Dacians, thracians, and their stuff.

Originally posted by ritallos You might want to check out some scholars before jumping to rash Internet-based conclusions: Getica (Vasile Parvan), Essential Myths (Victor Kernbach), Zalmoxis intre Herodot si Mircea Eliade (Dan Dana), Zalmoxis the Vanishing God (Mircea Eliade), Naissances mystiques (Mircea Eliade)

 Your recommendations are welcome but in my opinion not all of them are so informative or reliable.

Edited by Chilbudios - 22-Apr-2009 at 15:16

I think Dacian is more related to Thracian than Lithuanian. As Ritallos said Zemelen is Thracian, while Phrygians said zamelos\zemelos, Greeks said Semele (godess), Semeleus (offspring of Semele) or Semelos (snail) and i'm pretty sure there are other cognates in other languages.

Even Albanian has a respectful number of words that cognate with Dacian words. This can't really be a coincidence and therefore i tend to believe Dacian is a balkanic language. The rest can be like it often happens, similarities of the IE languages or a heavy influence by languages spoken north of Romania.

Originally posted by Tar Szer�nd Cert. no, but the heavy armoured riders were sarmatians on both sides. The dacian cavalry is wearing dacian clothes on the c.

I got some information from someone who works in the field of history, saying that have been discovered in diverse places of Romania fragments of five Dacian armures, made of rings and scalds.

One of it is the second oldest in the world.

One can be seen at the museum in Hunedoara castle (near the castle this year have been made very important Dacian discoveries).

So due to environmental defenses combined with the influence of threatening neighbors that also served as something of a political model, the Dacians had the chance that was denied many other "barbarian" tribes...

interesting.

Were there any other "barbarian" civilizations in particular that had similar success in terms of societal organization?

I'm getting an interesting picture of the Dacians here...more united than most other "barbarians", good enough fighters-or led well enough-to beat the romans a few times, built a lot of fortresses...

Manufacturing iron nails resistent to rust, having an exquisite political or economical infrastructure (when the sources are rather brief and sometimes silent about it), being an "arch-society" for the latter Goths, these are symptoms of "uber"ness I argue against. These obviously put the Dacians on a "next level" compared to Celtic and Germanic populations because the superiority of the former is affirmed through all these.

Edited by Chilbudios - 26-Oct-2007 at 14:22

Chilbudios, i never claimed that Dacians are a sort of "uber" nation, and Celtics and Germanics some inferior races, maybe you see too much so called dacomaniacs in every word about dacians. I just said that they haved a superior organization of society and military, especial.                     About that nails, was presented on a public television, and dated by scientists from IFA Magurele, in Bucharest, and, as Menumorut present, by scientists from Rep. Moldova, so, if you want to consider that just hypotheses, is your opinion, i am not try to force you to believe anything.                                                                                             About the academician you said, he have until now a singular opinion, i think, in his, what i will call with your words, <hypothese>. Even lingvist and historian Aurora Petan, who pretend she translate the dacian write tablets have more suporters in shes theory.                                                  About Sarmisegetuza, as a capital, or began to be builded as a capital in times of Burebista, all the historians and archeologists who studied "the problem" agree with that. If you are one of them, and have another view, or know better what was in fact, please tell me your arguments ( or argues of historians.etc who you said not agree with that, i am quite courious to know ).                                       About Diodor, and the laws he write, he make a comparation between 3 profets, Zarathustra, Moses and Zalmoxis, and how all of them receiving the laws from a deity. He dont say "belagines", just laws. But Deceneu, the high priest of Zalmoxis cult, obviously teach the Zalmoxis laws ( named by Jordanes <belagines> )who this received in the past from godess Hestia.                                                                                                          About Gets=Gots, as you saw, is what not only the Orosius, but a lot of others in his time who believe that, and this not mean that one take it for other the idea, since they was all contemporans more or less, but this mean that this was the comon view in that times, and all think like this. Getae ( Dacians ) was still see as an individual "nation" at that time, since emperor Constantine the Great take the over name Dacicus Maximus, or another emperor, Galerius ( with thracian and Dacian origins ), as Lactantius said, even want to change the name of empire from Roman to Dacian.                                                                                                          As well, i will like to see what you said about similarity in clothes between dacians and sarmatians, for ex. Because the comon view of historians and ethnologists who study the dacians from roman representations and modern romanian popular clothes reach to the same conclusions, that if is not remain exactly the same ( as it is probably in mountains remoted areas), for sure coming from the ancient ones. And this is obvious even for not a specialized person, as was the situation with Badea Cartan, the transilvanian peasent who walk on foot until the Rome, in XIX century, to see the Traian Column, and about who italian journalists write in titles, after saw him on Column < A dacian come down from the Column >, the similarity of his "look" with the dacians sculpted there beeing obvious.

A magnificent movie, but is an international production.

Like the materials on
dacia.org

and many of the materials on
enciclopedia-dacica.ro

and on other Dacoman sites, the work Dacia Preistorica is pure fantesy.

Is impressing the efforts of these people to edit so much things for web and is helpful in some aspects (when they take scientifical information and offer it without interpretations or when they are offering visual documentation).

Edited by Menumorut - 25-Oct-2007 at 21:11

diegis, I do not have a "nail" but a simple principle: extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidences. If the arguments do not follow, why should we believe in them? Okay, we can launch as many hypotheses as you like, but this is what they will ever be: hypotheses. To move beyond that we need solid evidences. I hope you have noticed I have not described the Dacians as a "nothing" but at a similar level with Germans or Celts, other contemporary European and non-Roman civilizations. The claim that Dacians were some superior and brilliant civilization is extraordinary and requires a solid proof which I see lacking.  

Edited by Chilbudios - 25-Oct-2007 at 16:38