Jump to content

Dacia: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m r2.6.4) (robot Modifying: hu:Dacia (római provincia)
Samueldee (talk | contribs)
m Political entities: inserted caveats about statements that were speculative. removed needs citation, assuming caveats explain why no citation is given.
Line 105: Line 105:


== Political entities ==
== Political entities ==
The migrations of the fore bearers of [[Ancient Greece]] (c. 750 BC— or earlier) most likely originated at least in part from periodic swelled populations in the easy living found in the fertile plains of the region.{{Citation needed|date=October 2010}} Such migrations were in mythological times, and well before historical records. It is likely that trade with communities along the [[Danube]] via the [[Black sea]] was a regular occurrence, even in [[Minoan civilization|Minoan]] times (2700 to 1450 BC).{{Citation needed|date=October 2010}} [[File:Roman_provinces_of_Illyricum,_Macedonia,_Dacia,_Moesia,_Pannonia_and_Thracia.jpg|250px|thumb|left|Dacia and environs]]
The migrations of the fore bearers of [[Ancient Greece]] (c. 750 BC— or earlier) are speculated to have originated from periodic swelled populations in the fertile plains of the region. Such migrations would have occurred in prehistoric times and therefore no documentation exists about them. It is also speculated that trade with communities along the [[Danube]] via the [[Black sea]] was a regular occurrence, even in [[Minoan civilization|Minoan]] times (2700 to 1450 BC).[[File:Roman_provinces_of_Illyricum,_Macedonia,_Dacia,_Moesia,_Pannonia_and_Thracia.jpg|250px|thumb|left|Dacia and environs]]


Geto-Dacians inhabited both sides of the Tisza river prior to the rise of the Celtic Boii and again after the latter were defeated by the Dacians under the king Burebista.{{sfn | Taylor | 2001 | 215 }} It seems likely that the Dacian state arose as an unstable tribal confederacy which was united only fitfully by charismatic leadership in both military-political and ideological-religious domains.{{sfn | Taylor | 2001 | 215 }}
Geto-Dacians inhabited both sides of the Tisza river prior to the rise of the Celtic Boii and again after the latter were defeated by the Dacians under the king Burebista.{{sfn | Taylor | 2001 | 215 }} It seems likely that the Dacian state arose as an unstable tribal confederacy which was united only fitfully by charismatic leadership in both military-political and ideological-religious domains.{{sfn | Taylor | 2001 | 215 }}

Revision as of 21:12, 6 April 2011

Template:Two other uses

Dacian Kingdom
1st century BC–2nd century
Dacian Kingdom, during the rule of Burebista, 82 BC, stretching from the Black Sea to the Adriatic and from the Balkan Mountains to Bohemia.[1]
Dacian Kingdom, during the rule of Burebista, 82 BC, stretching from the Black Sea to the Adriatic and from the Balkan Mountains to Bohemia.[1]
Statusindependent kingdom
CapitalSarmizegetusa Regia
Governmentkingdom
Historical eraantiquity
• Established
1st century BC
• Disestablished
2nd century

In ancient geography, especially in Roman sources, Dacia was the land inhabited by the Dacians or Getae as they were known by the Greeks - the branch of the Thracians north of the Haemus range. Dacia was bounded approximately by the Danubius river, in Greek sources Istros (the Danube) or, at its greatest extent, by the Haemus Mons (the Balkan Mountains) to the south–Moesia (Dobrogea), a region south of the Danube, was a core area where the Getae lived and interacted with the Ancient Greeks–Pontus Euxinus (the Black Sea) and river Danastris, in Greek sources Tyras (the Dniester) to the east (but several Dacian settlements are recorded in part of area between Dniester and Hypanis river (the Bug), and Tisia (the Tisza) to the west (but at times included areas between Tisza and middle Danube). The Carpathian Mountains were located in the middle of Dacia. It thus corresponds to modern countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as smaller parts of Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, and Ukraine.

