DACIANS
Two
of the eight marble statues of Dacian warriors surmounting the Arch
of Constantine in Rome
The
Dacians were a Thracian people who were the ancient inhabitants
of the cultural region of Dacia, located in the area near the Carpathian
Mountains and west of the Black Sea. This area includes mainly the
present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as parts of
Ukraine, Eastern Serbia, Northern Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary and
Southern Poland. The Dacians spoke the Dacian language, a sub-group
of Thracian, but were somewhat culturally influenced by the neighbouring
Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC.[citation
needed]
Name
and etymology :
Name :
The Dacians were known as Geta (plural Getae) in Ancient Greek writings,
and as Dacus (plural Daci) or Getae in Roman documents, but also
as Dagae and Gaete as depicted on the late Roman map Tabula Peutingeriana.
It was Herodotus who first used the ethnonym Getae in his Histories.
In Greek and Latin, in the writings of Julius Caesar, Strabo, and
Pliny the Elder, the people became known as 'the Dacians'. Getae
and Dacians were interchangeable terms, or used with some confusion
by the Greeks. Latin poets often used the name Getae. Vergil called
them Getae four times, and Daci once, Lucian Getae three times and
Daci twice, Horace named them Getae twice and Daci five times, while
Juvenal one time Getae and two times Daci. In AD 113, Hadrian used
the poetic term Getae for the Dacians. Modern historians prefer
to use the name Geto-Dacians. Strabo describes the Getae and Dacians
as distinct but cognate tribes. This distinction refers to the regions
they occupied. Strabo and Pliny the Elder also state that Getae
and Dacians spoke the same language.
By
contrast, the name of Dacians, whatever the origin of the name,
was used by the more western tribes who adjoined the Pannonians
and therefore first became known to the Romans. According to Strabo's
Geographica, the original name of the Dacians was "Daoi".
The name Daoi (one of the ancient Geto-Dacian tribes) was certainly
adopted by foreign observers to designate all the inhabitants of
the countries north of Danube that had not yet been conquered by
Greece or Rome.
The
ethnographic name Daci is found under various forms within ancient
sources. Greeks used the forms "Dakoi" (Strabo, Dio Cassius,
and Dioscorides) and "Daoi" (singular Daos). The form
"Daoi" was frequently used according to Stephan of Byzantium.
Latins
used the forms Davus, Dacus, and a derived form Dacisci (Vopiscus
and inscriptions).
There
are similarities between the ethnonyms of the Dacians and those
of Dahae (Greek Dáoi, Dáai, Dai, Dasai; Latin Dahae,
Daci), an Indo-European people located east of the Caspian Sea,
until the 1st millennium BC. Scholars have suggested that there
were links between the two peoples since ancient times. The historian
David Gordon White has, moreover, stated that the "Dacians
... appear to be related to the Dahae".
(Likewise White and other scholars also believe that the names Dacii
and Dahae may also have a shared etymology)
By
the end of the first century AD, all the inhabitants of the lands
which now form Romania were known to the Romans as Daci, with the
exception of some Celtic and Germanic tribes who infiltrated from
the west, and Sarmatian and related people from the east.
Etymology
:
The name Daci, or "Dacians" is a collective ethnonym.
Dio Cassius reported that the Dacians themselves used that name,
and the Romans so called them, while the Greeks called them Getae.
Opinions on the origins of the name Daci are divided. Some scholars
consider it to originate in the Indo-European *dha-k-, with the
stem *dhe- "to put, to place", while others think that
the name Daci originates in *daca – "knife, dagger"
or in a word similar to dáos, meaning "wolf" in
the related language of the Phrygians.
One
hypothesis is that the name Getae originates in the Indo-European
*guet- 'to utter, to talk'. Another hypothesis is that "Getae"
and "Daci" are Iranian names of two Iranian-speaking Scythian
groups that had been assimilated into the larger Thracian-speaking
population of the later "Dacia". They might be related
to Masagetae and Dahae people who used to live in central Asia in
6th century BC.[citation needed]
Early
history of etymological approaches :
In the 1st century AD, Strabo suggested that its stem formed a name
previously borne by slaves: Greek Daos, Latin Davus (-k- is a known
suffix in Indo-European ethnic names). In the 18th century, Grimm
proposed the Gothic dags or "day" that would give the
meaning of "light, brilliant". Yet dags belongs to the
Sanskrit word-root dah-, and a derivation from Dah to "Daci"
is difficult. In the 19th century, Tomaschek (1883) proposed the
form "Dak", meaning those who understand and can speak,
by considering "Dak" as a derivation of the root da ("k"
being a suffix); cf. Sanskrit dasa, Bactrian daonha. Tomaschek also
proposed the form "Davus", meaning "members of the
clan/countryman" cf. Bactrian daqyu, danhu "canton".
Modern
theories :
Since the 19th century, many scholars have proposed an etymological
link between the endonym of the Dacians and wolves.
•
A possible connection
with the Phrygians was proposed by Dimitar Dechev (in a work not
published until 1957). [citation needed] The Phrygian language word
daos meant "wolf", [citation needed] and Daos was also
a Phrygian deity. In later times, Roman auxiliaries recruited from
the Dacian area were also known as Phrygi. [citation needed] Such
a connection was supported by material from Hesychius of Alexandria
(5th/6th century), as well as the 20th century historian Mircea
Eliade.
• The
German linguist Paul Kretschmer linked daos to wolves via the root
dhau, meaning to press, to gather, or to strangle – i.e. it
was believed that wolves would often use a neck bite to kill their
prey.
• Endonyms
linked to wolves have been demonstrated or proposed for other Indo-European
tribes, including the Luvians, Lycians, Lucanians, Hyrcanians and,
in particular, the Dahae (of the south-east Caspian region), who
were known in Old Persian as Daos. Scholars such as David Gordon
White have explicitly linked the endonyms of the Dacians and the
Dahae.
• The
Draco, a standard flown by the Dacians, also prominently featured
a wolf head.
However, according to Romanian historian and archaeologist Alexandru
Vulpe, the Dacian etymology explained by daos ("wolf")
has little plausibility, as the transformation of daos into dakos
is phonetically improbable and the Draco standard was not unique
to Dacians. He thus dismisses it as folk etymology.
Another
etymology, linked to the Proto-Indo-European language roots *dhe-
meaning "to set, place" and dheua → dava ("settlement")
and dhe-k → daci is supported by Romanian historian Ioan I.
Russu (1967).
Mythological
theories :
Dacian
Draco as from Trajan's Column
Mircea Eliade attempted, in his book From Zalmoxis to Genghis Khan,
to give a mythological foundation to an alleged special relation
between Dacians and the wolves :
•
Dacians might
have called themselves "wolves" or "ones the same
with wolves", suggesting religious significance.
• Dacians
draw their name from a god or a legendary ancestor who appeared
as a wolf.
• Dacians
had taken their name from a group of fugitive immigrants arrived
from other regions or from their own young outlaws, who acted similarly
to the wolves circling villages and living from looting. As was
the case in other societies, those young members of the community
went through an initiation, perhaps up to a year, during which they
lived as a "wolf". Comparatively, Hittite laws referred
to fugitive outlaws as "wolves".
