Mîtiu Ioan
Deity
Correct.
The Dacians
- Thread starter Xen
- Start date
Correct.
Mikai
Chieftain
Hello, Xen!
I don't know you and this is my first time seeing your post and to tell you the truth it quite bothers me. You said you'll treat your articles from the Roman point of view. Well the Dacians were not Barbarians, not in the eyes of anyone at that time and especially in the eyes of Rome.
Let me introduce to all of you some correct facts, from the realistc and historical point of view:
Dacia, in ancient geography, the land of the Daci or Getae, a large district of Central Europe, bounded on the north by the Carpathians, on the south by the Danube, on the west by the Pathissus (Tisza river, in Hungary), on the east by the Tyras (Dniester, border between Moldavia and Ukraine), thus corresponding in the main to the modern Romania; towards the west it may originally have extended as far as the Danube where it runs from north to south at Waitzen (Vacz), while on the other hand Ptolemy puts its eastern boundary as far back as the Hierasus (Siret river, in Romania). The inhabitants of this district were of Thracian stock. By the Greeks the Dacians were usually called Getae, by the Romans, Daci.
Culture
The Dacians had attained a considerable degree of civilization when they first became known to the Romans. They 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, Zamolxis, upon earth; he was the king's chief adviser. Besides Zamolxis the Dacians believed in other deities, as Gebeleizis and Bendis. They were divided into two classes - an aristocracy (tarabostes) and a proletariate (comati). The first alone had the right to cover their heads and wore a felt hat (hence tarabostesei = pileati); they formed a privileged class, and it is supposed they were the predecessors of the Romanian boyars. The second class, who comprised the rank and file of the army, the peasants and artisans, wore their hair long (capillati). They dwelt in wooden huts surrounded by palisades, but in later times, aided by Roman architects, built walled strongholds and conical stone towers. Their chief occupations were agriculture and cattle breeding; horses were mainly used as draught animals. They also worked the gold and silver mines of Transylvania, and carried on a considerable outside trade, as is shown by the number of foreign coins found in the country.
Political entities
A kingdom of Dacia was in existence at least as early as the beginning of the 2nd century BC under a king Oroles. Conflicts with the Bastarnae and the Romans (112 BC-109 BC, 74 BC), against whom they had assisted the Scordisci and Dardani, had greatly weakened the resources of the Dacians. Under Burebista (Boerebista), a contemporary of Caesar, who thoroughly reorganized the army and raised the moral standard of the people, the limits of the kingdom were extended to its maximum expansion; the Bastarnae and Boii were conquered, and even Greek towns (Olbia, Apollonia) on the Pontus Euxinus fell into his hands. Indeed the Dacians appeared so formidable that Caesar contemplated an expedition against them, which was prevented by his death. About the same time Burebista was murdered, and the kingdom was divided into, four (or five) parts under separate rulers. One of these was Cotiso, whose daughter Augustus is said to have desired to marry and to whom he betrothed his own five-year-old daughter Julia. He is well known from the line in Horace (Occidit Daci Cotisonis agmen, Odes, III. 8. 18), which, as the ode was written on the March 1 29, probably refers to the campaign of Marcus Crassus (30-28), not to that of Cornelius Lentulus, who was not consul till 18. The Dacians are often mentioned under Augustus, according to whom, they were compelled to recognize the Roman supremacy. But they were by no means subdued, and in later times seized every opportunity of crossing the frozen Danube and ravaging the province of Moesia.
Roman Conquest
From A.D. 85 to 89 the Dacians were engaged in two wars with the Romans, under Duras or Diurpaneus, and the great Decebalus. After two severe reverses, the Romans, under Tettius Iullianus, gained a signal advantage, but were obliged to make peace owing to the defeat of Domitian by the Marcomanni. Decebalus restored the arms he had taken and some of the prisoners. But the Dacians were really left independent, as is shown by the fact that Domitian agreed to purchase immunity by the payment of an annual tribute.
To put an end to this disgraceful arrangement, Trajan resolved to crush the Dacians once and for all. The result of his first campaign (101-102) was the siege of the Dacian capital Sarmizegetusa, and the occupation of a part of the country; of the second (105-106), the suicide of Decebalus, the conquest of the whole kingdom and its conversion into a Roman province. The history of the war is given in Dio Cassius, but the best commentary upon it is the famous Column of Trajan in Rome.
