Dacian Falx

[Merlkir]

It's a bit sad how deadly sure both of you are of what you're saying. To me, nothing seems to be proven or definitive.
1) Why would the two handed falx be limited to only Bastarnae, or the Dacians? In a region like that, different cultures influencing each other would make sense.
2) Who knows what the nakedness is? It could be ritual - there really aren't many reason not to wear a tunic into battle - there's that quote about the Gaesatae suffering more severe wounds from javelins and darts than their cloaked allies. Or it could indeed be Roman propaganda, showing them as naked savages.
3) indeed not all the men wielding two handed falxes on the metopes have the suebian knots or the same clothes.
4) argumenting using historians from the 19th and early 20th century seems a bit silly to me - people used to believe all kinds of weird stuff back then, sometimes ridiculously wrong. Which we now know. I'm not saying those guys were wrong, just that their fame in those days doesn't mean they were definitely right.
5) that falx found at Sarmisegetuza also belonged to a Bastarnae warrior? Doesn't sound like mr. Occam would agree.

I think the falx (or curved blades, whatever) must've been useful somehow, otherwise the Dacians and other tribes in that area wouldn't have used them. I think both extreme views you guys hold (super effective vs. nearly useless) are implausible though.

The Dacians and other peoples in the area most likely used these choppers to some reasonable success, that's how I'd interpret the evidence.