• The
existence of a ritual that provides one with the ability to turn
into a wolf. Such a transformation may be related either to lycanthropy
itself, a widespread phenomenon, but attested especially in the
Balkans-Carpathian region, or a ritual imitation of the behavior
and appearance of the wolf. Such a ritual was presumably a military
initiation, potentially reserved to a secret brotherhood of warriors
(or Männerbünde). To become formidable warriors they would
assimilate behavior of the wolf, wearing wolf skins during the ritual.
Traces related to wolves as a cult or as totems were found in this
area since the Neolithic period, including the Vinca culture artifacts:
wolf statues and fairly rudimentary figurines representing dancers
with a wolf mask. The items could indicate warrior initiation rites,
or ceremonies in which young people put on their seasonal wolf masks.
The element of unity of beliefs about werewolves and lycanthropy
exists in the magical-religious experience of mystical solidarity
with the wolf by whatever means used to obtain it. But all have
one original myth, a primary event.
Origins and ethnogenesis :
Evidence of proto-Thracians or proto-Dacians in the prehistoric
period depends on the remains of material culture. It is generally
proposed that a proto-Dacian or proto-Thracian people developed
from a mixture of indigenous peoples and Indo-Europeans from the
time of Proto-Indo-European expansion in the Early Bronze Age (3,300–3,000
BC) when the latter, around 1500 BC, conquered the indigenous peoples.
The indigenous people were Danubian farmers, and the invading people
of the BC 3rd millennium were Kurgan warrior-herders from the Ukrainian
and Russian steppes.
Indo-Europeanization
was complete by the beginning of the Bronze Age. The people of that
time are best described as proto-Thracians, which later developed
in the Iron Age into Danubian-Carpathian Geto-Dacians as well as
Thracians of the eastern Balkan Peninsula.
Between
BC 15th–12th century, the Dacian-Getae culture was influenced
by the Bronze Age Tumulus-Urnfield warriors who were on their way
through the Balkans to Anatolia. When the La Tène Celts arrived
in BC 4th century, the Dacians were under the influence of the Scythians.
Alexander
the Great attacked the Getae in BC 335 on the lower Danube, but
by BC 300 they had formed a state founded on a military democracy,
and began a period of conquest. More Celts arrived during the BC
3rd century, and in BC 1st century the people of Boii tried to conquer
some of the Dacian territory on the eastern side of the Teiss river.
The Dacians drove the Boii south across the Danube and out of their
territory, at which point the Boii abandoned any further plans for
invasion.
Identity
and distribution :
North of the Danube, Dacians occupied [when?] a larger territory
than Ptolemaic Dacia, [clarification needed] stretching between
Bohemia in the west and the Dnieper cataracts in the east, and up
to the Pripyat, Vistula, and Oder rivers in the north and northwest.
[better source needed] In BC 53, Julius Caesar stated that the Dacian
territory [clarification needed] was on the eastern border of the
Hercynian forest. According to Strabo's Geographica, written around
AD 20, the Getes (Geto-Dacians) bordered the Suevi who lived in
the Hercynian Forest, which is somewhere in the vicinity of the
river Duria, the present-day Vah (Waag). Dacians lived on both sides
of the Danube. According to Strabo, Moesians also lived on both
sides of the Danube. According to Agrippa, Dacia was limited by
the Baltic Ocean in the North and by the Vistula in the West. The
names of the people and settlements confirm Dacia's borders as described
by Agrippa. Dacian people also lived south of the Danube.
Linguistic
affiliation :
The Dacians and Getae were always considered as Thracians by the
ancients (Dio Cassius, Trogus Pompeius, Appian, Strabo and Pliny
the Elder), and were both said to speak the same Thracian language.
The linguistic affiliation of Dacian is uncertain, since the ancient
Indo-European language in question became extinct and left very
limited traces, usually in the form of place names, plant names
and personal names. Thraco-Dacian (or Thracian and Daco-Mysian)
[which?] seems to belong to the eastern (satem) group of Indo-European
languages. [why?] There are two contradictory theories: some scholars
(such as Tomaschek 1883; Russu 1967; Solta 1980; Crossland 1982;
Vraciu 1980) consider Dacian to be a Thracian language or a dialect
thereof. This view is supported by R. G. Solta, who says that Thracian
and Dacian are very closely related languages. Other scholars (such
as Georgiev 1965, Duridanov 1976) consider that Thracian and Dacian
are two different and specific Indo-European languages which cannot
be reduced to a common language. Linguists such as Polomé
and Katicic expressed reservations [clarification needed] about
both theories.
The
Dacians are generally considered [by whom?] to have been Thracian
speakers, representing a cultural continuity [specify] from earlier
Iron Age communities loosely termed [by whom?] Getic. Since in one
interpretation, Dacian is a variety of Thracian, for the reasons
of convenience, the generic term ‘Daco-Thracian" is used,
with "Dacian" reserved for the language or dialect that
was spoken north of Danube, in present-day Romania and eastern Hungary,
and "Thracian" for the variety spoken south of the Danube.
There is no doubt that the Thracian language was related to the
Dacian language which was spoken in what is today Romania, before
some of that area was occupied by the Romans. Also, both Thracian
and Dacian have one of the main satem characteristic changes of
Indo-European language, *k and *g to *s and *z. With regard to the
term "Getic" (Getae), even though attempts have been made
to distinguish between Dacian and Getic, there seems no compelling
reason to disregard the view of the Greek geographer Strabo that
the Daci and the Getae, Thracian tribes dwelling north of the Danube
(the Daci in the west of the area and the Getae further east), were
one and the same people and spoke the same language.
Another
variety that has sometimes been recognized [by whom?] is that of
Moesian (or Mysian) for the language of an intermediate area immediately
to the south of Danube in Serbia, Bulgaria and Romanian Dobruja:
this and the dialects north of the Danube have been grouped together
as Daco-Moesian. The language of the indigenous population has left
hardly any trace in the anthroponymy of Moesia, but the toponymy
indicates that the Moesii on the south bank of the Danube, north
of the Haemus Mountains, and the Triballi in the valley of the Morava,
shared a number of characteristic linguistic features [specify]
with the Dacii south of the Carpathians and the Getae in the Wallachian
plain, which sets them apart from the Thracians though their languages
are undoubtedly related.
Dacian
culture is mostly followed through Roman sources. Ample evidence
suggests that they were a regional power in and around the city
of Sarmizegetusa. Sarmizegetusa was their political and spiritual
capital. The ruined city lies high in the mountains of central Romania.
Vladimir
Georgiev disputes that Dacian and Thracian were closely related
for various reasons, most notably that Dacian and Moesian town names
commonly end with the suffix -DAVA, while towns in Thrace proper
(i.e. South of the Balkan mountains) generally end in -PARA (see
Dacian language). According to Georgiev, the language spoken by
the ethnic Dacians should be classified as "Daco-Moesian"
and regarded as distinct from Thracian. Georgiev also claimed that
names from approximately Roman Dacia and Moesia show different and
generally less extensive changes in Indo-European consonants and
vowels than those found in Thrace itself. However, the evidence
seems to indicate divergence of a Thraco-Dacian language into northern
and southern groups of dialects, not so different as to qualify
as separate languages. Polomé considers that such lexical
differentiation ( -dava vs. para) would, however, be hardly enough
evidence to separate Daco-Moesian from Thracian.
