| Dacian Kingdom | ||||
| independent kingdom | ||||
|
||||
| At the height of Burebista' power, his kingdom stretched from the Black Sea to the Adriatic and from the Balkan Mountains to Bohemia.[1] | ||||
| Capital | Sarmizegetusa Regia | |||
| Government | kingdom | |||
| Historical era | Classical antiquity | |||
| - 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 (or 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.
Contents |
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.
The extent and location of the geographical entity Dacia varied in its three distinct historical periods (see History, below):
The Dacia of King Burebista (82–44 BC), stretching from the Black Sea to the river Tisza and from the Balkan Mountains to Bohemia.[1] During that period, the Geto-Dacians conquered a wider territory and Dacia extended from the Middle Danube to the Black Sea littoral (between Apollonia and Olbia) and from present-day Slovakia's mountains to the Balkan mountains.[5] In 53 BC, Julius Caesar stated that the lands of the Dacians started on the eastern edge of the Hercynian Forest.[6] After Burebista's death, his kingdom split in four states, later five.
Around 20 AD, Strabo wrote Geographica [7] that provides information regarding to the extent of regions inhabited by Dacians at that time. On its basis, Lengyel and Radan (1980), Hoddinott (1981) and Mountain (1998) consider that the 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.[8][9][10][11] The hold of the Dacians between Danube and Tisza appears to have been only loose.[12] However, the archaeologist Parducz argued a Dacian presence west of the Tisza dating from the time of Burebista.[13] According to Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117) Dacians were bordering Germany in the south-east while Sarmatians bordered it in the east.[14]
In the 1st century AD, the Iazyges settled West of Dacia, on the plain between the Danube and the Tisza rivers, according to the scholars' interpretation of Pliny's text: “The higher parts between the Danube and the Hercynian Forest (Black Forest) as far as the winter quarters of Pannonia at Carnutum and the plains and level country of the German frontiers there are occupied by the Sarmatian Iazyges, while the Dacians whom they have driven out hold the mountains and forests as far as the river Theiss”.[15] [16][17] [18][19]
Strabo in his Geography written between 20 BC – 23 AD:[20]
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.
Written a few decades after the Roman conquest of Dacia 105–106 AD[21], Ptolemy's Geographia included boundaries of Dacia. According to the scholars' interpretation of Ptolemy (Hrushevskyi 1997, Bunbury 1879, Mocsy 1974, Barbulescu and Nagler 2005) Dacia was the region between the rivers Tisza, Danube, upper Dniester, and Siret.[22][23] [24][25] The mainstream of historians accepted this interpretation: Avery (1972) Berenger (1994) Fol (1996) Mountain (1998), Waldman Mason (2006).[26][6][27][28][29]
Ptolemy also provided a couple of Dacian toponyms in the Upper Vistula (Polish: Wisla) river basin (south Poland): Susudava and Setidava (with a manuscript variant Getidava[30]).[31][32][33] This could have been an “echo” of Burebista’s expansion.[31] It seems like this northern expansion of the Dacian language as far as the Vistula (Polish Wisla) river, lasted until AD 170-180 when Hasdings thrust out from there a Dacian group, according to Shutte (1917), Childe (1930).[34][35] This Dacian group is associated by Shutte (1952) with towns having the specific Dacian language ending 'dava' i.e. Setidava.[36]
The Roman province Dacia Trajana, established by the victors of the Dacian Wars during 101–106 AD, initially comprised only the regions known today as Banat, Oltenia, Transylvania, and was subsequently gradually extended to parts of Moldavia, while Dobruja and Budjak belonged the Roman province of Moesia.
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 Muntenia and Ukraine, except the Black Sea shore.
After the Marcomannic Wars (166-180 AD), Dacian groups from outside Roman Dacia had been set in motion. So were the 12,000 Dacians 'from the neighbourhood of Roman Dacia sent away from their own country'. Their native country could have been the Upper Tisza region but some other places cannot be excluded.[37]
Ptolemy gives a list of 43 names of towns in Dacia, out of which arguably 33 were of Dacian origin. Most of the latter included the added suffix ‘dava’ (meaning settlement, village) But, other Dacian names from his list lack the suffix (e.g. Zarmisegethusa regia = Zermizirga) In addition, nine other names of Dacian origin seem to have been Latinised.[39]
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:
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.
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).
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.[8] 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.[8] 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 –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.[6]
Burebista suppressed the indigenous minting of coinages by four major tribal groups, adopting imported or copied Roman denarii as a monetary standard[8] During his reign, Burebista transferred Geto-Dacians capital from Argedava to Sarmizegetusa.[40][41] 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 entities was Cotiso's state, 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.[42]
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[43][44] when they had beaten a Roman army at the Battle of Histria.[45] In 85, the Dacians had swarmed over the Danube and pillaged Moesia[46][47] and initially defeated an army the Emperor Domitian sent against them,[48] but the Romans were victorious in the Battle of Tapae in 88 AD and a truce was drawn up.[48]
From 85 to 89 AD, the Dacians (under Decebalus) were engaged in two wars with the Romans.
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. 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,[49] defeated the Dacian general Decebalus in the Second Battle of Tapae in 101 AD.[50] With Trajan's troops pressing towards the Dacian capital Sarmizegethusa, Decebalus once more sought terms.[51] Decebalus rebuilt his power over the following years and attacked Roman garrisons again in 105 AD. In response Trajan again marched into Dacia,[52] besieging the Dacian capital in the Siege of Sarmizegethusa, and razing it to the ground.[53] 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.[54]
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[55] 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".
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.[56] At Roman-Dacia's boundaries, Carpians (Free Dacians) were still strong enough to sustain five battles in eight 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.[57] 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.[38] 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.
| Wikimedia Commons has media related to: |
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||