|
Post by Temüjin on Dec 2, 2010 21:15:48 GMT 3
i don't know, the whole Thracian-Dacian-Getae relationship isn't fully clear...
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Dec 2, 2010 21:54:03 GMT 3
Not fully, but is the most likely one...
|
|
|
Post by merlkir on Dec 3, 2010 0:06:32 GMT 3
It seems fairly clear. Getai/Dacians were originally a Thracian tribe. Their culture deviated quite noticeably and that's why we usually don't just bundle them with other Thracians.
It seems (from a book on Dacians I've read written by a Romanian archaeologist) that the terms Getai and Dacians were at first used geographically. (don't remember how the division went though)
At some point the tribes of Getai and Dacians were united under Burebista and the following line of rulers ending with Decebal and most ancient historians used the terms interchangeably with the same meaning.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Dec 3, 2010 23:42:43 GMT 3
yeah i know but Getae were culturally very similar to Steppe tribes, as they lived in Wallachia. then, Dacians were heavy influenced by Celts and/or Germanic tribes, but have also more classical thracian characteristics, ratehr than any Steppe influence. as far as i can see, there is a huge conflict between written accounts (who claim Getae = Dacians) and archaeological evidence. besides, just because modern Romanians speak a romanic language doesn't mean they're "roman-dacians". in fact that one book implies they're of various background and only embraced the langauge as some sort of lingua franca, and indeed historically the assumption that Romanians = Romanized Dacians seems off, the only supportive argument for this is their language. www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1171744/?site_locale=en_GB
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Dec 4, 2010 1:11:07 GMT 3
Well, Romanian discussion could be to0 big to leave it in this thread. May be need to create a special thread about Romanian ethnic origins?
Regarding the Getae-Dacians, there are indeed several interesting theories. There are even indications that they might have been Slavs, or at least included some Slavic component...
There is an interesting passage from the Russian Primary Chronicle where it is written that "Slavs lived along the Danube and later Volokhs i.e. Romans attacked them and they had to escape to the north..."
One theory states that this actually is a memory of Trajan invasion of the kingdom of Dacians. The name Trajan is also mentioned in several ancient Russian chronicles as a kind of of strange mysterious character... "The ages of Trajan" is a kind of a metaphor for a very distant past in those chronicles. It's even mentioned in the Tale of Igor's campaing which is a about the famous battle with Cumans/Polovtsians.
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Dec 4, 2010 3:15:29 GMT 3
Yes, the Getae seem to have some Scythian features in their culture, which is not surprising given their territorial proximity (even Herodotus who refer the Getae to Thracians wrote that Danube was "a Scythian river"). Jordanes relates that common Getae were called "long-haired" (Latin Capillati or Komētai in Greek according to Cassius Dio) and the aristocrats amongst which kings and priests were chosen - Pilleati (= Pilōphoroi by Cassius Dio which means "wearers of felt caps"). Both wearing long hair and peaked felt cap are Scythian customs. Maybe those illustrious Getae were from Scythian origin? According to Jordanes the native name of the Pilleati was "Tarabostesei" which could be derived from Iranian Scythian *dār-upasta - "possessing land", i.e. "landowners".
Jordanes, being himself from Gothic origin, claimed that Goths are descendants of Getae. Before him Strabo have thought that Dacians were related to Scythian Dahae and were predecessors of Germans. So such speculations have been made not only in our age.
Then there is the topic of that particular cult of Zalmoxis which as already Herodotus had pointed out was different from the common Thracian religion. According to Porphyry the name "Zalmoxis" is derived from Thracian word zalmos - "hide, pelt" (felt again?). This could be also a Scythian name from Old Iranian zarema - "hide" (in Avesta also a homonym of zarema - "springtime") and xshaya - "king". (cf. Scythian Kolaksais < *Xoraxshaya - "sun-king" with similar r~l transition). Indeed in writings of Lucian of Samosata (although his works are more literary than actual account of Scythian customs and traditions) Zamolxis (Zalmoxis) is referred as Scythian deity - an equivalent of Wind or symbol of the life-force in the Scythian oath. And according to Herodotus another name of Zalmoxis was Gebeleizis or Gebeleizeis which could be from Iranian Scythian *gaya-bala-zāy ("life-force-bear") or *gaya-bala-zāta ("life-force-born").
Still, I wouldn't insist on the above suggestions too much. When an extinct language is not well known it's easy to see in ancient names whatever one is biased to see. For instance in Volga Bulgarian epic "Chulman Tolgau" the name Zalmoxis is comprehended as Čolmaqsïz - "immaculate". But not only one truth can be real.
|
|
|
Post by merlkir on Dec 4, 2010 12:58:31 GMT 3
As far as I remember, the Dacians/Getai had two different types of main cults - a sky deity which (I think) came later, and an underground deity. Zamolxis was the sky one? if it's this way and the cult of Zamolxis came later, it would make sense for it to be a steppe influence coming after old Thracian cults.
I think saying they might've been Slavs is dangerous and misleading - Slavs appeared much later, so if anything, we may speculate that the Getai influenced Slavs. (it's similar how Ancalimon says everyone in history was Turk)
This region was inhabited by many various populations and it's obvious they all influenced each other a lot. A scythian/sarmatian influence on the Getai is a given I'd say. Another tribe from that area - the Bastarnae is another example, scholars still can't agree if they were more celtic, germanic or eastern.
Babur, could you please elaborate on this? From what I've read it seems the archaeology on dacian/getai territory is pretty much consistent with written sources.