Tribes
:
Roman era Balkans
An extensive account of the native tribes in Dacia can be found
in the ninth tabula of Europe of Ptolemy's Geography. The Geography
was probably written in the period AD 140–150, but the sources
were often earlier; for example, Roman Britain is shown before the
building of Hadrian's Wall in the AD 120s. Ptolemy's Geography also
contains a physical map probably designed before the Roman conquest,
and containing no detailed nomenclature. There are references to
the Tabula Peutingeriana, but it appears that the Dacian map of
the Tabula was completed after the final triumph of Roman nationality.
Ptolemy's list includes no fewer than twelve tribes with Geto-Dacian
names.
The
fifteen tribes of Dacia as named by Ptolemy, starting from the northernmost
ones, are as follows. First, the Anartes, the Teurisci and the Coertoboci/Costoboci.
To the south of them are the Buredeense (Buri/Burs), the Cotense/Cotini
and then the Albocense, the Potulatense and the Sense, while the
southernmost were the Saldense, the Ciaginsi and the Piephigi. To
the south of them were Predasense/Predavenses, the Rhadacense/Rhatacenses,
the Caucoense (Cauci) and Biephi. Twelve out of these fifteen tribes
listed by Ptolemy are ethnic Dacians, and three are Celt Anarti,
Teurisci, and Cotense. There are also previous brief mentions of
other Getae or Dacian tribes on the left and right banks of the
Danube, or even in Transylvania, to be added to the list of Ptolemy.
Among these other tribes are the Trixae, Crobidae and Appuli.
Some
peoples inhabiting the region generally described in Roman times
as "Dacia" were not ethnic Dacians.The true Dacians were
a people of Thracian descent. German elements (Daco-Germans), Celtic
elements (Daco-Celtic) and Iranian elements (Daco-Sarmatian) occupied
territories in the north-west and north-east of Dacia. This region
covered roughly the same area as modern Romania plus Bessarabia
(Republic of Moldova) and eastern Galicia (south-west Ukraine),
although Ptolemy places Moldavia and Bessarabia in Sarmatia Europaea,
rather than Dacia. After the Dacian Wars (AD 101-6), the Romans
occupied only about half of the wider Dacian region. The Roman province
of Dacia covered just western Wallachia as far as the Limes Transalutanus
(East of the river Aluta, or Olt) and Transylvania, as bordered
by the Carpathians.
The
impact of the Roman conquest on these people is uncertain. One hypothesis
was that they were effectively eliminated. An important clue to
the character of Dacian casualties is offered by the ancient sources
Eutropius and Crito. Both speak about men when they describe the
losses suffered by the Dacians in the wars. This suggests that both
refer to losses due to fighting, not due to a process of extermination
of the whole population. A strong component of the Dacian army,
including the Celtic Bastarnae and the Germans, had withdrawn rather
than submit to Trajan. Some scenes on Trajan's Column represent
acts of obedience of the Dacian population, and others show the
refugee Dacians returning to their own places. Dacians trying to
buy amnesty are depicted on Trajan's Column (one offers to Trajan
a tray of three gold ingots).
Alternatively,
a substantial number may have survived in the province, although
were probably outnumbered by the Romanised immigrants. Cultural
life in Dacia became very mixed and decidedly cosmopolitan because
of the colonial communities. The Dacians retained their names and
their own ways in the midst of the newcomers, and the region continued
to exhibit Dacian characteristics. The Dacians who survived the
war are attested as revolting against the Roman domination in Dacia
at least twice, in the period of time right after the Dacian Wars,
and in a more determined manner in 117 AD. In 158 AD, they revolted
again, and were put down by M. Statius Priscus. Some Dacians were
apparently expelled from the occupied zone at the end of each of
the two Dacian Wars or otherwise emigrated. It is uncertain where
these refugees settled. Some of these people might have mingled
with the existing ethnic Dacian tribes beyond the Carpathians (the
Costoboci and Carpi).
After
Trajan's conquest of Dacia, there was recurring trouble involving
Dacian groups excluded from the Roman province, as finally defined
by Hadrian. By the early third century the "Free Dacians",
as they were earlier known, were a significantly troublesome group,
then identified as the Carpi, requiring imperial intervention on
more than one occasion. In 214 Caracalla dealt with their attacks.
Later, Philip the Arab came in person to deal with them; he assumed
the triumphal title Carpicus Maximus and inaugurated a new era for
the province of Dacia (July 20, 246). Later both Decius and Gallienus
assumed the titles Dacicus Maximus. In 272, Aurelian assumed the
same title as Philip.
In
about 140 AD, Ptolemy lists the names of several tribes residing
on the fringes of the Roman Dacia (west, east and north of the Carpathian
range), and the ethnic picture seems to be a mixed one. North of
the Carpathians are recorded the Anarti, Teurisci and Costoboci.
The Anarti (or Anartes) and the Teurisci were originally probably
Celtic peoples or mixed Dacian-Celtic. The Anarti, together with
the Celtic Cotini, are described by Tacitus as vassals of the powerful
Quadi Germanic people. The Teurisci were probably a group of Celtic
Taurisci from the eastern Alps. However, archaeology has revealed
that the Celtic tribes had originally spread from west to east as
far as Transylvania, before being absorbed by the Dacians in the
1st century BC.
Costoboci
:
The main view is that the Costoboci were ethnically Dacian. Others
considered them a Slavic or Sarmatian tribe. There was also a Celtic
influence, so that some consider them a mixed Celtic and Thracian
group that appear, after Trajan's conquest, as a Dacian group within
the Celtic superstratum. The Costoboci inhabited the southern slopes
of the Carpathians. Ptolemy named the Coestoboci (Costoboci in Roman
sources) twice, showing them divided by the Dniester and the Peucinian
(Carpathian) Mountains. This suggests that they lived on both sides
of the Carpathians, but it is also possible that two accounts about
the same people were combined. There was also a group, the Transmontani,
that some modern scholars identify as Dacian Transmontani Costoboci
of the extreme north. The name Transmontani was from the Dacians'
Latin, literally "people over the mountains". Mullenhoff
identified these with the Transiugitani, another Dacian tribe north
of the Carpathian mountains.
Based
on the account of Dio Cassius, Heather (2010) considers that Hasding
Vandals, around 171 AD, attempted to take control of lands which
previously belonged to the free Dacian group called the Costoboci.
Hrushevskyi (1997) mentions that the earlier widespread view that
these Carpathian tribes were Slavic has no basis. This would be
contradicted by the Coestobocan names themselves that are known
from the inscriptions, written by a Coestobocan and therefore presumably
accurately. These names sound quite unlike anything Slavic. Scholars
such as Tomaschek (1883), Shutte (1917) and Russu (1969) consider
these Costobocian names to be Thraco-Dacian. This inscription also
indicates the Dacian background of the wife of the Costobocian king
"Ziais Tiati filia Daca". This indication of the socio-familial
line of descent seen also in other inscriptions (i.e. Diurpaneus
qui Euprepes Sterissae f(ilius) Dacus) is a custom attested since
the historical period (beginning in the 5th century BC) when Thracians
were under Greek influence. It may not have originated with the
Thracians, as it could be just a fashion borrowed from Greeks for
specifying ancestry and for distinguishing homonymous individuals
within the tribe.Shutte (1917), Parvan, and Florescu (1982) pointed
also to the Dacian characteristic place names ending in '–dava'
given by Ptolemy in the Costoboci's country.