Dacians and Getae were North Thracian tribes.[2] Dacian tribes had both peaceful and military encounters with other neighboring tribes, such as Celts, Ancient Germanics, Sarmatians, and Scythians, but were most influenced by the Ancient Greeks and Romans. The latter eventually conquered, and linguistically and culturally assimilated the Dacians. A Dacian Kingdom of variable size existed between 82 BC until the Roman conquest in 106 AD. The capital of Dacia, Sarmizegetusa, located in modern Romania, was destroyed by the Romans, but its name was added to that of the new city (Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa) built by the latter to serve as the capital of the Roman province of Dacia.

Name

The Dacians, situated north of the lower Danube in the area of the Carpathians and Transylvania, are the earliest named people from the present territory of Romania. They are first mentioned in the writings of Ancient Greeks, in Herodotus (Histories Book IV XCIII - "[Getae] the noblest as well as the most just of all the Thracian tribes") and Thucydides (Peloponnesian Wars, Book II - "[Getae] border on the Scythians and are armed in the same manner, being all mounted archers").[3]

Later, the Dacians were mentioned in the Roman documents (Caesar's De Bello Gallico, Book VI 25,1 - "The Hercynian Forest [...] stretches along the Danube to the areas of the Daci and Anarti"), and also under the name Geta (plural Getae). Strabo in his Geography, Book VII 3,12 tells about the Daci-Getae division "Getae, those who incline towards the Pontus and the east, and Daci, those who incline in the opposite direction towards Germany and the sources of the Ister". In Strabo's opinion, the original name of the Dacians was "daoi", which Mircea Eliade in his De Zalmoxis à Genghis Khan explained with a possible Phrygian cognate "Daos", the name of the wolf god. This assumption is enforced by the fact that the Dacian standard, the Dacian Draco, had a wolf head. The late Roman map Tabula Peutingeriana indicates them as Dagae and Gaete.

Much later, in the Late Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church on a few occasions used the term Dacia to denote Denmark, and refer to several notables from Denmark as "of Dacia". As the term did not catch on, and fell into disuse soon after its (re)introduction, normally there is no confusion with the original usage.

Geography

The extent and location of the geographical entity Dacia varied in its three distinct historical periods (see History, below):

Note: Strabo in his Geography written between 20 BC - 23 AD:[4]

"As for the southern part of Germany beyond the Albis, the portion which is just contiguous to that river is occupied by the Suevi; then immediately adjoining this is the land of the Getae, which, though narrow at first, stretching as it does along the Ister on its southern side and on the opposite side along the mountain-side of the Hercynian Forest (for the land of the Getae also embraces a part of the mountains), afterwards broadens out towards the north as far as the Tyregetae; but I cannot tell the precise boundaries"

Towards the west Dacia may originally have extended as far as the Danube, where it runs from north to south at Vác. In the 1st century BC, at the time of the Dacian Kingdom of Burebista, Julius Caesar in his De Bello Gallico (book 6) speaks of the Hercynian forest extending along the Danube to the territory of the Dacians.

In the 2nd century AD, after the Roman conquest, Ptolemy puts the eastern boundary of Dacia Traiana (the Roman province) as far east as the Hierasus (Siret) river, in modern Romania. Roman rule extended to almost all Dacian area; it however did not extend to what later became known as Maramureş, to the parts of the later Principality of Moldavia east of the Siret and north of the Upper Trajan Wall, as well as to areas in modern Ukraine, except the Black Sea shore.

