diegis

Well, in my opinion the empire becomed weaker military because of its internal problems, endless fights for power betwen throne pretenders, fall of internal economy and of the martial virtutes among its population. I think that Dacians was the strongest enemy during the peak of the empire power (late I century AD, early II century AD). Persians was a strong enemy as well, but the fact that they was too far from Rome make them less dangerous. Germans become a real menance just when Empire start to fall from the inside, and they wasnt transformed before in a roman province (the teritory betwen Rhine and Elba) not because Teutoborg episode (Germanicus entered after that in that area whenever he wished and go whenever he wanted, beating Arminius everytime when germans didnt run back in the forests), but because there wasnt anything worthy, just swamps and forests, no important agriculture areas, no cities or fortreses, no roads or natural resources (gold, silver), no strategic position. This was the luck of germans in fact (without to not recognize their martial virtutes too, ofcourse), they lived in an area who wasnt attractive for the others, so they manage to live in a relative peace, without too much interference. And anyway, Goths was a mix of several peoples, Dacians, Sarmatians and Germans, formed around III century AD and with even a Roman influence.

Well, i think the problem is a little more complicated. The Cherniakov culture have a lot of dacian and even roman characteristics ( pottery especialy ), and goths area mixed with dacians one. They atacked together the Roman Empire borders at the begining, and when goths leave the area they spread all over they go some of dacian myths. They pretended that dacians (or getians, the name gived by ancient greeks ) are they ancestors and in Medieval times peoples where goths lived, from Spain to Sweden pretend their ancestry from old dacians and names like Buruista ( Burebista ), Dicineo ( Deceneu ) or Zalmoxis, all greatest dacian kings or even gods was know to them. In my opinion, goths was some germanic tribes mixed heavily with dacian ones, and originated from Black Sea area and the Scandza origin is more like a myth.

Hi guys: really, thanks for all this information, it's really going to help. The last part about speculation is great - it means I can make things up without getting my fingers too badly burned. Which is a result! Again, thanks for all your help. I'll be sure to add the UNRV url in the acknowledgements section if the book sees print! Cheers Russ I read as well some opinions that actualy the first battle between Domitian army ( that one leaded by Fuscus, with some 5-6 legions, and auxiliary troops, a quite important army, in fact, twice bigger as Varus one ), was fought somewhere on Olt river defile ( as well on Carpatian mountains ), east of Transilvania Iron Gates, romans tryied to follow the river path, after cross the Danube. The first battle of Tapae beeing fight between dacians and romans under Tettius Iulianus, beeing a roman victory. But, both dacians and romans act as well thru their allies, and romans have faill to defeate dacian ones ( quazii and marcomanii tribes ), and dacians, acording with what i read, defeating in another campaigne the iazigs sarmatians, allies with romans. This will make the Domitian to agree with a shamefull peace for romans. The second battle of Tapae was one of the biggest and bloodiest battles of that times, with probably around 100,000 romans deployed, under Traian, and a close number ( thus a smaller one, more probably ) of dacians, under Decebal. Battle ended with a inconclusive roman victory, because, even if romans cann`t defeate the dacian army, the later one retreated from the battlefield when a storm occur, and a thunder hit their lines. Dacians beeing a very religious peoples, who, acording with ancient writings, shot arrows in clouds, to make the sky clear, consider this a very bad sign from the gods, so retreated ( btw, i read an opinion that almost all writings and acounts about daco-roman wars, or even about dacians was destroyed by early roman church, precisely because of this moment from battle, probably considered then as a miracle made by pagan gods, this beeing the reason why are soo poor sources to know about ).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dacian_Weapons.jpg This is images from a history museum in Romania, showing in the upper part of panel a falx blade ( under that is a gladius / spatha ) type one, spears heads, and down a Dacian "umbo" shield, and a drawning from a parade shield. The very top of the Falx is missing, and, for sure, the sword haved a wood grip at least as half or 2/3 of the blade lenght.