Roman rule
The province was limited to Transylvania and Oltenia. It was under a governor of praetorian rank, and Legio XIII Gemina with numerous auxiliaries had their fixed quarters in the province. To make up for the ravages caused by the recent wars colonists were imported to cultivate the land and work the mines, and the old inhabitants gradually returned. Forts were built as a protection against the incursions of the surrounding barbarians, and three great military roads were constructed to unite the chief towns, while a fourth, named after Trajan, traversed the Carpathians and entered Transylvania by the Roteturm pass. The chief towns of the province were Colonia Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa (today Sarmizegetusa, Hunedoara county, Romania), Apulum (today Alba-Iulia, Alba county), Napoca (today Cluj-Napoca, Cluj county) and Potaissa (today Turda, Cluj county). With the religion the Dacians also adopted the language of the conquerors, modern Romanian language being a Romance language.
In 129, under Hadrian, Dacia was divided into Dacia Superior and Dacia Inferior, the former comprising Transylvania, the latter Little Walachia or Oltenia. Marcus Aurelius redivided it into three (tres Daciae): Porolissensis, from the chief town Porolissum (near Moigrad, Salaj county), Apulensis from Apulum and Malvensis from Malva (site unknown). The tres Daciae formed a commune in so far that they had a common capital, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, and a common diet, which discussed provincial affairs, formulated complaints and adjusted the incidence of taxation; but in other respects they were practically independent provinces, each under an ordinary procurator, subordinate to a governor of consular rank.
Roman withdrawal
The Roman hold on the country was, however, still precarious. Indeed it is said that Hadrian, conscious of the difficulty of retaining it, had contemplated its abandonment and was only deterred by consideration for the safety of the numerous Roman settlers. Under Gallienus (256), the Goths crossed the Carpathians and drove the Romans from Dacia, with the exception of a few fortified places between the Timis river and the Danube. No details of the event are recorded, and the chief argument in support of the statement in Rufius Festus that "under the Emperor Gallienus Dacia was lost" is the sudden cessation of Roman inscriptions and coins in the country after 256. Aurelian (270-275) withdrew the troops altogether and settled the Roman colonists on the south of the Danube, in Moesia, where he created the province Dacia Aureliani. This was subsequently divided into Dacia Ripensis on the Danube, with capital Ratiaria (Arcar in Bosnia-Herzegovina), and Dacia Mediterranea, with capital Sardica (Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria), the latter again being subdivided into Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea.
Also please check Encyclopaedia Britannica as I believe it is a more common resource to all our readers:
DACIA, in antiquity, the area of the Carpathian Mountains and Transylvania, in present north-central and western Romania. The Dacian people had earlier occupied lands south of the Danube and north of the mountains, and the Roman province eventually included wider territories both to the north and east. The Dacians were agricultural and also worked their rich mines of silver, iron, and gold. They first appeared in the Athenian slave market in the 4th century BC; subsequently they traded with the Greeks (importing especially wine) and used Greek coins. They spoke a Thracian dialect but were influenced culturally by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC. The Dacians engaged Roman troops in 112, 109, and 75 BC. In about 60-50 BC King Burebista unified and extended the kingdom, which, however, split into four parts after his death.
During the reign of the Roman emperor Augustus (ruled 27 BC-ad 14) and again in AD 69 the Dacians raided the Roman province of Moesia but were beaten back. The Dacian Wars (ad 85-89) under the emperor Domitian resulted in their recognition of Roman overlordship. The Romans under Trajan reopened hostilities in AD 101 and by 106 subdued the whole country. A large part of the population was either exterminated or driven northward. The Romans seized an enormous amount of wealth (the Dacian Wars were commemorated on Trajan's Column in Rome) and immediately exploited the Dacian mines. Roman influence was broadened by the construction of important roads, and Sarmizegethusa and Tsierna (Orsova) were made colonies. The new province was divided under Hadrian: Dacia Superior corresponded roughly to Transylvania and Dacia Inferior to the region of Wallachia.
In AD 159 Antoninus Pius redivided the region into three provinces, the Tres Daciae (Dacia Porolissensis, Dacia Apulensis, and Dacia Malvensis), all subordinate to one governor of consular rank. Marcus Aurelius made the provinces a single military region in about AD 168. The limits of Roman territory were probably never clearly defined, but the Romans benefitted both militarily and materially from the occupation.
More to come....
I don't know you and this is my first time seeing your post and to tell you the truth it quite bothers me. You said you'll treat your articles from the Roman point of view. Well the Dacians were not Barbarians, not in the eyes of anyone at that time and especially in the eyes of Rome.