Cities

Onomastic range of the Dacian towns with the dava ending, covering Dacia, Moesia, Thrace and Dalmatia
Onomastic range of the Dacian towns with the dava ending, covering Dacia, Moesia, Thrace and Dalmatia

The cities of the Dacians were known as -dava, -deva, -δαυα ("-dawa" or "-dava", Anc. Gk.), -δεβα ("-deva", Byz. Gk.) or -δαβα ("-dava", Byz. Gk.), etc. . A list of Dacian davas 1 and, more actual, at SOLTDM:

  1. In Dacia: Acidava, Argedava, Buridava, Dokidava, Carsidava, Clepidava, Cumidava, Marcodava, Netindava, Patridava, Pelendava, *Perburidava, Petrodaua, Piroboridaua, Rhamidaua, Rusidava, Sacidava, Sangidava, Setidava, Singidava, , Tamasidava, Utidava, Zargidava, Ziridava, Sucidava – 26 names altogether.
  2. In Lower Moesia (the present Northern Bulgaria) and Scythia minor (Dobrudja): Aedeba, *Buteridava, *Giridava, Dausadava, Kapidaua, Murideba, Sacidava, Scaidava (Skedeba), Sagadava, Sukidaua (Sucidava) – 10 names in total.
  3. In Upper Moesia (the districts of Nish, Sofia, and partly Kjustendil): Aiadaba, Bregedaba, Danedebai, Desudaba, Itadeba, Kuimedaba, Zisnudeba – 7 names in total.

Gil-doba, a village in Thracia, of unknown location.

Thermi-daua, a town in Dalmatia. Probably a Grecized form of *Germidava.

Pulpu-deva, (Phillipopolis) today Plovdiv in Bulgaria.

Political entities

The migrations of the fore bearers of Ancient Greece (c. 750 BC— or earlier) are speculated to have originated from periodic swelled populations in the fertile plains of the region. Such migrations would have occurred in prehistoric times and therefore no documentation exists about them. It is also speculated that trade with communities along the Danube via the Black sea was a regular occurrence, even in Minoan times (2700 to 1450 BC).

Dacia and environs

Geto-Dacians inhabited both sides of the Tisza river prior to the rise of the Celtic Boii and again after the latter were defeated by the Dacians under the king Burebista.[6] It seems likely that the Dacian state arose as an unstable tribal confederacy which was united only fitfully by charismatic leadership in both military-political and ideological-religious domains.[6]

At the beginning of the 2nd century BC, under the rule of Rubobostes, a Dacian king in present-day Transylvania, the Dacians' power in the Carpathian basin increased by defeating the Celts who previously held the power in the region.

A kingdom of Dacia was also in existence at least as early as the first half of the 2nd century BC under King Oroles. Conflicts with the Bastarnae and the Romans (112 BC-109 BC, 74 BC), against whom they had assisted the Scordisci and Dardani, greatly weakened the resources of the Dacians.

Burebista (Boerebista), a contemporary of Julius Caesar, ruled Geto-Dacian tribes between 82 BC and 44 BC. He thoroughly reorganised the army and raised the moral standard of the people, the limits of the kingdom were extended to their maximum. The Bastarnae and Boii were conquered, and even the Greek towns of Olbia and Apollonia on the Black Sea (Pontus Euxinus) recognised Burebista's authority. In BC 53, Caesar stated that the Dacian territory was on the eastern border of the Hercynian forest.[7]

Burebista suppressed the indigenous minting of coinages by four major tribal groups, adopting imported or copied Roman denarii as a monetary standard[6] During his reign, Burebista transferred Geto-Dacians capital from Argedava to Sarmizegetusa.[8][9] For at least one and a half century, Sarmizegethusa was the Dacians' capital and reached its acme under King Decebal. The Dacians appeared so formidable that Caesar contemplated an expedition against them; something his death prevented. 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, to whom Augustus 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).

The Dacians are often mentioned under Augustus, according to whom they were compelled to recognise Roman supremacy. However they were by no means subdued, and in later times to maintain their independence they seized every opportunity of crossing the frozen Danube during the winter and ravaging the Roman cities in the province of Moesia.