Well, i was not refering to such units as some "special forces" of today, but as small groups of peoples, armed with Falces, who have the role of break the legion shield wall, at the begining of clashes. We can just speculate, trying to be as logical as we can, because there is no many writings about Daco-Roman wars, because strangely and unfortunately, almost all disapear or was destroyed, begining with one of Traian "De bello Dacico", or his personal doctor "Getica" ( i read somewhere, and this is just an opinion, not necesary the truth, that early roman church do that, because in that writings was depicted "miracles" ). In my opininon, Falx was a development of Sica ( inspired most likely by a sickle - secera in romanian ). And haved a more tick and hardened blade, with a smaller grip then a scythe, beeing special destinated for fight. Ofcourse, do to shes shape, can be used in the same manner as a scythe ( who, btw, was spread through Europe much later ), for cutting legs, or as well, for hooks and slashings, like a giant claw, or with axe / hammer type hits, using the top of sword. Later, in the Medieval times, yes, the simple scythes was used for almost the same role. About iron weapons, in center of Dacian kingdom was found many iron workshops and iron objects, who rivalize with centers from Roman empire, so building a big cantity of weapons was not imposible for dacians. And, beside that the biger part of the army was composed by peasants, there was for sure a permanent army, with smaller dimensions, and who haved a standardized equipment, thus i am not sure if Falx have a building standard thru all Dacia, beeing posible to be make in diferent dimensions, depending of places and materials available there, but having the same "design" in mind, builded for the same manner of use.

About comparation between Traian Column and Adamclisi monument images of falx, this can be debatable, but is not a mainstream historian opinion that is a sarmatians depiction at Adamclisi, but, as you translate, just of "some authors", since i dont know if was a "standard" in falx construction. The main sword of dacians was, indeed, the "sica", a smaller, lighter, one handed, curved sword, sharped on inside edge of blade, and used in classic combination with an shield. Some fighters ( into a smaller number ) even use "gladius type". Falx was, more probably, a dacian adaptation of weaponry to roman tactics and armor, before romans adapted as well their equipment to dacians weapons. It was developed from "sica", and shes main reason was to breake the roman legions shield wall. It was little probably to be used as in that reenactor image ( even not imposible, if you think it was used by a person who work from childhood in the mountains forest, cuting trees, and more good then that reenactor guy to use a Falx ), because the warrior loose precious time to recover the sword from shield, but as a scythe used to cut grass, cuting tendons or most probably entier legs, or arms, mutilating the enemy, or used on higher level hits, when the top of sword breake thru helmet, over the scutum, do to shes curved shape, and causing head damages. It was more a developation do to wars with romans, and used in small numbers, by some "special troops", who tryed to breake the romans shield walls, so the main bulk of dacian army, armed with smaller swords, enter in the breach and "cut" the roman formation. Because of this special role, the Falx was not used after the Daco-Roman wars, ( maybe just in small numbers by dacian units from roman army, or by some so called "free dacians" ), and was not adopted by romans either, since was not any reason for use, because no one of the romans enemies at that times fight in roman legion style ( the only one who tried to copy them was Dacians and, i read somewhere, if i remeber corect, Partians, who tried to deploy some legion type units, but stil count on cavalry archers ).

