Segmentata vs. Falx

[A_Volpe]

I agree that the Legend of the Falx has become a huge thing in the last couple of years.

It appears to be just another weapon type that was used, and if one cares to notice, for a -short- period of time, and if one
is going to split hairs about it, it was seemingly only used by a single people in a specific area during a particular battle.
Not exactly legendary stuff, but, sometimes things just run off on there own. Like the whole Spartan legend, etc.

Anyway, As has been mentioned, Roman metal body armor was still in use well into the 4th century. The plate armor, segmentata, was still one of the many types a Roman could be wearing.

I still don't understand this notion to split-hairs and argue incessantly about "how effective was the armor". If you're standing in the middle of a battlefield daring someone to hack at you with a sharp weapon (and intending to actually kill you) because you have the Best Armor EVER and you Must Prove It…..Sorry that's a great way of getting killed - And then, how many surviving literary references and evidence tells us anything like that happened? IIRC, There Are None.

Also, just because the weapon is depicted in later sculptures and mentioned by other writers later one (i.e. that 'body guard' carrying falx reference), doesn't mean the weapon necessarily retained it's horrific legendary status - It could also have been used as a Representational or "Traditional" arms of those particular Dacians. It'd be like having a pair of Samurai you hired as part of your entourage. Would you equip them with American 1860's pattern Cavalry sabers, or with the weapon that would easily identify them of their original country with a Katana?

All of that said, I'm not disputing the Intimidation factor of the Falx or it's potential in combat. Quite the opposite. I know the people involved with the Leg XX Maryland Falx vs Scutum thing, and I've seen and even handled that very Falx, and damn that sends shivers up my spine.

Targeting specific areas like smashing the shield apart with a Falx, or thinking about aiming for the leather straps on Segmentata I think is a misleading approach. Like with my earlier comment, no one is going to wait to have you try and target somewhere on their body in the thick of a fight. Smashing a shield is a viable tactic, but it's not the only trick in the bag - and may not always be the "best" one to use, either. We have this problem today when we've had these last 20-30 years of fantastic and interesting reconstructive and speculative work done on Roman period weapons, armor, and tactics, yet the problem is so little is actually based in fact, much of it is just speculative. But it ends up in a book that is beloved and lauded by 'the experts' if not 'the rest of us' enthusiasts, etc, and those speculative ideas themselves over time become "fact" that are just accepted by some and sometimes it seems to spiral out of control or out of context.

[Dan Howard]

I read that there is archaeological evidence that Roman helmets were reinforced during the Dacian Wars, apparently as a response to the falx' cutting power.

It is pure speculation. There is nothing to suggest this except that the reinforcement occurred within a century or so of Roman exposure to the falx. The only causative link is "wishful thinking".

[Alanus]

No offense to anyone. But nothing like beating a subject to death... with a falx', no less. :dizzy:
Amazing how an obscure weapon has taken international importance, going on and on and on... like the Energizer Bunny.

Well, maybe it wasn't the Energizer Bunny but you know what I mean. :unsure:

[Nathan Ross]

I read that there is archaeological evidence that Roman helmets were reinforced during the Dacian Wars, apparently as a response to the falx' cutting power.

The 'battlefield modification' to the Berzobis helmet might have something to do with the falx, but as Dan says we don't really know. Cross bracing like this appears on helmets for the next couple of hundred years, in areas where the falx was not apparent... It might equally have been a defence against a heavy downward blow from a man on a horse.

I would think that a more effective use of the falx might be in directing low sweeping blows against the legs, below the shield. This might be why we see greaves being worn by the legionaries on the Adamklisi metopes...

[diegis]

Well, Romans themselves considered the Falx as a terryfing weapon:

"Trajan engaged the war with hardened soldiers, who despised the Parthians, our enemy, and who didn't care of their arrow blows, after the horrible wounds inflicted by the curved swords of the Dacians."

Fronto, Principia Historiae, II

My opinion is that Falx evolved from Sica (itself a possible evolution from a sickle or something similar with dual use, for war and for work).
As quite many of those found have marks and signs on the blades I understand, it means that Sica was a weapon and those signs marked there had probably some spiritual significance.
The Falx seem to me as a sort of combination of a Sica and a Romphaia and appeared right in the period when Dacians start to clash more serious with Romans.