Strabo's testimony: "although the Getae and Daci once attained to very great power, so that they actually could send forth an expedition of two hundred thousand men, they now find themselves reduced to as few as forty thousand, and they have come close to the point of yielding obedience to the Romans, though as yet they are not absolutely submissive, because of the hopes which they base on the Germans, who are enemies to the Romans" [17]

In fact, this was because of the Burebista's empire splitting after his death in four and later five smaller states as per Strabo "only recently, when Augustus Caesar sent an expedition against them, the number of parts into which the empire had been divided was five, though at the time of the insurrection it had been four. Such divisions, to be sure, are only temporary and vary with the times".

Decebalus ruled the Dacians between 87 AD and 106 AD. The frontiers of Decebal's Dacia were marked by the Tisza River to the west, by the Carpathians to the north and by the Dniester River to the east.[10]

Roman conquest

Fiery battle scene between the Roman and Dacian armies, Trajan's Column, Rome

Trajan turned his attention to Dacia, an area north of Macedon and Greece and east of the Danube that had been on the Roman agenda since before the days of Caesar[11][12] when they had beaten a Roman army at the Battle of Histria.[13] In 85, the Dacians had swarmed over the Danube and pillaged Moesia[14][15] and initially defeated an army the Emperor Domitian sent against them,[16] but the Romans were victorious in the Battle of Tapae in 88 AD and a truce was drawn up.[16]

From 85 to 89 AD, the Dacians (under Decebalus) were engaged in two wars with the Romans.

File:Decebalus b.jpg
Decebal, detail on the Trajan's Column, Rome

In 87 AD, the Roman troops under Cornelius Fuscus were defeated, and Cornelius Fuscus was killed by the Dacians under the authority of their ruler, Diurpaneus. After this victory, Diurpaneus took the name of Decebalus.[citation needed] The next year, 88 AD, new Roman troops under Tettius Iullianus, gained a signal advantage, but were obliged to make peace owing to the defeat of Domitian by the Marcomanni, so the Dacians were really left independent. Even more, Decebalus received the status of "king client to Rome", receiving from Rome military instructors, craftsmen and even money.

Emperor Trajan recommenced hostilities against Dacia and, following an uncertain number of battles,[17] defeated the Dacian general Decebalus in the Second Battle of Tapae in 101 AD.[18] With Trajan's troops pressing towards the Dacian capital Sarmizegethusa, Decebalus once more sought terms.[19] Decebalus rebuilt his power over the following years and attacked Roman garrisons again in 105 AD. In response Trajan again marched into Dacia,[20] besieging the Dacian capital in the Siege of Sarmizegethusa, and razing it to the ground.[21] With Dacia quelled, Trajan subsequently invaded the Parthian empire to the east, his conquests bringing the Roman Empire to its greatest extent. Rome's borders in the east were indirectly governed through a system of client states for some time, leading to less direct campaigning than in the west in this period.[22]

File:Roman Dacia 1.1.svg
Roman Dacia and Moesia Inferior.

To expand the glory of his reign, restore the finances of Rome, and end a treaty perceived as humiliating, Trajan resolved on the conquest of Dacia and with it the capture of the famous Treasure of Decebalus and control over the Dacian gold mines of Transylvania. The result of his first campaign (101–102) was the siege of the Dacian capital Sarmizegethusa and the occupation of a part of the country. The second campaign (105–106) ended with the suicide of Decebalus, and the conquest of the territory that was to form the Roman province Dacia Traiana. The history of the war is given by Cassius Dio, but the best commentary upon it is the famous Column of Trajan in Rome.

Although the Romans conquered and destroyed the ancient Kingdom of Dacia, a large remainder of the land remained outside of Roman Imperial authority. Additionally, the conquest changed the balance of power in the region and was the catalyst for a renewed alliance of Germanic and Celtic tribes and kingdoms against the Roman Empire. However, the material advantages of the Roman Imperial system wasn't lost on much of the surviving aristocracy. Thus, most of the Romanian historians and linguists believe that many of the Dacians became Romanised (see also Origin of Romanians). In 183, war broke out in Dacia: few details are available, but it appears two future contenders for the throne of emperor Commodus, Clodius Albinus and Pescennius Niger, both distinguished themselves in the campaign.

