Getae and Dacians? Are they the same? Or is this unknowable?

[Mitra]

Mitra, you are fairly-much on the money.
The Alans were the earlier Massagetae who, in turn, branched from the Saka ("tall hat Scythians"), all of whom originated in the Altai but came from the bronze age Androvono culture. I think the Aorsi were also Alanic, as were the Taifali and Roxolani ("light Alans"). All had an Asiatic admixture and carried fairly long swords.

The other group, the western Scythians, produced the earliest "Sauromatae" through an Alanic infusion (Herodotus called the Alanic women "Amazons"). We find the Iazyges in this group. They used shorter, Scythian-styled, swords.

I'm pressed for time. More later.

Hi Alanus

The Alans are associated to Massagatae by ancient authors but the archaelogy of first Alans is very like to that of sarmates with some orientals influx, so has been thought some oriental tribes, last wave of Yuezhi press at east mixed with the more oriental tribes of sarmates , forming a new confederation, other think the Alans are linked to Wusun/Asiens of chinese sources. The Aorses and Roxolani from their archaeology, are considerated sarmates, and they start to disappears from the sources when the alans start to appears. On dispute if in the III-IV century a.D. a wave of Massagetae pressed from east mixed with the late Alans and if the Maskoutes of Caucasus in the Armenian sources can be Massagetae tribes here arrived in this last wave.

Saka word exact ethimology is far to sure, in iranian languages the name has many senses.

The Sauromatae is considerated the predecessor of sarmates (the first period of sarmatian history is called Sauromatian), no scythian born. The Alans and Iazyges don't exist in sauromatae time.