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Dec 4, 2010 22:56:45 GMT 3
AFAIK Dacians and Getae just two names for the same people. Getae is a Greek name, Dacians is a Latin name. Regarding the Slavs, it is really unclear whether they had any genetic with Dacians, you can't really disprove it based on the evidence we have. Cherniakhov culture, for example, according to some scholars seems to belong both to Dacians and Slavs...
|
|
|
Post by Ardavarz on Dec 5, 2010 1:05:12 GMT 3
As far as I remember, the Dacians/Getai had two different types of main cults - a sky deity which (I think) came later, and an underground deity. Zamolxis was the sky one? if it's this way and the cult of Zamolxis came later, it would make sense for it to be a steppe influence coming after old Thracian cults. The Zalmoxis cult integrates both uranic and chtonic aspects. It seems this syncretism is a common feature of Thracian religion in the classic times. It appears to have two layers - one native and one foreign which quite possible might be Scythian. According to Herodotus Thracian kings had a special cult and claimed that have descended from Hermes whose name was probably Kandaon - "dog-fighter", i.e. wolf - a Steppe totem. And then all that cult of heroes represented as riders... Maybe the Thracian aristocracy really was from Scythian origin mingled with native tribes.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Dec 5, 2010 1:11:57 GMT 3
Jordanes, being himself from Gothic origin, claimed that Goths are descendants of Getae. Before him Strabo have thought that Dacians were related to Scythian Dahae and were predecessors of Germans. So such speculations have been made not only in our age. Jordanes was most likely of Alan origin. nevertheless the theory is known but Goths most likely came from Scandinavia and if anything absorbed remnants of Getae when they passed through. a Scythian-German connection was also suggested at some points already, if you want to read more, check the thread Steppe influence on Germanic people. Babur, could you please elaborate on this? From what I've read it seems the archaeology on dacian/getai territory is pretty much consistent with written sources. from what we know, Thracians of modern Bulgaria geographcially, were hillmen in general and had a culture influenced by Greece. Getae north of the Danube (modern Romania) were more influenced by their eastern neighbours, the Scythians. in Roman times, the Thracians south of the Danube became part of the Roman empire and didn't played a role for our observations. Dacians however, seem to have been hillmen too, ifnluenced by western neighbours (Celtic and/or Germanic tribes). how to we explain this transition if they were indeed the same? western european and eastern european steppe culture were too different and hostile towards each others. ironcially enough, only the Goths seem to have managed to dwell on the Steppe, coming from the North. it should also be noted that when the Dacians were at war with Rome, they were assisted by Steppe tribes of Sarmatian origin. on Trajan's Column, we can clearly see the huge difference in warfare between the Dacians (unarmoured infantry with Rhomphaias) and Sarmatians (armoured cavalry). Getae however were horsemen too. Dacian and Thracian is really the same word, and we know Getae were a Thracian tribe. the real question is not if Getae were Thracians, but what's the deal with Dacians being closer culturally to their 'core' thracian ancestors of modern Bulgaria, while Getae seem to have been culturally Steppe people for most part.
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Dec 5, 2010 4:53:31 GMT 3
Jordannes story about Getae-Goths connection is just one of the most famous examples of fake historical geneologies.
At the same he actually decribes in detail who the Goths arrived from Svandinavia and travelled to the Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by merlkir on Dec 5, 2010 12:23:55 GMT 3
I think the separation of Getai and Dacians as horse riders and mountain dwellers is a bit artificial one. I'll look in my books, but I think we don't really know about a clear line between Getai and Dacian settlements, or Getai and Dacian archaeology. Of course, tribes of Getai/Dacians lived in different terrain - flatlands near river and also deep mountains with their heavily defended fortresses. I can imagine a certain preference of horse riding and fighting on foot depending on terrain.
again, I'll take a look in me books. The point is - the Getai and Dacians were united by alliances very often and later even united under one king, after that they are referred to by one name without a difference.
|
|
|
Post by Asparuh on Dec 6, 2010 2:50:58 GMT 3
Hi,I see you guys putted enought post about Dacians here.Yes indeed they were very interested people.I read they served the mountain Wolf.Their tribe used to carry a flag with a wolf head on it.They do are a Thracian tribe ,but they used to be in conflicts with southern Thracians several times.Althought the war technics and fighting style of Dacians and Thracians were slightly diferent.The Thracians for instance used to use fight techniques similar to the Spartans while the Dacians had another way of fight relying more on the massive attack of people and using more axes and bows.Anyway it is scientifically demonstrated that the Dacians or Getae belong to the Indo-European Thracian familly.Thanks for the posts.
|
|
|
Post by merlkir on Dec 6, 2010 14:03:30 GMT 3
Hi,I see you guys putted enought post about Dacians here.Yes indeed they were very interested people.I read they served the mountain Wolf.Their tribe used to carry a flag with a wolf head on it.They do are a Thracian tribe ,but they used to be in conflicts with southern Thracians several times.Althought the war technics and fighting style of Dacians and Thracians were slightly diferent.The Thracians for instance used to use fight techniques similar to the Spartans while the Dacians had another way of fight relying more on the massive attack of people and using more axes and bows.Anyway it is scientifically demonstrated that the Dacians or Getae belong to the Indo-European Thracian familly.Thanks for the posts. Where have you read about the wolf banner? Also, the tactics and equipment you describe don't sound right to me.
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Dec 6, 2010 21:52:26 GMT 3
|
|