Carpi
:
The Carpi were a sizeable group of tribes, who lived beyond the
north-eastern boundary of Roman Dacia. The majority view among modern
scholars is that the Carpi were a North Thracian tribe and a subgroup
of the Dacians. However, some historians classify them as Slavs.
According to Heather (2010), the Carpi were Dacians from the eastern
foothills of the Carpathian range – modern Moldavia and Wallachia
– who had not been brought under direct Roman rule at the
time of Trajan's conquest of Transylvania Dacia. After they generated
a new degree of political unity among themselves in the course of
the third century, these Dacian groups came to be known collectively
as the Carpi.
Dacian cast in Pushkin Museum, after original in Lateran
Museum. Early second century AD
The ancient sources about the Carpi, before 104 AD, located them
on a territory situated between the western side of Eastern European
Galicia and the mouth of the Danube. The name of the tribe is homonymous
with the Carpathian mountains. Carpi and Carpathian are Dacian words
derived from the root (s)ker- "cut" cf. Albanian karp
"stone" and Sanskrit kar- "cut". A quote from
the 6th-century Byzantine chronicler Zosimus referring to the Carpo-Dacians
(Latin: Carpo-Dacae), who attacked the Romans in the late 4th century,
is seen as evidence of their Dacian ethnicity. In fact, Carpi/Carpodaces
is the term used for Dacians outside of Dacia proper.However, that
the Carpi were Dacians is shown not so much by the form in Zosimus
as by their characteristic place-names in –dava, given by
Ptolemy in their country. The origin and ethnic affiliations of
the Carpi have been debated over the years; in modern times they
are closely associated with the Carpathian Mountains, and a good
case has been made for attributing to the Carpi a distinct material
culture, "a developed form of the Geto-Dacian La Tene culture",
often known as the Poienesti culture, which is characteristic of
this area.
Physical
characteristics :
Roman
monument commemorating the Battle of Adamclisi clearly shows two
giant Dacian warriors wielding a two-handed falx
Dacians are represented in the statues surmounting the Arch of Constantine
and on Trajan's Column. The artist of the Column took some care
to depict, in his opinion, a variety of Dacian people—from
high-ranking men, women, and children to the near-savage. Although
the artist looked to models in Hellenistic art for some body types
and compositions, he does not represent the Dacians as generic barbarians.
Classical
authors applied a generalized stereotype when describing the "barbarians"—Celts,
Scythians, Thracians—inhabiting the regions to the north of
the Greek world. In accordance with this stereotype, all these peoples
are described, in sharp contrast to the "civilized" Greeks,
as being much taller, their skin lighter and with straight light-coloured
hair and blue eyes. For instance, Aristotle wrote that "the
Scythians on the Black Sea and the Thracians are straight-haired,
for both they themselves and the environing air are moist";
according to Clement of Alexandria, Xenophanes described the Thracians
as "ruddy and tawny". On Trajan's column, Dacian soldiers'
hair is depicted longer than the hair of Roman soldiers and they
had trimmed beards.
Body-painting
was customary among the Dacians. [specify] It is probable that the
tattooing originally had a religious significance. They practiced
symbolic-ritual tattooing or body painting for both men and women,
with hereditary symbols transmitted up to the fourth generation.
History
:
Early history :
Getae
on the World Map according to Herodotus
In the absence of historical records written by the Dacians (and
Thracians) themselves, analysis of their origins depends largely
on the remains of material culture. On the whole, the Bronze Age
witnessed the evolution of the ethnic groups which emerged during
the Eneolithic period, and eventually the syncretism of both autochthonous
and Indo-European elements from the steppes and the Pontic regions.
Various groups of Thracians had not separated out by 1200 BC, but
there are strong similarities between the ceramic types found at
Troy and the ceramic types from the Carpathian area. About the year
1000 BC, the Carpatho-Danubian countries were inhabited by a northern
branch of the Thracians. At the time of the arrival of the Scythians
(c. 700 BC), the Carpatho-Danubian Thracians were developing rapidly
towards the Iron Age civilization of the West. Moreover, the whole
of the fourth period of the Carpathian Bronze Age had already been
profoundly influenced by the first Iron Age as it developed in Italy
and the Alpine lands. The Scythians, arriving with their own type
of Iron Age civilization, put a stop to these relations with the
West. From roughly 500 BC (the second Iron Age), the Dacians developed
a distinct civilization, which was capable of supporting large centralised
kingdoms by 1st BC and 1st AD.
Since
the very first detailed account by Herodotus, Getae are acknowledged
as belonging to the Thracians.Still, they are distinguished from
the other Thracians by particularities of religion and custom. The
first written mention of the name "Dacians" is in Roman
sources, but classical authors are unanimous in considering them
a branch of the Getae, a Thracian people known from Greek writings.
Strabo specified that the Daci are the Getae who lived in the area
towards the Pannonian plain (Transylvania), while the Getae proper
gravitated towards the Black Sea coast (Scythia Minor).
Relations
with Thracians :
Since the writings of Herodotus in the 5th century BC, Getae/Dacians
are acknowledged as belonging to the Thracian sphere of influence.
Despite this, they are distinguished from other Thracians by particularities
of religion and custom. Geto-Dacians and Thracians were kin people
but they were not the same. The differences from the southern Thracians
or from the neighbouring Scythians were probably faint, as several
ancient authors make confusions of identification with both groups.
In
the 19th century, Tomaschek considered a close affinity between
the Besso-Thracians and Getae-Dacians, an original kinship of both
people with Iranian peoples. They are Aryan tribes, several centuries
before Scolotes of the Pont and Sauromatae left the Aryan homeland
and settled in the Carpathian chain, in the Haemus (Balkan) and
Rhodope mountains. The Besso-Thracians and Getae-Dacians separated
very early from Aryans, since their language still maintains roots
that are missing from Iranian and it shows non-Iranian phonetic
characteristics (i.e. replacing the Iranian "l" with "r").
He considered that the Geto-Dacians and Besso-Thracians would represent
a new layer of people that extended in the autochthonous fund, probably
Illyrian or Armenian-Phrygian.
Relations
with Celts :
|
Diachronic
distribution of Celtic peoples |
|
|
|
Core Hallstatt territory, by the 6th century
BC |
|
|
|
Maximal
Celtic expansion, by 275 BC |
Geto-Dacians inhabited both sides of the Tisa River before the rise
of the Celtic Boii, and again after the latter were defeated by
the Dacians under king Burebista. During the second half of the
4th century BC, Celtic cultural influence appears in the archaeological
records of the middle Danube, Alpine region, and north-western Balkans,
where it was part of the Middle La Tène material culture.
This material appears in north-western and central Dacia, and is
reflected especially in burials. The Dacians absorbed the Celtic
influence from the northwest in the early third century BC. Archaeological
investigation of this period has highlighted several Celtic warrior
graves with military equipment. It suggests the forceful penetration
of a military Celtic elite within the region of Dacia, now known
as Transylvania, that is bounded on the east by the Carpathian range.
