Dacian - Romanian - Falx sword

Battara · 18th July 2005, 07:56 PM

Incredible and enlightening!

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Sounds like a formidible weapon in the hands of an expert. Reminds me also in some ways of a katana. The gladius forced the Romans to come at close range and this was able to keep them at bay while cutting them to pieces (until the modifications came). Also reminiscent of how the Moro kampilan and the dha (for you dafia out there

) would have been in effectiveness against smaller arms. Cato in his book even states that some Moros suggest that the spike on the ends of some kampilans was used to distract or strike in a similar manner as that mentioned for this Dacian weapon.

Emanuel · 18th July 2005, 08:12 PM

As I understand so far, the romphaia was the large variant of the falx. In both cases, the blade was only sharpened on the concave side. All other curved weapons I know of generally use a convex cutting edge. Similarites therefore exist with the dha and katana type swords only in shape. This blade was apparently used through a combination of slashing and pulling motion, forcing the curved section into the victim/object. As devastating as it was, it must have been fairly unwieldy since such blades were abandoned after the 5th c. ad. It must have acted much like the huge zweihander and flamberge blades used more as pikes to break tight formations. I'd love to get my hands on one.

fearn · 18th July 2005, 08:36 PM

Great to see this!

I've admired the falx and rhompaia for a long time.

One thing to point out: you can buy similar blades for less than $30 at large hardware stores: they're called bank blades (glaive in French), and they're used for clearing brush. The falx as a tool was used for coppicing (i.e. cutting trees and shrubs down), and this is simply a weaponized version of it. A similar story holds for the English Brown Bill.

Glad to see that people are making them again.

F

Aurangzeb · 19th July 2005, 01:50 AM

Hello all!

I have been looking where to buy a repro falx for a while looks like I will make my own out of the modern counter parts blade!

"Home Depot" here I come!!!!

Emanuel · 19th July 2005, 02:49 PM

I find it strange that the scycle/scythe blade design was simply abandonned. The only other examples I've seen of such curvature are african weapons like zairian throwing knives and executioner swords. One question bugs me: From a functional/physics point of view how is the concave edge more or less effective than the convex? The convex focussed all cutting power at the apex of the curve, does that apply to concave as well?

My appreciation for any answers.
Manolo

Ian · 19th July 2005, 05:18 PM

Manolo:

I think the sickle/scythe weapon was fairly widespread. One finds examples of their use as weapons into the early 20th C., and perhaps later, in southern India, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Others can probably contribute more examples. The areas I listed still produce these blades for agricultural and domestic use, but those same blades could be used today, if needed, as weapons.

Ian.

fearn · 19th July 2005, 08:56 PM

Hi Manolo,

That's an excellent question! Here's my take on it: a convex blade is useful for slashing, and if the goal is to cut deeply, a slash (i.e. from a scimitar/shamshir), is a good way to do it. A convex weapon can do a couple of things. As you point out, it can focus a lot of power in a small spot (as with a kukri). However, the bill/scythe design actually works quite well on a pull-cut. I've got a bill-hook (actually, a woodsman's pal) that's quite good for cutting brambles and small brush. It doesn't smash them. Rather, the hook collects the branches at the sharp inner edge, and the pulling part of my stroke severs them. I suspect the same thing goes for the falx, with a different type of limb.

I suspect the reason we don't see more sickle-swords (or whatever) is twofold. One is that they tend to be tip heavy. The other is that they don't lend themselves to parrying as easily as other blade shapes do.

Other thoughts? That's just off the top of my head.

Fearn

18th July 2005, 08:12 PM	#2
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	As I understand so far, the romphaia was the large variant of the falx. In both cases, the blade was only sharpened on the concave side. All other curved weapons I know of generally use a convex cutting edge. Similarites therefore exist with the dha and katana type swords only in shape. This blade was apparently used through a combination of slashing and pulling motion, forcing the curved section into the victim/object. As devastating as it was, it must have been fairly unwieldy since such blades were abandoned after the 5th c. ad. It must have acted much like the huge zweihander and flamberge blades used more as pikes to break tight formations. I'd love to get my hands on one. Attached Images

19th July 2005, 02:49 PM	#5
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I find it strange that the scycle/scythe blade design was simply abandonned. The only other examples I've seen of such curvature are african weapons like zairian throwing knives and executioner swords. One question bugs me: From a functional/physics point of view how is the concave edge more or less effective than the convex? The convex focussed all cutting power at the apex of the curve, does that apply to concave as well? My appreciation for any answers. Manolo Last edited by Manolo; 19th July 2005 at 03:44 PM.

18th July 2005, 07:56 PM	#1
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,272	Incredible and enlightening! Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Sounds like a formidible weapon in the hands of an expert. Reminds me also in some ways of a katana. The gladius forced the Romans to come at close range and this was able to keep them at bay while cutting them to pieces (until the modifications came). Also reminiscent of how the Moro kampilan and the dha (for you dafia out there ) would have been in effectiveness against smaller arms. Cato in his book even states that some Moros suggest that the spike on the ends of some kampilans was used to distract or strike in a similar manner as that mentioned for this Dacian weapon.

18th July 2005, 08:36 PM	#3
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Great to see this! I've admired the falx and rhompaia for a long time. One thing to point out: you can buy similar blades for less than $30 at large hardware stores: they're called bank blades (glaive in French), and they're used for clearing brush. The falx as a tool was used for coppicing (i.e. cutting trees and shrubs down), and this is simply a weaponized version of it. A similar story holds for the English Brown Bill. Glad to see that people are making them again. F

19th July 2005, 01:50 AM	#4
Aurangzeb Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 306	Hello all! I have been looking where to buy a repro falx for a while looks like I will make my own out of the modern counter parts blade! "Home Depot" here I come!!!!

19th July 2005, 05:18 PM	#6
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,361	Manolo: I think the sickle/scythe weapon was fairly widespread. One finds examples of their use as weapons into the early 20th C., and perhaps later, in southern India, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Others can probably contribute more examples. The areas I listed still produce these blades for agricultural and domestic use, but those same blades could be used today, if needed, as weapons. Ian.

19th July 2005, 08:56 PM	#7
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Manolo, That's an excellent question! Here's my take on it: a convex blade is useful for slashing, and if the goal is to cut deeply, a slash (i.e. from a scimitar/shamshir), is a good way to do it. A convex weapon can do a couple of things. As you point out, it can focus a lot of power in a small spot (as with a kukri). However, the bill/scythe design actually works quite well on a pull-cut. I've got a bill-hook (actually, a woodsman's pal) that's quite good for cutting brambles and small brush. It doesn't smash them. Rather, the hook collects the branches at the sharp inner edge, and the pulling part of my stroke severs them. I suspect the same thing goes for the falx, with a different type of limb. I suspect the reason we don't see more sickle-swords (or whatever) is twofold. One is that they tend to be tip heavy. The other is that they don't lend themselves to parrying as easily as other blade shapes do. Other thoughts? That's just off the top of my head. Fearn