The Dacians: Rome\'s Greatest Enemy?

[Frostwulf]

I will like to see a primary source talking about an ambush, not some modern interpretation, because such interpretations i can do myself too

Yes, and that could very well be the problem is your interpretation(Goffart for instance). You still have to give credence to amount of historians who say it was an ambush, even Schmidt says so.

If Domitian received an Imperial salutation by September 88 it means that the battle was already fought by then, and the news reached Rome in late August or September. The winter seasons here start in late November lets say, with 1st December being considered the begining of winter
However, Tapae is at maybe two days of walk from Sarmizegetusa. Why do you think Tettius Iulianus, achieveing such a great victory and eliminating a big part of Dacian army and having his way open to the Dacian capital, just turned around and retreated back in the empire? Still having some two months maybe until the winter will come?

Because as usual the professionals know what they are talking about. They may not know the exact reason for Tettius not going on to crush the remaining Dacians, but they do know when the campaign season ends, which you apparently do not. The Roman campaign season ends in October(Bennet pg.248), which gave Tettius Julianus little time to vacate hostile territory(both human and terrain).

Most logically is that Tettius Iulianus advanced by surprise and meet some local Dacian troops (probably from garrisons in that area), gathered in a hurry by Vezina, second in comand after Decebalus, and who was probably left to protect the area. Decebalus, who usually comanded the army wasnt even present. Romans scored a tactical victory (not without suffering too losses) against that hastly assembled (and rather very small) Dacian army who fight to delay their advance and then retreated before to face the main Dacian army which probably started to gather coming from all over Dacia, under Decebalus comand.

So somehow Tettius Julianus with around 4 legions was able to go through that whole area without being seen? Yet both Fuscus and Trajan were seen? Decebaulus was there with Vezina, it's just that Vezina got caught up in the slaughter of his troops and Decebalus had the good sense to flee. When Romans try to ambush/surprise an opponent, it is usually written in the passage. The answer to your version is this:
Protochronism

This was enough to empower Domitian vanity who get an Imperial Salutation soon after.
Then Domitian, instead to go against Dacia to finish the business after that, switched against Marcomani. The reason isnt at all that Marcomani was some danger for Romans, but because (Dio CAssius book penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/67*.html

<<7 1 Domitian, wishing to requite the Quadi and the Marcomani because they had not assisted him against the Dacians, entered Pannonia with the intention of making war upon them; and he put to death the second group of envoys which had been sent by the enemy to propose terms of peace.>>

I have no doubt that what Dio says is true, but what you are forgetting or ignoring is that there had already been preparations for attacks against the Marcomanni, perhaps that is why the Marcomanni didn't help Domitian.

Basically Domitian tried to find a weaker oponent to win over and score some successes for himself too. He knew Dacians are too strong so he just found a whatever reason to attack Quadi and Marcomani, who not just didnt threatened the Romans but send too couple envoys to ask for peace. Actually Domitian did same thing with Suebii, when he get the throne and conquered some region in Germania, it was something more symbolically, to show he is a good comander.

Choosing an convenient adversary (not too weak, but not too strong either) was the best way to do it, before to advance to harder ones (same thing as in professional boxing if you wish, when the "new hope" for the belt isnt throw from the begining against the champion or the stronger adversaries, but start with smaller names to get experience, make a name and get self thrust)

Just like Maroboduus before or any enemy that seems to be getting to strong, the Romans will try to justify attacking them. Domitian already had his "victory"(I put the quotes over victory because the classical authors don't see it that way) over the Chatti, there was no need to go after any more Germani since he was already Germanicus.

If he would be that bend on to eliminate Dacians, and thought thats possible, he would just invade them, as Quadi and Marcomani wasnt in any situation to attack the empire.

Once again there were plans to invade Dacia once the more dangerous Marcomanni/Sarmatians were dealt with. Did you miss the quotes I put in?

Despite the derision of contemporary observers, all writing after the fact, it is clear that Domitian’s Suebic-Sarmatic wars were the necessary preliminaries to an intended military settlement of the Dacian problem. And such a settlement was required, to avenge the defeats of Sabinus and Fuscus and to escape the crippling subsidies agreed with Decebalus for his neutrality after the debacle of 89, which included large sums of money ‘as well as artisans of every trade pertaining to both peace and war’. In the event, Domitians never resumed hostilities against the Dacians, perhaps because intermittent warfare with the Suebi continued for another five years. Pg.31

The victory at Tapae was not followed up by occupation and annexation of Dacian territory. This may never have been part of Domitian’s plan, but even if it had been there was a hiatus at this stage of the Danubian wars. It is suggested that the preparations were under way at the end of 88 for the continuation of the war in 89, but before the army could take the field, or the Emperor himself could take any action, he had to deal with the revolt of Saturninus in Upper Germany. Pg.101

Btw, about the peace proposal coming from Dacians, those sound like this (from same Dio Cassius)

<<5 Decebalus, the king of the Dacians, was making overtures to Domitian, promising him peace; but Domitian sent Fuscus against him with a large force. On learning of this Decebalus sent to him an embassy anew with the insulting proposal to make peace with the emperor, on condition that every Roman should elect to pay two obols to Decebalus each year; otherwise, he declared, he would make war and inflict great ills upon the Romans. >>

Yet afterwards he offered frequent treaties towards Domitian, real ones not the one you quoted. Yes Domitian had to quickly buy off Decebalus so he could deal with the more dangerous Suebi/Sarmatians, but he did require him to wear a diadem, which meant: "just as if he had truly conquered and could give the Dacians anyone he pleased to be their king". Decebalus knew that after the fiasco with Tettius Julianus where "He encountered the enemy at Tapae, and slew great numbers of them" he also had no choice. That is the reason for the frequent offers of treaty and also allowing the Romans to walz through Dacian territory, both men were desperate. Decebalus was desperate after getting crushed by Tettius Julianus and Domitian for a two front war against the grave danger of the Suebi/Sarmatian alliance.

Gosh my friend, if 2 legions is a large army, then 9 legions is an imense, almost incomensurable army. Dont forget quite few other historians talk about 12-14 legions.

Name them! Who says there were that many legions, what book, what article, where? And yes 9 legions is a huge, enormous amount of men.

So please allow me to consider the 5-6 legions hypotheses more appropiate of "a large army"

Yet I have shown you an actual correlation of what large meant to one of your sources, you only have what you consider large. You have no idea what Tacitus or the others meant. Now show me a source where there were 5-6 legions.

Trust me, i do read quite few history books here. Is not that they dont present DAcians/Getae as reputed for their military qualities. Is that many exaggerate Romans and so can't pass over an invisible border (which i think shouldnt exist) when comparing the two, and are mostly Romanophiles and dont want to "denigrate" too much the Romans

Are you trying to say the Dacians were on par with the Romans? If so you are mistaken badly, especially militarily. There is allot to admire about the dacians, but you just put to much protochronism in you beliefs.