The archaeological sites of the third and second centuries BC in
Transylvania revealed a pattern of co-existence and fusion between
the bearers of La Tène culture and indigenous Dacians. These
were domestic dwellings with a mixture of Celtic and Dacian pottery,
and several graves in the Celtic style containing vessels of Dacian
type. There are some seventy Celtic sites in Transylvania, mostly
cemeteries, but most if not all of them indicate that the native
population imitated Celtic art forms that took their fancy, but
remained obstinately and fundamentally Dacian in their culture.
Replica of the raven-totem helmet from Satu Mare County
The Celtic Helmet from Satu Mare, Romania (northern Dacia), an Iron
Age raven totem helmet, dated around the 4th century BC. A similar
helmet is depicted on the Thraco-Celtic Gundestrup cauldron, being
worn by one of the mounted warriors (detail tagged here). See also
an illustration of Brennos wearing a similar helmet. Around 150
BC, La Tène material disappears from the area. This coincides
with the ancient writings which mention the rise of Dacian authority.
It ended the Celtic domination, and it is possible that Celts were
driven out of Dacia. Alternatively, some scholars have proposed
that the Transylvanian Celts remained, but merged into the local
culture and thus ceased to be distinctive.
Archaeological
discoveries in the settlements and fortifications of the Dacians
in the period of their kingdoms (1st century BC and 1st century
AD) included imported Celtic vessels and others made by Dacian potters
imitating Celtic prototypes, showing that relations between the
Dacians and the Celts from the regions north and west of Dacia continued.
In present-day Slovakia, archaeology has revealed evidence for mixed
Celtic-Dacian populations in the Nitra and Hron river basins.
After
the Dacians subdued the Celtic tribes, the remaining Cotini stayed
in the mountains of Central Slovakia, where they took up mining
and metalworking. Together with the original domestic population,
they created the Puchov culture that spread into central and northern
Slovakia, including Spis, and penetrated northeastern Moravia and
southern Poland. Along the Bodrog River in Zemplin they created
Celtic-Dacian settlements which were known for the production of
painted ceramics.
Relations
with Greeks :
Greek and Roman chroniclers record the defeat and capture of the
Macedonian general Lysimachus in the 3rd century BC by the Getae
(Dacians) ruled by Dromihete, their military strategy, and the release
of Lysimachus following a debate in the assembly of the Getae.
Relations
with Persians :
Herodotus says: "before Darius reached the Danube, the first
people he subdued were the Getae, who believed that they never die".
It is possible that the Persian expedition and the subsequent occupation
may have altered the way in which the Getae expressed the immortality
belief. The influence of thirty years of Achaemenid presence may
be detected in the emergence of an explicit iconography of the "Royal
Hunt" that influenced Dacian and Thracian metalworkers, and
of the practice of hawking by their upper class.
Relations
with Scythians :
Agathyrsi
Transylvania :
The Scythians' arrival in the Carpathian mountains is dated to 700
BC. The Agathyrsi of Transylvania had been mentioned by Herodotus
(fifth century BC), who regarded them as not a Scythian people,
but closely related to them. In other respects, their customs were
close to those of the Thracians. The Agathyrsi were completely denationalized
at the time of Herodotus and absorbed by the native Thracians.
The
opinion that the Agathyrsi were almost certainly Thracians results
also from the writings preserved by Stephen of Byzantium, who explains
that the Greeks called the Trausi the Agathyrsi, and we know that
the Trausi lived in the Rhodope Mountains. Certain details from
their way of life, such as tattooing, also suggest that the Agathyrsi
were Thracians. Their place was later taken by the Dacians. That
the Dacians were of Thracian stock is not in doubt, and it is safe
to assume that this new name also encompassed the Agathyrsi, and
perhaps other neighbouring Thracian people as well, as a result
of some political upheaval.
Relations
with Germanic tribes :
Map showing the Dacian-speaking Carpi place in invading
Roman Dacia in AD 250-1, under the Gothic leader Kniva
The Goths, a confederation of east German peoples, arrived in the
southern Ukraine no later than 230.During the next decade, a large
section of them moved down the Black Sea coast and occupied much
of the territory north of the lower Danube. The Goths' advance towards
the area north of the Black Sea involved competing with the indigenous
population of Dacian-speaking Carpi, as well as indigenous Iranian-speaking
Sarmatians and Roman garrison forces. The Carpi, often called "Free
Dacians", continued to dominate the anti-Roman coalition made
up of themselves, Taifali, Astringi, Vandals, Peucini, and Goths
until 248, when the Goths assumed the hegemony of the loose coalition.
The first lands taken over by the Thervingi Goths were in Moldavia,
and only during the fourth century did they move in strength down
into the Danubian plain. The Carpi found themselves squeezed between
the advancing Goths and the Roman province of Dacia. In 275 AD,
Aurelian surrendered the Dacian territory [clarification needed]
to the Carpi and the Goths. Over time, Gothic power in the region
grew, at the Carpi's expense. The Germanic-speaking Goths replaced
native Dacian-speakers as the dominant force around the Carpathian
mountains. Large numbers of Carpi, but not all of them, were admitted
into the Roman empire in the twenty-five years or so after 290 AD.
Despite this evacuation of the Carpi around 300 AD, considerable
groups of the natives (non-Romanized Dacians, Sarmatians and others)
remained in place under Gothic domination.
In
330 the Gothic Thervingi contemplated moving to the Middle Danube
region, [citation needed] and from 370 relocated with their fellow
Gothic Greuthungi to new homes in the Roman Empire. The Ostrogoths
were still more isolated, but even the Visigoths preferred to live
among their own kind. As a result, the Goths settled in pockets.
Finally, although Roman towns continued on a reduced level, there
is no question as to their survival.
In
336 AD, Constantine took the title Dacicus Maximus ("The great
victory over Dacians"), implying at least partial reconquest
of Trajan Dacia. In an inscription of 337, Constantine was commemorated
officially as Germanicus Maximus, Sarmaticus, Gothicus Maximus,
and Dacicus Maximus, meaning he had defeated the Germans, Sarmatians,
Goths, and Dacians.
Dacian
kingdoms :
Dacian kingdom during the reign of Burebista, 82 BC
Dacian polities arose as confederacies that included the Getae,
the Daci, the Buri, and the Carpi [dubious – discuss] (cf.
Bichir 1976, Shchukin 1989), united only periodically by the leadership
of Dacian kings such as Burebista and Decebal. This union was both
military-political and ideological-religious on ethnic basis. The
following are some of the attested Dacian kingdoms :
The
kingdom of Cothelas, one of the Getae, covered an area near the
Black Sea, between northern Thrace and the Danube, today Bulgaria,
in the 4th century BC. The kingdom of Rubobostes controlled a region
in Transylvania in the 2nd century BC. Gaius Scribonius Curio (proconsul
75–73 BC) campaigned successfully against the Dardani and
the Moesi, becoming the first Roman general to reach the river Danube
with his army. His successor, Marcus Licinius Lucullus, brother
of the famous Lucius Lucullus, campaigned against the Thracian Bessi
tribe and the Moesi, ravaging the whole of Moesia, the region between
the Haemus (Balkan) mountain range and the Danube. In 72 BC, his
troops occupied the Greek coastal cities of Scythia Minor (the modern
Dobrogea region in Romania and Bulgaria), which had sided with Rome's
Hellenistic arch-enemy, king Mithridates VI of Pontus, in the Third
Mithridatic War. Greek geographer Strabo claimed that the Dacians
and Getae had been able to muster a combined army of 200,000 men
during Strabo's era, the time of Roman emperor Augustus.