Let me introduce to all of you some correct facts, from the realistc and historical point of view:
Dacia, in ancient geography, the land of the Daci or Getae, a large district of Central Europe, bounded on the north by the Carpathians, on the south by the Danube, on the west by the Pathissus (Tisza river, in Hungary), on the east by the Tyras (Dniester, border between Moldavia and Ukraine), thus corresponding in the main to the modern Romania; towards the west it may originally have extended as far as the Danube where it runs from north to south at Waitzen (Vacz), while on the other hand Ptolemy puts its eastern boundary as far back as the Hierasus (Siret river, in Romania). The inhabitants of this district were of Thracian stock. By the Greeks the Dacians were usually called Getae, by the Romans, Daci.
Culture
The Dacians had attained a considerable degree of civilization when they first became known to the Romans. They 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, Zamolxis, upon earth; he was the king's chief adviser. Besides Zamolxis the Dacians believed in other deities, as Gebeleizis and Bendis. They were divided into two classes - an aristocracy (tarabostes) and a proletariate (comati). The first alone had the right to cover their heads and wore a felt hat (hence tarabostesei = pileati); they formed a privileged class, and it is supposed they were the predecessors of the Romanian boyars. The second class, who comprised the rank and file of the army, the peasants and artisans, wore their hair long (capillati). They dwelt in wooden huts surrounded by palisades, but in later times, aided by Roman architects, built walled strongholds and conical stone towers. Their chief occupations were agriculture and cattle breeding; horses were mainly used as draught animals. They also worked the gold and silver mines of Transylvania, and carried on a considerable outside trade, as is shown by the number of foreign coins found in the country.
Political entities
A kingdom of Dacia was in existence at least as early as the beginning of the 2nd century BC under a king Oroles. Conflicts with the Bastarnae and the Romans (112 BC-109 BC, 74 BC), against whom they had assisted the Scordisci and Dardani, had greatly weakened the resources of the Dacians. Under Burebista (Boerebista), a contemporary of Caesar, who thoroughly reorganized the army and raised the moral standard of the people, the limits of the kingdom were extended to its maximum expansion; the Bastarnae and Boii were conquered, and even Greek towns (Olbia, Apollonia) on the Pontus Euxinus fell into his hands. Indeed the Dacians appeared so formidable that Caesar contemplated an expedition against them, which was prevented by his death. About the same time Burebista was murdered, and the kingdom was divided into, four (or five) parts under separate rulers. One of these was Cotiso, whose daughter Augustus is said to have desired to marry and to whom he betrothed his own five-year-old daughter Julia. He is well known from the line in Horace (Occidit Daci Cotisonis agmen, Odes, III. 8. 18), which, as the ode was written on the March 1 29, probably refers to the campaign of Marcus Crassus (30-28), not to that of Cornelius Lentulus, who was not consul till 18. The Dacians are often mentioned under Augustus, according to whom, they were compelled to recognize the Roman supremacy. But they were by no means subdued, and in later times seized every opportunity of crossing the frozen Danube and ravaging the province of Moesia.
Roman Conquest
From A.D. 85 to 89 the Dacians were engaged in two wars with the Romans, under Duras or Diurpaneus, and the great Decebalus. After two severe reverses, the Romans, under Tettius Iullianus, gained a signal advantage, but were obliged to make peace owing to the defeat of Domitian by the Marcomanni. Decebalus restored the arms he had taken and some of the prisoners. But the Dacians were really left independent, as is shown by the fact that Domitian agreed to purchase immunity by the payment of an annual tribute.
To put an end to this disgraceful arrangement, Trajan resolved to crush the Dacians once and for all. The result of his first campaign (101-102) was the siege of the Dacian capital Sarmizegetusa, and the occupation of a part of the country; of the second (105-106), the suicide of Decebalus, the conquest of the whole kingdom and its conversion into a Roman province. The history of the war is given in Dio Cassius, but the best commentary upon it is the famous Column of Trajan in Rome.
Roman rule
The province was limited to Transylvania and Oltenia. It was under a governor of praetorian rank, and Legio XIII Gemina with numerous auxiliaries had their fixed quarters in the province. To make up for the ravages caused by the recent wars colonists were imported to cultivate the land and work the mines, and the old inhabitants gradually returned. Forts were built as a protection against the incursions of the surrounding barbarians, and three great military roads were constructed to unite the chief towns, while a fourth, named after Trajan, traversed the Carpathians and entered Transylvania by the Roteturm pass. The chief towns of the province were Colonia Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa (today Sarmizegetusa, Hunedoara county, Romania), Apulum (today Alba-Iulia, Alba county), Napoca (today Cluj-Napoca, Cluj county) and Potaissa (today Turda, Cluj county). With the religion the Dacians also adopted the language of the conquerors, modern Romanian language being a Romance language.