From Lactantius[23] it results that Decius, Roman emperor (249-251 AD) had to restore Roman-Dacia from the Carpo-Dacians of Zosimus "having undertaken an expedition against the Carpi, who had then possessed themselves of Dacia and Moesia".

Dacian prisoner on the Arch of Constantine

Nonetheless, Germanic and Celtic kingdoms, particularly the Gothic tribes made a slow progression toward the Dacian borders and soon within a generation were making assaults on the province. Ultimately, the Goths succeeded in dislodging the Romans and restoring the independence of Dacia following Emperor Aurelian's withdrawal, in 275.

In 268 / 269 AD, at Naissus, Claudius II (Gothicus Maximus) obtained a decisive victory over the Goths. At that time Romans were still occupying Dacia and Goths didn't attack from Dacia. Goths who survived their defeat didn't even attempt to escape through Dacia, but through Thrace.[24] At Roman-Dacia's boundaries, Carpians (Free Dacians) were still strong enough to sustain 5 battles in 8 years against the Romans from 301-308 AD. That makes it more likely that Roman-Dacia was left in 275 AD by the Romans, again to Carpians and not to the Goths. Also, there were the Dacians that Constantine the Great had to fight against in 336 AD.

The province was abandoned by Roman troops, and, according to the Breviarium historiae Romanae by Eutropius, Roman citizens "from the town and lands of Dacia" were resettled to the interior of Moesia. [1] However, Romanian historians maintain that the bulk of the civilian population remained and a surviving aristocratic Dacian line revived the kingdom under Regalianus. About his origin, the Historia Augusta says he was a Dacian, a kinsman of Decebalus. Nonetheless, the Gothic aristocracy remained ascendant and through intermarriage soon dominated the kingdom which was absorbed into their large empire.

During Diocletian, c. 296 AD, in order to defend the Roman border, fortifications were erected by the Romans on both banks of the Danube.[5] By 336 AD, Constantine the Great had reconquered the lost province, however following his death, the Romans abandoned Dacia for good.

Constantine the Great took the title Dacicus Maximus ("The great Victor over the Dacians") when he restored Dacia back to the Roman Empire in 336 AD.[25]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b "Britannica Encyclopedia, History of Romania - Antiquity - The Dacians".
  2. ^ Dacian, North Thracian Language
  3. ^ J. P. Mallory, Douglas Q. Adams. Encyclopedia of Indo-European culture. London and Chicago: Fitzroy-Dearborn. ISBN 1884964982. Retrieved 2009-06-20.
  4. ^ Geography by the Greek historian, geographer and philosopher Strabo (63/64 BC – ca. AD 24
  5. ^ a b Charles Matson Odahl: Constantine and the Christian Empire
  6. ^ a b c Taylor & 2001 215.
  7. ^ Mountain, 1998 & 59.
  8. ^ MacKendrick 1975, p. 48.
  9. ^ Goodman & Sherwood 2002, p. 227.
  10. ^ Vico, Pinton & 2001 325.
  11. ^ Goldsworthy, In the Name of Rome, p. 322
  12. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 213
  13. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 215
  14. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 216
  15. ^ Luttwak, The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, p. 53
  16. ^ a b Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 217
  17. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 219
  18. ^ Luttwak, The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, p. 54
  19. ^ Goldsworthy, In the Name of Rome, p. 329
  20. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 222
  21. ^ Matyszak, The Enemies of Rome, p. 223
  22. ^ Luttwak, The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire, p. 39
  23. ^ “of the Manner in which the persecutors died” by Lactantius (early Christian author 240 – 320 AD)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactantius
  24. ^ Battle of Naissus at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Naissus and Cladius Gothicus also at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius_Gothicus. Beside Zosimus acnount there is also Historia Augusta The Life of Claudius
  25. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Imperial_Victory_Titles

References