The
kingdom of Burebista :
The Dacian kingdom reached its maximum extent under king Burebista
(ruled 82 – 44 BC). The capital of the kingdom was possibly
the city of Argedava, also called Sargedava in some historical writings,
situated close to the river Danube. The kingdom of Burebista extended
south of the Danube, in what is today Bulgaria, and the Greeks believed
their king was the greatest of all Thracians. [better source needed]
During his reign, Burebista transferred the Geto-Dacians' capital
from Argedava to Sarmizegetusa. For at least one and a half centuries,
Sarmizegethusa was the Dacian capital, reaching its peak under king
Decebalus. Burebista annexed the Greek cities on the Pontus.(55–48
BC). Augustus wanted to avenge the defeat of Gaius Antonius Hybrida
at Histria (Sinoe) 32 years before, and to recover the lost standards.
These were held in a powerful fortress called Genucla (Isaccea,
near modern Tulcea, in the Danube delta region of Romania), controlled
by Zyraxes, the local Getan petty king. The man selected for the
task was Marcus Licinius Crassus, grandson of Crassus the triumvir,
and an experienced general at 33 years of age, who was appointed
proconsul of Macedonia in 29 BC.
The
kingdom of Decebalus 87 – 106 :
By the year AD 100, more than 400,000 square kilometres were dominated
by the Dacians, who numbered two million. Decebalus was the last
king of the Dacians, and despite his fierce resistance against the
Romans was defeated, and committed suicide rather than being marched
through Rome in a triumph as a captured enemy leader.
Conflict
with Rome :
Burebista's Dacian state was powerful enough to threaten Rome, and
Caesar contemplated campaigning against the Dacians. Despite this,
the formidable Dacian power under Burebista lasted only until his
death in 44 BC. The subsequent division of Dacia continued for about
a century until the reign of Scorilo. This was a period of only
occasional attacks on the Roman Empire's border, with some local
significance.
The
unifying actions of the last Dacian king Decebalus (ruled 87–106
AD) were seen as dangerous by Rome. Despite the fact that the Dacian
army could now gather only some 40,000 soldiers, Decebalus' raids
south of the Danube proved unstoppable and costly. In the Romans'
eyes, the situation at the border with Dacia was out of control,
and Emperor Domitian (ruled 81 to 96 AD) tried desperately to deal
with the danger through military action. But the outcome of Rome's
disastrous campaigns into Dacia in AD 86 and AD 88 pushed Domitian
to settle the situation through diplomacy.
Emperor
Trajan (ruled 97–117 AD) opted for a different approach and
decided to conquer the Dacian kingdom, partly in order to seize
its vast gold mines wealth. The effort required two major wars (the
Dacian Wars), one in 101–102 AD and the other in 105–106
AD. Only fragmentary details survive of the Dacian war: a single
sentence of Trajan's own Dacica; little more of the Getica written
by his doctor, T. Statilius Crito; nothing whatsoever of the poem
proposed by Caninius Rufus (if it was ever written), Dio Chrysostom's
Getica or Appian's Dacica. Nonetheless, a reasonable account can
be pieced together.
In
the first war, Trajan invaded Dacia by crossing the river Danube
with a boat-bridge and inflicted a crushing defeat on the Dacians
at the Second Battle of Tapae in 101 AD. The Dacian king Decebalus
was forced to sue for peace. Trajan and Decebalus then concluded
a peace treaty which was highly favourable to the Romans. The peace
agreement required the Dacians to cede some territory to the Romans
and to demolish their fortifications. Decebalus' foreign policy
was also restricted, as he was prohibited from entering into alliances
with other tribes.
However,
both Trajan and Decebalus considered this only a temporary truce
and readied themselves for renewed war. Trajan had Greek engineer
Apollodorus of Damascus construct a stone bridge over the Danube
river, while Decebalus secretly plotted alliances against the Romans
(citation needed). In 105, Trajan crossed the Danube river and besieged
Decebalus' capital, Sarmizegetusa, but the siege failed because
of Decebalus' allied tribes. However, Trajan was an optimist. He
returned with a newly constituted army and took Sarmizegetusa by
treachery. Decebalus fled into the mountains, but was cornered by
pursuing Roman cavalry. Decebalus committed suicide rather than
being captured by the Romans and be paraded as a slave, then be
killed. The Roman captain took his head and right hand to Trajan,
who had them displayed in the Forums. Trajan's Column in Rome was
constructed to celebrate the conquest of Dacia.
Death of Decebalus (Trajan's Column, Scene CXLV)
The Roman people hailed Trajan's triumph in Dacia with the longest
and most expensive celebration in their history, financed by a part
of the gold taken from the Dacians. For his triumph, Trajan gave
a 123-day festival (ludi) of celebration, in which approximately
11,000 animals were slaughtered and 11,000 gladiators fought in
combats. This surpassed Emperor Titus's celebration in AD 70, when
a 100-day festival included 3,000 gladiators and 5,000 to 9,000
wild animals.
Roman
rule :
Only about half part of Dacia then became a Roman province, with
a newly built capital at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, 40 km away
from the site of Old Sarmisegetuza Regia, which was razed to the
ground. The name of the Dacians' homeland, Dacia, became the name
of a Roman province, and the name Dacians was used to designate
the people in the region. Roman Dacia, also Dacia Traiana or Dacia
Felix, was a province of the Roman Empire from 106 to 271 or 275
AD. Its territory consisted of eastern and southeastern Transylvania,
and the regions of Banat and Oltenia (located in modern Romania).
Dacia was organised from the beginning as an imperial province,
and remained so throughout the Roman occupation. It was one of the
empire's Latin provinces; official epigraphs attest that the language
of administration was Latin. Historian estimates of the population
of Roman Dacia range from 650,000 to 1,200,000.
Roman Dacia, Moesia Inferior, Moesia Superior and other
Roman provinces
Dacians that remained outside the Roman Empire after the Dacian
wars of AD 101–106 had been named Dakoi prosoroi (Latin Daci
limitanei), "neighbouring Dacians". Modern historians
use the generic name "Free Dacians" or Independent Dacians.
The tribes Daci Magni (Great Dacians), Costoboci (generally considered
a Dacian subtribe), and Carpi remained outside the Roman empire,
in what the Romans called Dacia Libera (Free Dacia). By the early
third century the "Free Dacians" were a significantly
troublesome group, by now identified as the Carpi. Bichir argues
that the Carpi were the most powerful of the Dacian tribes who had
become the principal enemy of the Romans in the region. In 214 AD,
Caracalla campaigned against the Free Dacians. There were also campaigns
against the Dacians recorded in 236 AD.
Roman
Dacia was evacuated by the Romans under emperor Aurelian (ruled
271–5 AD). Aurelian made this decision on account of counter-pressures
on the Empire there caused by the Carpi, Visigoths, Sarmatians,
and Vandals; the lines of defence needed to be shortened, and Dacia
was deemed not defensible given the demands on available resources.
