09-06-2009, 05:14 PM
Hi Robert
Lets take Jordanes again :
"(39) To return, then, to my subject. The aforesaid race of which I speak is known to have had Filimer as king while they remained in their first home in Scythia near Maeotis. In their second home, that is in the countries of Dacia, Thrace and Moesia, Zalmoxes reigned, whom many writers of annals mention as a man of remarkable learning in philosophy. Yet even before this they had a learned man Zeuta, and after him Dicineus; and the third was Zalmoxes of whom I have made mention above. Nor did they lack teachers of wisdom. (40) Wherefore the Goths have ever been wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks, as Dio relates, who wrote their history and annals with a Greek pen. He says that those of noble birth among them, from whom their kings and priests were appointed, were called first Tarabostesei and then Pilleati. Moreover so highly were the Getae praised that Mars, whom the fables of poets call the god of war, was reputed to have been born among them. Hence Virgil says"
As you can see, Dacians and their history is considered by Jordanes as part of Goths history, and kings of them are both Filimer and Zalmoxis. The fact that Goths writed in a germanic language, doesnt mean too much. Probably they adopted the for writing the language of the germanic part of that mix, since Dacians didnt use their language in writing (or is not known) And we dont know for sure if there is or not Dacian words in Gothic language, since there are many common indo-european related words at ancient peoples.
About archeology, i think i was clear, foreign scholars, based on modern archeology (there is on wikipedia an article where they opinions are presented at Chernyakhov culture) said that is little to no evidences that Wielbark culture have anything to do with Cherneakhov/Santana de Mures culture, and yes, the local Daco-Getians had the leading role. Dacians doesnt dissapear after Roman conquest, what you saying there. Yes, they didnt have anymore a powerful kingdom, but they didnt dissaper, and yes, according with both ancient writers (Strabo, Dio Cassius, Trogus Pompeius, Criton-the doctor of Traian, Julian the Apostate) or modern historians and archeology, Dacians and Getae was the same, as you can't say that Spartans and Athenians arent greeks.
Unfortunately i dont have too much time now, i will come with more later
Lets take Jordanes again :
"(39) To return, then, to my subject. The aforesaid race of which I speak is known to have had Filimer as king while they remained in their first home in Scythia near Maeotis. In their second home, that is in the countries of Dacia, Thrace and Moesia, Zalmoxes reigned, whom many writers of annals mention as a man of remarkable learning in philosophy. Yet even before this they had a learned man Zeuta, and after him Dicineus; and the third was Zalmoxes of whom I have made mention above. Nor did they lack teachers of wisdom. (40) Wherefore the Goths have ever been wiser than other barbarians and were nearly like the Greeks, as Dio relates, who wrote their history and annals with a Greek pen. He says that those of noble birth among them, from whom their kings and priests were appointed, were called first Tarabostesei and then Pilleati. Moreover so highly were the Getae praised that Mars, whom the fables of poets call the god of war, was reputed to have been born among them. Hence Virgil says"
As you can see, Dacians and their history is considered by Jordanes as part of Goths history, and kings of them are both Filimer and Zalmoxis. The fact that Goths writed in a germanic language, doesnt mean too much. Probably they adopted the for writing the language of the germanic part of that mix, since Dacians didnt use their language in writing (or is not known) And we dont know for sure if there is or not Dacian words in Gothic language, since there are many common indo-european related words at ancient peoples.
About archeology, i think i was clear, foreign scholars, based on modern archeology (there is on wikipedia an article where they opinions are presented at Chernyakhov culture) said that is little to no evidences that Wielbark culture have anything to do with Cherneakhov/Santana de Mures culture, and yes, the local Daco-Getians had the leading role. Dacians doesnt dissapear after Roman conquest, what you saying there. Yes, they didnt have anymore a powerful kingdom, but they didnt dissaper, and yes, according with both ancient writers (Strabo, Dio Cassius, Trogus Pompeius, Criton-the doctor of Traian, Julian the Apostate) or modern historians and archeology, Dacians and Getae was the same, as you can't say that Spartans and Athenians arent greeks.
Unfortunately i dont have too much time now, i will come with more later
Razvan A.
