!) Furthermore even if Imperial Guards DID carry a two-handed 'falx', where is the link to 'Dacia' ? It could have been adopted from a 'Bastarnae' weapon/tool....... ( it is the single-handed 'sica' type that is clearly linked to Dacia). The Adamklissi 'two-handed chopper' is not 'derived from' or 'adapted from' or anything else - it IS the tool pure and simple, as can be seen by comparisons.
Nor does the presence of a mark ( and that on only one or two examples) "prove" it is a weapon....the mark could be anything, and most likely a maker's mark! There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest it is some 'mystical warrior' mark....
Nina wrote:-
Quote:I have a complete collection of the two-handed Dacian/Bastarnae blade depictions (there are several that are not usually seen) but I'm saving them for my book,I can match that boast......and I've had it for over 30 years !! As the old Yorkshire saying has it, "There's nowt new under the sun! "
The problem is, as was explored on the thread, coin depictions are small and lacking in detail generally, and the soldiers seem to have shields - which means their 'falxes' (curved blades) are probably single-handed 'sicas' - which we know were in use by Dacian auxiliary troops. Whatever object the figure is holding on the Marcus Aurelius 'adlocutio', it doesn't bear much resemblance to the two-handed 'falx' of Adamklissi - the shape is different, the handle 'flares out' to a thickness too big to grip, there seems to be a small handle on the end of the object etc. and, as was noted in the thread, this is long after the Dacian Wars ( but then Caracalla wanted to revive the Macedonian phalanx!) Furthermore even if Imperial Guards DID carry a two-handed 'falx', where is the link to 'Dacia' ? It could have been adopted from a 'Bastarnae' weapon/tool....... ( it is the single-handed 'sica' type that is clearly linked to Dacia). The Adamklissi 'two-handed chopper' is not 'derived from' or 'adapted from' or anything else - it IS the tool pure and simple, as can be seen by comparisons.
Nor does the presence of a mark ( and that on only one or two examples) "prove" it is a weapon....the mark could be anything, and most likely a maker's mark! There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest it is some 'mystical warrior' mark....
Nina wrote:-
Quote:You have here two types of Dacian scythes (older and newer discoveries):To avoid confusion, it must be pointed out that while 'falx'( latin: 'curved blade') could be used to describe a scythe, no-one, as far as I know links the Adamklissi 'chopper' to scythes in any way.....but it is identical to a completely different tool universally used for coppicing, hedge trimming and the like which is still in use today, referred to by various names - 'slashing hook', 'splashing hook', 'hedge trimmer' etc ( see previous posts)
Quote:An object used bouth as tool and weapon in the same time??Agricultural tools have been used as weapons all through history......and I gave the example of even well-equipped Roman Legionaries resorting to a tool - a "two-handed chopper" - the 'dolabra'/pickaxe, against well-armoured opponents.......
"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