Roman power in Thracia rested mainly with the legions stationed
in Moesia. The rural nature of Thracia's populations, and the distance
from Roman authority, encouraged the presence of local troops to
support Moesia's legions. Over the next few centuries, the province
was periodically and increasingly attacked by migrating Germanic
tribes. The reign of Justinian saw the construction of over 100
legionary fortresses to supplement the defence. Thracians in Moesia
and Dacia were Romanized, while those within the Byzantine empire
were their Hellenized descendants that had mingled with the Greeks.
After
the Aurelian Retreat :
Dacian on the Constantine Arch
Roman Dacia was never a uniformly or fully Romanized area. Post-Aurelianic
Dacia fell into three divisions: the area along the river, usually
under some type of Roman administration even if in a highly localized
form; the zone beyond this area, from which Roman military personnel
had withdrawn, leaving a sizable population behind that was generally
Romanized; and finally what is now the northern parts of Moldavia,
Crisana, and Maramures, which were never occupied by the Romans.
These last areas were always peripheral to the Roman province, not
militarily occupied but nonetheless influenced by Rome as part of
the Roman economic sphere. Here lived the free, unoccupied Carpi,
often called "Free Dacians".
The
Aurelian retreat was a purely military decision to withdraw the
Roman troops to defend the Danube. The inhabitants of the old province
of Dacia displayed no awareness of impending dissolution. There
were no sudden flights or dismantling of property. It is not possible
to discern how many civilians followed the army out of Dacia; it
is clear that there was no mass emigration, since there is evidence
of continuity of settlement in Dacian villages and farms; the evacuation
may not at first have been intended to be a permanent measure. The
Romans left the province, but they didn't consider that they lost
it. Dobrogea was not abandoned at all, but continued as part of
the Roman Empire for over 350 years. As late as AD 300, the tetrarchic
emperors had resettled tens of thousands of Dacian Carpi inside
the empire, dispersing them in communities the length of the Danube,
from Austria to the Black Sea.
Society
:
Dacian
tarabostes (nobleman) – (Hermitage Museum)
Comati
on Trajan's Column, Rome
Dacians were divided into two classes: the aristocracy (tarabostes)
and the common people (comati). Only the aristocracy had the right
to cover their heads, and wore a felt hat. The common people, who
comprised the rank and file of the army, the peasants and artisans,
might have been called capillati in Latin. Their appearance and
clothing can be seen on Trajan's Column.
Occupations
:
Dacian
tools: compasses, chisels, knives, etc
The chief occupations of the Dacians were agriculture, apiculture,
viticulture, livestock, ceramics and metalworking. They also worked
the gold and silver mines of Transylvania. At Pecica, Arad, a Dacian
workshop was discovered, along with equipment for minting coins
and evidence of bronze, silver, and iron-working that suggests a
broad spectrum of smithing. Evidence for the mass production of
iron is found on many Dacian sites, indicating guild-like specialization.
Dacian ceramic manufacturing traditions continue from the pre-Roman
to the Roman period, both in provincial and unoccupied Dacia, and
well into the fourth and even early fifth centuries. They engaged
in considerable external trade, as is shown by the number of foreign
coins found in the country. On the northernmost frontier of "free
Dacia", coin circulation steadily grew in the first and second
centuries, with a decline in the third and a rise again in the fourth
century; the same pattern as observed for the Banat region to the
southwest. What is remarkable is the extent and increase in coin
circulation after Roman withdrawal from Dacia, and as far north
as Transcarpathia.
Currency
:
Geto-Dacian
Koson, mid 1st century BC
The first coins produced by the Geto-Dacians were imitations of
silver coins of the Macedonian kings Philip II and Alexander the
Great. Early in the 1st century BC, the Dacians replaced these with
silver denarii of the Roman Republic, both official coins of Rome
exported to Dacia, as well as locally made imitations of them. The
Roman province Dacia is represented on the Roman sestertius coin
as a woman seated on a rock, holding an aquila, a small child on
her knee. The aquila holds ears of grain, and another small child
is seated before her holding grapes.
Construction
:
Dacians
had developed the murus dacicus (double-skinned ashlar-masonry with
rubble fill and tie beams) characteristic to their complexes of
fortified cities, like their capital Sarmisegetuza Regia in what
is today Hunedoara County, Romania. This type of wall has been discovered
not only in the Dacian citadel of the Orastie mountains, but also
in those at Covasna, Breaza near Fagaras, Tilisca near Sibiu, Capâlna
in the Sebes valley, Banita not far from Petrosani, and Piatra Craivii
to the north of Alba Iulia. The degree of their urban development
was displayed on Trajan's Column and in the account of how Sarmizegetusa
Regia was defeated by the Romans. The Romans were given by treachery
the locations of aqueducts and pipelines of the Dacian capital,
only after destroying the water supply being able to end the long
siege of Sarmisegetuza.
Material
culture :
According to archaeological findings, the cradle of the Dacian culture
is considered to be north of the Danube towards the Carpathian mountains,
in the historical Romanian province of Muntenia. It is identified
as an evolution of the Iron Age Basarabi culture. The earlier Iron
Age Basarabi evidence in the northern lower Danube area connects
to the iron-using Ferigile-Birsesti group. This is an archaeological
manifestation of the historical Getae who, along with the Agathyrsae,
are one of a number of tribal formations recorded by Herodotus.
In archaeology, "free Dacians" are attested by the Puchov
culture (in which there are Celtic elements) and Lipita culture
to the east of the Carpathians. The Lipita culture has a Dacian/North
Thracian origin. This North Thracian population was dominated by
strong Celtic influences, or had simply absorbed Celtic ethnic components.
Lipita culture has been linked to the Dacian tribe of Costoboci.
Specific
Dacian material culture includes: wheel-turned pottery that is generally
plain but with distinctive elite wares, massive silver dress fibulae,
precious metal plate, ashlar masonry, fortifications, upland sanctuaries
with horseshoe-shaped precincts, and decorated clay heart altars
at settlement sites. Among many discovered artifacts, the Dacian
bracelets stand out, depicting their cultural and aesthetic sense.
There are difficulties correlating funerary monuments chronologically
with Dacian settlements; a small number of burials are known, along
with cremation pits, and isolated rich burials as at Cugir. Dacian
burial ritual continued under Roman occupation and into the post-Roman
period.
Language
:
The Dacians are generally considered to have been Thracian speakers,
representing a cultural continuity from earlier Iron Age communities.
Some historians and linguists consider Dacian language to be a dialect
of or the same language as Thracian. The vocalism and consonantism
differentiate the Dacian and Thracian languages.Others consider
that Dacian and Illyrian form regional varieties (dialects) of a
common language. (Thracians inhabited modern southern Bulgaria and
northern Greece. Illyrians lived in modern Albania, Serbia, Montenegro,
Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.)