In 129, under Hadrian, Dacia was divided into Dacia Superior and Dacia Inferior, the former comprising Transylvania, the latter Little Walachia or Oltenia. Marcus Aurelius redivided it into three (tres Daciae): Porolissensis, from the chief town Porolissum (near Moigrad, Salaj county), Apulensis from Apulum and Malvensis from Malva (site unknown). The tres Daciae formed a commune in so far that they had a common capital, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, and a common diet, which discussed provincial affairs, formulated complaints and adjusted the incidence of taxation; but in other respects they were practically independent provinces, each under an ordinary procurator, subordinate to a governor of consular rank.
Roman withdrawal
The Roman hold on the country was, however, still precarious. Indeed it is said that Hadrian, conscious of the difficulty of retaining it, had contemplated its abandonment and was only deterred by consideration for the safety of the numerous Roman settlers. Under Gallienus (256), the Goths crossed the Carpathians and drove the Romans from Dacia, with the exception of a few fortified places between the Timis river and the Danube. No details of the event are recorded, and the chief argument in support of the statement in Rufius Festus that "under the Emperor Gallienus Dacia was lost" is the sudden cessation of Roman inscriptions and coins in the country after 256. Aurelian (270-275) withdrew the troops altogether and settled the Roman colonists on the south of the Danube, in Moesia, where he created the province Dacia Aureliani. This was subsequently divided into Dacia Ripensis on the Danube, with capital Ratiaria (Arcar in Bosnia-Herzegovina), and Dacia Mediterranea, with capital Sardica (Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria), the latter again being subdivided into Dardania and Dacia Mediterranea.
Also please check Encyclopaedia Britannica as I believe it is a more common resource to all our readers:
DACIA, in antiquity, the area of the Carpathian Mountains and Transylvania, in present north-central and western Romania. The Dacian people had earlier occupied lands south of the Danube and north of the mountains, and the Roman province eventually included wider territories both to the north and east. The Dacians were agricultural and also worked their rich mines of silver, iron, and gold. They first appeared in the Athenian slave market in the 4th century BC; subsequently they traded with the Greeks (importing especially wine) and used Greek coins. They spoke a Thracian dialect but were influenced culturally by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC. The Dacians engaged Roman troops in 112, 109, and 75 BC. In about 60-50 BC King Burebista unified and extended the kingdom, which, however, split into four parts after his death.
During the reign of the Roman emperor Augustus (ruled 27 BC-ad 14) and again in AD 69 the Dacians raided the Roman province of Moesia but were beaten back. The Dacian Wars (ad 85-89) under the emperor Domitian resulted in their recognition of Roman overlordship. The Romans under Trajan reopened hostilities in AD 101 and by 106 subdued the whole country. A large part of the population was either exterminated or driven northward. The Romans seized an enormous amount of wealth (the Dacian Wars were commemorated on Trajan's Column in Rome) and immediately exploited the Dacian mines. Roman influence was broadened by the construction of important roads, and Sarmizegethusa and Tsierna (Orsova) were made colonies. The new province was divided under Hadrian: Dacia Superior corresponded roughly to Transylvania and Dacia Inferior to the region of Wallachia.
In AD 159 Antoninus Pius redivided the region into three provinces, the Tres Daciae (Dacia Porolissensis, Dacia Apulensis, and Dacia Malvensis), all subordinate to one governor of consular rank. Marcus Aurelius made the provinces a single military region in about AD 168. The limits of Roman territory were probably never clearly defined, but the Romans benefitted both militarily and materially from the occupation.
More to come....
they were no more advanced then the Celts were politically, and cultureally-but I'll let you in on a secret- If I write an article on them, then they are by no means "savages" living out in the wilderness- they are barbarians though, particurally when given the classical definiton that it is anyone whom dosent speak Latin, or Greek (or a languaged based on them in modern times)
though when comparing them to Rome, there is no compition, as nice as the culture was, Rome came in, conqoured, and left such an impression that the area is still named after Rome today in the nationn of Romania-
as for my facts- read my articles, i dont address culture in most cases, and this was no differnt, its a guide to the civs milatary first and foremost, as war is amoujng the more interesting of histories, and I wish to adds to the sites extensive knowledge on the subject- if you want to add to it then fine, post a new article on the Dacians culture and such, but dont slander my article by inferring them false when you know that they are true, but are written in a manner you dont happen to apporove of.