So was probably developed precisely to deal with the type of soldier the Romans had, covered by a big shield and having a good armour too. I dont think the Falx was used to split a scutum in two (even if such blow would have disabled the one holding the shield as well) but to hit the soldier behind the scutum, or maybe being used as a sort of hook to break the possible shield wall.
As the curvature allowed the tip to hit the head (and I read here on the site that experimental results were astonishing when they saw the contact), and even if protected by a helmet the hit could at least knock him out or wound him, if not killing him directly.
If the soldier would have rise the shield more for head protection then he will open a lower gap and the Falxmen could have cut his legs. As well a Falxmen could have reach the hand with the sword of his enemy even if keep somehow behind the shield, using the same curvature of the blade and the longer reach of it.
Thats why the first known Roman reinforced helmet was found in Dacia and some Roman soldiers are depicted specifically with arms and legs protections.

And thats why Marcus Cornelius Fronto had write about the very nasty wounds produced and the impression the Roman soldiers had about such blades.

Later they were still used probably by some of Dacian auxiliares (or Dacian bodyguards of some emperors as Septimius Severus, I think on his coins are depicted?) in Roman army but gradually fell of use.
The Falxmen were probably very skilled warriors and formed just a fraction of Dacian army.

[brennivs - tony drake]

I have 2 pics of found falx as you can see they are of the gentle curving type. They are nice views of different Falxes on the Adamski monument they also show 2 falxmen engageing a Legionary on more than one panel as well as the extra armour on helmets ect.
Also I have put cross bracing on a helmet for a someones Trajanic uniform this last week so quite ap for the thread I used the Berzobis helmet as were to place the bracing, however I still think this would not work as even my falx would still go into the skull before it hit the braceing. I would say it is more of a moral boost to anyone who wore the helmet. Where as the Manica and Greave are a more effective defence.



Regards Brennivs :lol:

[Andy from Petuaria]

The falx is basically a pivoted point so there is one heck of a lot of kinetic energy being transferred into the Roman taking the blow. The sharpness hardly matters a jot. Imagine you are using the falx with an overhead downward two handed grip, swiping it downwards or across the body, very very nasty. There is a YouTube video of two Dutch lads having a go with fifteenth century pole axes (note significantly slower than in full practice and with less power for obvious reasons) and you can quite easily imagine similar styles of fighting with the falx. (Less certain moves peculiar to a multifaceted weapon like the poleaxe). And what's the best armour to cope with such weapons? One heck of a lot of padding to absorb the impact. Falx fighting was frightening for the Romans as it was quite unlike any other previously encountered style.

[Mrbsct]

Michael Smitt says the Hamata and Squamata are better than the Segmentata for the Falx. How true is this? He says the Hamata/Squmata absorbs the blow better due to their better quality metal and flexibility, while the Segmentata's soft iron could be ripped through. However IMO it seems plate would defect a piercing blow better than chain would.

This theory comes from the Tropeaum Trajani Legionaires wearing no Segmentata, and Trajan was a said to have upgraded armor. IMO the Segmentata does better in the first couple of strikes but it then starts to wear out. Plus the Falx could aim for gaps, straps and nocovered areas.

What kind of quality is Segmentata metal? Wikipedia says mild case hardened steel. Some people say soft iron to absorb a blow, some say soft iron case hardened.

[Nathan Ross]

Michael Smitt says the Hamata and Squamata are better than the Segmentata for the Falx. How true is this?

You mentioned this in your first post. Who is Michael Smitt? Where does he makes these claims, and does he give any evidence for them?

[Mrbsct]

Michael Schmitz, sorry. He wrote the Dacian Threat

[Nathan Ross]

Michael Schmitz, sorry. He wrote the Dacian Threat

Ah, OK! I did read this, years ago, and I remember liking it, although checking back through it now it seems a bit flimsy. Here's the armour section (p33):

Dacian Threat

There are problems with Schmitz's ideas. Firstly, the segmentata was not 'the latest innovation in Roman armour' - it had been around for over a hundred years by AD101. Secondly, Schmitz is mistaken that the manica 'had never previously, nor ever again... employed as part of the legionary's protective armour'. Manicae are known from several other parts of the empire, and predate the Dacian war.