The
ancient languages of these people became extinct, and their cultural
influence highly reduced, after the repeated invasions of the Balkans
by Celts, Huns, Goths, and Sarmatians, accompanied by persistent
hellenization, romanisation and later slavicisation. Therefore,
in the study of the toponomy of Dacia, one must take account of
the fact that some place-names were taken by the Slavs from as yet
unromanised Dacians. A number of Dacian words are preserved in ancient
sources, amounting to about 1150 anthroponyms and 900 toponyms,
and in Discorides some of the rich plant lore of the Dacians is
preserved along with the names of 42 medicinal plants.
Symbols
:
The Dacians knew about writing. Permanent contacts with the Graeco-Roman
world had brought the use of the Greek and later the Latin alphabet.
It is also certainly not the case that writing with Greek and Latin
letters and knowledge of Greek and Latin were known in all the settlements
scattered throughout Dacia, but there is no doubt about the existence
of such knowledge in some circles of Dacian society. However, the
most revealing discoveries concerning the use of the writing by
the Dacians occurred in the citadels on the Sebes mountains. Some
groups of letters from stone blocks at Sarmisegetuza might express
personal names; these cannot now be read because the wall is ruined,
and because it is impossible to restore the original order of the
blocks in the wall.
Religion
:
Detail of the main fresco of the Aleksandrovo kurgan. The
figure is identified with Zalmoxis
Dacian religion was considered by the classic sources as a key source
of authority, suggesting to some that Dacia was a predominantly
theocratic state led by priest-kings. However, the layout of the
Dacian capital Sarmizegethusa indicates the possibility of co-rulership,
with a separate high king and high priest. Ancient sources recorded
the names of several Dacian high priests (Deceneus, Comosicus and
Vezina) and various orders of priests: "god-worshipers",
"smoke-walkers" and "founders". Both Hellenistic
and Oriental influences are discernible in the religious background,
alongside chthonic and solar motifs.
According
to Herodotus' account of the story of Zalmoxis or Zamolxis, the
Getae (speaking the same language as the Dacians and the Thracians,
according to Strabo) believed in the immortality of the soul, and
regarded death as merely a change of country. Their chief priest
held a prominent position as the representative of the supreme deity,
Zalmoxis, who is called also Gebeleizis by some among them. Strabo
wrote about the high priest of King Burebista Deceneus: "a
man who not only had wandered through Egypt, but also had thoroughly
learned certain prognostics through which he would pretend to tell
the divine will; and within a short time he was set up as god (as
I said when relating the story of Zamolxis)."
Votive stele representing Bendis wearing a Dacian cap (British
Museum)
The Goth Jordanes in his Getica (The origin and deeds of the Goths),
also gives an account of Deceneus the highest priest, and considered
Dacians a nation related to the Goths. Besides Zalmoxis, the Dacians
believed in other deities, such as Gebeleizis, the god of storm
and lightning, possibly related to the Thracian god Zibelthiurdos.
He was represented as a handsome man, sometimes with a beard. Later
Gebeleizis was equated with Zalmoxis as the same god. According
to Herodotus, Gebeleizis (*Zebeleizis/Gebeleizis who is only mentioned
by Herodotus) is just another name of Zalmoxis.
Another
important deity was Bendis, goddess of the moon and the hunt. By
a decree of the oracle of Dodona, which required the Athenians to
grant land for a shrine or temple, her cult was introduced into
Attica by immigrant Thracian residents, and, though Thracian and
Athenian processions remained separate, both cult and festival became
so popular that in Plato's time (c. 429–13 BC) its festivities
were naturalised as an official ceremony of the Athenian city-state,
called the Bendideia.
Known
Dacian theonyms include Zalmoxis, Gebeleïzis and Darzalas.
Gebeleizis is probably cognate to the Thracian god Zibelthiurdos
(also Zbelsurdos, Zibelthurdos), wielder of lightning and thunderbolts.
Derzelas (also Darzalas) was a chthonic god of health and human
vitality. The pagan religion survived longer in Dacia than in other
parts of the empire; Christianity made little headway until the
fifth century.
Pottery
:
Fragment
of a vase collected by Mihail Dimitriu at the site of Poiana, Galati
(Piroboridava), Romania illustrating the use of Greek and Latin
letters by a Dacian potter (source: Dacia journal, 1933).
Fragments of pottery with different "inscriptions" with
Latin and Greek letters incised before and after firing have been
discovered in the settlement at Ocnita – Valcea. An inscription
carries the word Basileus (meaning "king") and seems to
have been written before the vessel was hardened by fire. Other
inscriptions contain the name of the king, believed to be Thiemarcus,
and Latin groups of letters (BVR, REB). BVR indicates the name of
the tribe or union of tribes, the Buridavensi Dacians who lived
at Buridava and who were mentioned by Ptolemy in the second century
AD under the name of Buridavensioi.
Clothing
and science :
The typical dress of Dacians, both men and women, can be seen on
Trajan's column.
Dio
Chrysostom described the Dacians as natural philosophers.
A
19th century depiction of Dacian women
Warfare :
The history of Dacian warfare spans from c. 10th century BC up to
the 2nd century AD in the region typically referred to by Ancient
Greek and Latin historians as Dacia. It concerns the armed conflicts
of the Dacian tribes and their kingdoms in the Balkans. Apart from
conflicts between Dacians and neighboring nations and tribes, numerous
wars were recorded among Dacian tribes as well.
Weapons
:
The weapon most associated with the Dacian forces that fought against
Trajan's army during his invasions of Dacia was the falx, a single-edged
scythe-like weapon. The falx was able to inflict horrible wounds
on opponents, easily disabling or killing the heavily armored Roman
legionaries that they faced. This weapon, more so than any other
single factor, forced the Roman army to adopt previously unused
or modified equipment to suit the conditions on the Dacian battlefield.
Notable
individuals :
This is a list of several important Dacian individuals or those
of partly Dacian origin.
•
Zalmoxis, a semi-legendary
social and religious reformer, eventually deified by the Getae and
Dacians and regarded as the only true god.
• Zoltes
• Burebista
was a king of Dacia, 70–44 BC, who united under his rule Thracians
in a large territory, from today's Moravia in the West, to the Southern
Bug river (Ukraine) in the East, and from the Northern Carpathian
Mountains to Southern Dionysopolis. The Greeks considered him the
first and greatest king of Thrace. [better source needed]
• Decebalus,
a king of Dacia who was ultimately defeated by the forces of Trajan.
• Diegis
was a Dacian chief, general and brother of Decebalus, and his representative
at the peace negotiations held with Domitian (89 CE)
Trivia :
"The ducks come from the trucks" – Romanian language
pun about a mistranslation (duck and truck sound like dac and trac,
the ethnonyms for Dacian and Thracian).
In
Romanian nationalism :
Modern Romanian statue of the Dacian King Burebista (located
in Calarasi)
Study of the Dacians, their culture, society and religion is not
purely a subject of ancient history, but has present day implications
in the context of Romanian nationalism. Positions taken on the vexed
question of the Origin of the Romanians and to what degree are present-day
Romanians descended from the Dacians might have contemporary political
implications. For example, The government of Nicolae Ceausescu claimed
an uninterrupted continuity of a Dacian-Romanian state, from King
Burebista to Ceausescu himself. The Ceausescu government conspicuously
commemorated the supposed 2,050th anniversary of the founding of
the "unified and centralized" country that was to become
Romania, on which occasion the historical film "Burebista"
was produced.
Source
:
https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Dacians