Mikai
Chieftain
I did not intended to offend you in any way, just to make it clear to you. Your article about the Dacians, besides the mistake of placing them in today's Yugoslavia, contains true information and there is no word in my previous post referring to it as beeing false.
The only thing I wanted to point you out was that the Dacians were not simply put Barbarians. But I see now that my intention was a mistake, as (if I understand correctly) you treat your articles from a Roman Empire fan point of view and mostly oriented to military aspects...
Well, this forum is called "World History" and as I've studied Dacian and Romanian history, I'll fallow your advice and post some articles about them...
FYI, Romanian language is a Latin based language...Actually it was called at some point in the History, not long after the Aurelian Withdrawall in 271 AD, as the Vulgar Latin language
Originally posted by Mikai
FYI, Romanian language is a Latin based language...Actually it was called at some point in the History, not long after the Aurelian Withdrawall in 271 AD, as the Vulgar Latin language
if I remember correctley, ancient Dacian is NOT a latin or Greek baced language
- madern Romania, and ancient Dacic are hardley the same- and this is just one of them- the same applies to all nation, the Roman empire is not Italy, nor even ancient China modern ChinaMikai
Chieftain
Ancient Dacian is not a Latin based language - TRUE although the Dacians and Greek colonists coexisted on Pontus Euxinus (Black Sea) shores since 1500 BC in the towns of Histria, Tomis, Callatis and many more...
Modern Romanian and ancient Dacian are hardly the same - TRUE mostly when we think at the latin and slavic influences upon the initial language; but I'll let you on a little secret: we still use in our language up to 100 purely dacian unalterated words from wich most of them are the names of animals, rivers, mountains, food items and so on...
One must be a fool to believe that today's Romania is the same nation with th ancient Dacian people. Every history book and every child knows that the Romanians are the descendants, of both Dacians and Romans mixed up. Our National Antem mention in its lirics the Emperor Trajan as one of our great ancestors.
And to conclude: read carefully, please. I said that Romanian language is latin based, not ancient Dacian...But you've said that according to the definition(?) barbarians are (among other things) the ones that don't speak Latin or Greek or a language based on those two in modern times. Since the Romanian language is Latin based, and the Romanians are the closest thing to Dacians in modern times, we can conclude that (according to your definition) the Dacians were not Barbarians...
This is not a valid argument, of cource - I didn't even started to post the real ones - I just wanted to use your definition to prove the contrary about the Dacians...
So to level up, It is TRUE that the Roman Empire refered to all the other nations in the rest of the ancient Europe(besides the Greeks) in that time with the term of Barbarians (even used for the Parthian Empire people aswell wich was more powerfull than Dacia at that time...), but Barbarian does not equal "savages living in the wilderness"...I think this is your mistake. You are to awed by the Roman Empire's glory enough to underestimate the true cultural and military value of the other nations and kingdoms of that time...
I'm not just awed by Rome, I am Rome 
(well, I've got a firm Romano-Etruscan-Jewish bloodline from my dads side that can be traced back to the early days of the republic itself)-and I fully agree barbarian dose not equal savages in the woods- if it did, i would not post anything about them.
as for the languages- Dacians=barbarians, they didnt speake modern romanian then, they spoke dacian, dacian, not being Latin, or Greek, is barbarian talk, if anything, concidering the geneology of the nation of romania, that makes them barbarians as the first language of the area was not a latin, or greek based language
as for true culteral and milatary values? i know a good amount of stuff on everybody in the west during the time frame, and it is no understaement to say that Romes was 10 fold superior to anything the other guys had- a genearl could often balence things out, but during the time of trajan, the Roman army achieved a status so supreme that no other force in history can match it
(well, I've got a firm Romano-Etruscan-Jewish bloodline from my dads side that can be traced back to the early days of the republic itself)-and I fully agree barbarian dose not equal savages in the woods- if it did, i would not post anything about them.as for the languages- Dacians=barbarians, they didnt speake modern romanian then, they spoke dacian, dacian, not being Latin, or Greek, is barbarian talk, if anything, concidering the geneology of the nation of romania, that makes them barbarians as the first language of the area was not a latin, or greek based language
as for true culteral and milatary values? i know a good amount of stuff on everybody in the west during the time frame, and it is no understaement to say that Romes was 10 fold superior to anything the other guys had- a genearl could often balence things out, but during the time of trajan, the Roman army achieved a status so supreme that no other force in history can match it
Similar threads