Bearing this in mind, I wouldn't put much faith in Schmitz's ideas about the comparative protection offered by segmentata, mail and scale. The notes refer to Sim's 2000 test in JRMES, which I believe involved a single sheet of metal struck directly, and no mail or scale.

[Mrbsct]

So do you think the Segmentata would do better or worse against the Falx? Is there any historical quote that says Trajan' upgraded the armor? Plus Seg is not depicted on Tropeaum Trajani, which seems to be more accurate than the Columm.

However Adrian Godsworthy says Segmentata had been found at the Dacian Captial Sarmizagathusa.

[Nathan Ross]

So do you think the Segmentata would do better or worse against the Falx?

I doubt there's any way of really finding out. But the segmentata clearly didn't do that badly, as it remained in use for several hundred years after the Dacian war.

Is there any historical quote that says Trajan' upgraded the armor?

No, none at all!

Plus Seg is not depicted on Tropeaum Trajani, which seems to be more accurate than the Columm.

There are various theories why that might be. Perhaps segmentata wasn't worn as much as the Column suggests. Perhaps the Column artists were more concerned to give their legionaries an identifiably 'Roman' appearance. Perhaps the troops on the metopes are auxiliaries. Either way, 'more accurate' is a difficult statement to quantify!

However Adrian Godsworthy says Segmentata had been found at the Dacian Captial Sarmizagathusa.

Yes, and many other places too, with finds dated up to cAD300.

The clearest indication that the Dacian falx was not a uniquely effective weapon is, as I've said, that it was not adopted by any other nation, nor by the Romans themselves. Plenty of other 'foreign' military innovations were, the falx was not. So apparently, for all its shock value, the Romans did not feel it contributed that much to the battlefield.

We should therefore discount any suggestions of falxes acting as giant can-openers, ripping open Roman armour like aluminium. As I said above, the most effective way to defeat an armoured opponent was not to try and chop his armour to bits, but rather to beat him to death with a blunt instrument!

[Mrbsct]

Do any historical sources say the Falx pierced through armor? Is there historical proof that cross-section helmet, manica, and greaves were designed specifically for the Falx?

I believe the Tropeum Trajani were Legionaires and Auxiliaries since the columm was meant to honor them.

IMO, Michael Schmitz maybye a little correct. The Segmentata does provide less coverage to the thighs and armpits. So it is prone to get hooked.

[diegis]

I think Falx was a weapon specifically developed by Dacians at the moment they had more serious encounters with Roman Army, which predate with more then a century the Trajanic wars.
My opinion is that was a combination of Romphaia and Sica blades, with a various curvature of the blade and a various lenght of the handle (wasnt quite a standard).
Being a special weapon designated to fight a specific type of enemy and used by (probably) few elite or skilled warriors it had mostly fell out of use after Trajanic wars.
Some Dacian auxiliars must have still use it for a while (as there is some evidence for this) but being more of a specialized or special weapon with a different style of use compared with classic Roman soldier / legionar it didnt spread all over in Roman Army.

It was kept as a weapon of emperor bodyguards too, beside the Septimius Severus coins (I think it was his coins) with Dacian bodyguards wearing Falxes I think the tradition was kept and some Varangian bodyguards of eastern Roman (Byzantine) emperors was given suhc Falxes (or Romphaia?) as weapon of choice, I remember I read that somewhere, long ago.

I dont know how effective was against various armors (segmentata, hamata, squamata) but it was apparently effective as Cornelius Fronto describe the wounds made with such curved swords as "terrible" and having a deep effect on Roman soldiers (psychological wise too).
If someone, sometime, will have a good Falx and couple good various armours and helmets on some ballistic gel dummies to verify the effects of hits from various angles and speed, then we'll probably know much close to reality how it worked