Editing Falx (section)

== Dacian ''falx'' ==
[[File:Dacian Weapons.jpg|thumb|right|Dacian weaponry including a ''falx'' (top) exhibited in [[Transylvanian History Museum|Cluj National History Museum]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.romanianhistoryandculture.com/getaigoldsilverarmor.htm#667015478|title=Getai Gold&Silver Armor|website=Romanian History and Culture}}</ref>]]
In Latin texts, the weapon was described as an ''{{lang|la|ensis falcatus}}'' (whence {{lang|la|[[falcata]]}}) by [[Ovid]] in {{lang|la|Metamorphose}} and as a ''{{lang|la|falx supina}}'' by [[Satires of Juvenal|Juvenal]] in {{lang|la|Satiriae}}.

The Dacian {{lang|la|falx}} came in two sizes: one-handed and two-handed. The shorter variant was called {{lang|la|[[sica]]}}<ref>''Rome's Enemies, Vol. 1: Germanics and Dacians'' (Men at Arms Series, 129) by Peter Wilcox and Gerry Embleton, 1982, p. 35</ref> (sickle) in the Dacian language ([[Valerius Maximus]], III, 2.12) with a blade length that varied but was usually around {{convert|16|in|cm}} long with a handle one-third longer than the blade. The two-handed {{lang|la|falx}} was a [[polearm]]. It consisted of a {{convert|3|ft|m|adj=mid|-long}} wooden shaft with a long curved iron blade of nearly-equal length attached to the end. Archaeological evidence indicates that the one-handed {{lang|la|falx}} was also used two-handed.<ref name="Schmitz31">Michael Schmitz ''The Dacian threat, 101-106 AD'' Caeros 2005, p. 31 {{ISBN|0-9758445-0-4}}</ref>

The blade was sharpened only on the inside and was reputed to be devastatingly effective. However, it left its user vulnerable because, being a two-handed weapon, the warrior could not also make use of a shield. It may be imagined that the length of the two-handed {{lang|la|falx}} allowed it to be wielded with great force, the point piercing helmets and the blade splitting shields – it was said to be capable of splitting a shield in two at a single blow. Alternatively, it might have been used as a hook, pulling away shields and cutting at vulnerable limbs, or striking the edge of a strong shield. The inward curving point was still able to pierce the armour or flesh of the target behind the shield, rendering even the most reinforced shields much less effective against a {{lang|la|falx}} wielder.

[[Trajan's column]] is a monument to the emperor's conquest of Dacia. The massive base is covered with reliefs of trophies of Dacian weapons and includes several illustrations of the two-handed {{lang|la|falx}}. The column itself has a helical frieze that tells the story of the Dacian wars. On the frieze, almost all the Dacians that are armed have shields and therefore cannot be using two-handed {{lang|la|falx}}. The exact weapon of those few shown without shields cannot be determined with certainty. The frieze of Trajan's column also shows Dacians using smaller, sword-sized {{lang|la|falx}}.  However, this column is also largely stylized, with the sculptor believed to have worked from Trajan's now lost commentary and unlikely to have witnessed the events himself. A further problem is that most of the weapons on the monument were made of metal, which have since disappeared.<ref>Michael Schmitz ''The Dacian threat, 101-106 AD'', p. 4</ref>

The Adamclisi monument, built by Trajan to commemorate the Romans who lost their lives in the Dacian counterattack in [[Moesia]], is thought to have been constructed by the soldiers who fought there, so it may be more accurate. This column shows four distinct types of {{lang|la|falx}}, whereas Trajan's shows only one type that does not resemble any on the Adamclisi monument. Because of this, historians disagree on which depiction is correct, but it has been pointed out that if the Trajan's column {{lang|la|falx}} are correct, then there would have been no need to modify Roman armour.<ref name="Schmitz30">Michael Schmitz ''The Dacian threat, 101-106 AD'', p. 30</ref> Both columns show the Dacians fighting with no armour apart from a shield, although some on the Adamclisi are wearing helmets. Some historians believe that armour was not depicted to differentiate Dacians from Romans, as both used the same style of shield. Other sources indicate that Dacians by this time had undergone Romanisation, used Roman military tactics, and sometimes wore Roman style scale armour. It is likely that the nobles at least wore armour and, combined with the {{lang|la|falx}}, the Dacians would have been a formidable threat.<ref>Michael Schmitz ''The Dacian threat, 101-106 AD'', pp. 32–33</ref>

===Effectiveness===

[[Marcus Cornelius Fronto]] described the large gaping wounds that a {{lang|la|falx}} inflicted, and experiments have shown that a blow from a {{lang|la|falx}} easily penetrated the Romans' {{lang|la|[[lorica segmentata]]}}, enough to incapacitate or kill a majority of opponents. These experiments also show that the {{lang|la|falx}} was most efficient when targeting the head, shoulders, legs and especially the right (sword) arm, which was generally exposed. A legionary who had lost the use of his right arm became a serious liability to his unit in battle.<ref name="Schmitz31" />

During the [[Trajan's Dacian Wars|conquest of Dacia]] by [[Trajan]] the Roman army adapted personal equipment while on campaign, and it seems likely that this was a response to this deadly weapon. Roman legionaries had transverse reinforcing iron straps applied to their helmets - it is clear that these are late modifications because they are roughly applied across existing embossed decoration. The legions also reintroduced the wearing of {{lang|la|[[lorica hamata]]}} and {{lang|la|[[lorica squamata]]}} for the Dacia campaign as both were more flexible than the newer {{lang|la|segmentata}} armour which was able to distribute damage more widely. In addition, both these older armour styles had unique modifications, a row of {{lang|la|[[pteruges]]}} was added to the sleeves, a double row of {{lang|la|pteruges}} was added to the skirt and a heavily padded vestment was worn underneath them.  Roman armour of the time left limbs unprotected; Trajan introduced the use of [[greave]]s and an arm protector ({{lang|la|[[Manica (armguard)|manica]]}}) for the right arm, which had previously been used only by gladiators, and which was never used again by soldiers once the Dacia campaign concluded.<ref>Michael Schmitz ''The Dacian threat, 101-106 AD'', pp. 33–36</ref>{{Contradictory inline|article=Manica (armguard)|section=History and usage|date=October 2011}}<!--Is this being claimed for both the greaves and the manica, or just the manica?-->