Well, my opinion is that gots ( ostrogoths and visigoths ) was at least a mixed peoples, with both getian ( dacian ) and germanic origin, but for sure with a getae dominant part. Denmark and Sweden was not inhabited by dacians as all, but have for sure dacian peoples around, do to pre <dark age> migrations, dacians who left traces of their influence there ( see as well the <Gesta Normannorum> of Dudo of St.Quentin, chronicler of Norman dukes). Some parts of goths is posible to originate from Scandinavian peninsula ( thus is most probable a mythology the same as Romans coming from Troy ), but most important part of them was from getians origin, dacian beeing just a gets tribe who impose themselves over the other tribes. In north, this getae tribes was probably mixed with that, let say, northern "gots", but beeing the dominant element. This tribes was included in Burebista kingdoom ( considered by some even an empire, the only "barbarian" empire of Europe ), but not in Decebal kingdoom. After fall of Sarmisegetuza, Decebal try to go to this tribes, to "take them" in his fight against Roman empire, but he will be reached by roman cavalry, and comit suicide before to be captured, to not be dragged in triumph of Traian at Rome. But, later, this gets/gots, most probablly under influence of exilated dacian priests and former comanders of Decebal army will join with dacians from former Decebal kingdoom not ocupied by romans, and start to atack the Roman empire. They will never forgot their true dominant origins ( as wee can see in Teodoric church ), and all antiq chronicars contemporan with them consider them gets. About languages of that times, there is many shadows, and we cannt be sure 100% about them. Dacians was considered thracians or related with this ( and for that having a <satem> IE language ) because of fraze <the most brave and most honorable from thracians> of Herodot, but we can be sure of what type of IE language they spoke, since in all images from Traian column when both comon dacian peoples ( comati ) or nobles ( tarabostes ) speake with Traian there is no translator around, is no need of one, and was not preserved any kind of sure dacian writings ( they seems to prefer oral traditions, and use writings just at king court, as Iordanes said, but unfortunately not find yet, or posibly distroyed by romans ). And i think, in that times, most of languages spoked in Europe have many comon elements, beeing much close than today, do to much closer comon IE heritage. And yes, i beleive gots was not "true germanic" population originated from Scandinavia ( that was very hard, do to enviroment there, very inospitalier for develope any important population in ancient times ). Gots was made especially from IE population from south areas of Baltic Sea ( most probably getae tribes ) mixed with some peoples from the northern areas ( but less developed and in smaler number ), as in many parts in Europe ( see -romans with latins, samnites, sabines - celt tribes mixed with german ones - or greeks with macedonians and some thracians ). They will form later the so called <gots>, in fact a little diferent getians, with almost the same culture ( see the Zamolxis cult they spread ) and even the saame language ( probably influenced in some parts by a germanic one, as latin influence was in south ). Getians was a more numerous peoples, and they spread into a much larger teritory then Decebal kingdoom, who was just a part of Burebista ones ( ocupy aproximative just today romanian teritory ).

Hmmm, maybe later germans have got names, not goths have germanic names. And german language is interesting too. She have a lot of dialects, many of them not inteligible between them ( the same situation with italian or french ). The actual german language is a modern "production", beeing a "cabinet" work of end of XVIII century and especially XIX century, being imposed from top to bottom, from some scholars to people masses ( same situation with french ). But gotic language is disaperead long, long time ago. So, how you consider her a true germanic language, since, actually, modern german is a sintese made especially in XIX century, and, even today, in many regions is necesary that kids learn the language at school, because their home learn dialect is not inteligible in other german regions ? The german language was not a reality existent in that days. Maybe teutones, allemans, suebii, franks can be considered germanics, but today german language is a modern creation inexistent in those times, how you can say that gots speake german ? All the languages spoke in ancient times in Europe regions have many similarities between them, and today languages are a evolution of them influenced by many things. And, if you consider that germans was the elite, how you explain the Getes ? Dacians mythology and history spread in the teritories ocupied by Gots ( both Ostrogoths and visigoths ) ? Denmark was named long time as Dacia, and danes as dni or daci, sweden scholars from medieval times consider gets and gots one and the same nation, and spanish nobles try to trace their origin on gets, this beeing the most noble origin in their "dark ages" times, and have histories of Boirista ( Burebista ), Dicineo ( Deceneu ), Decebalus and Zalmoxis ? ( see Isidor for ex. )

That is the picture on the wall of church from Ravenna build by Teodoric, with that 3 magicians dress like Dacians "tarabostes", and female martyrs dress in popular costumes who can still see in today Romania.

http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/italy/r...linare/0030.jpg

I think the problem is more complicated. First, as you said, swedens call themselves Gots, but a sweden, Carol Lundius, said that Gots and Gets are, without doubt, one and the same nation. And, Scandinavian peninsulawas, until the end of Holocen, a land covered in ice ( land level was even lower then Balric Sea level, under wheigt of ice ), and after ice retreat, when Iordanes said that gots ( with just 3 ships ) come on Gothscandza, the land was too pour to suport any important population 9 as well, the absence of salt was a important factor ). I dont say that a migration from Scandinavia was not done, but is logical to say that was done by a under developed and very small population, and the bulk of so called gots consisted in fact in indo-europeans who come from the south areas ( were getians / dacians haved a empire / kingdoom later ). And, more important, Iordanes write his GETICA after he make a sort of resume of senator Cassiodorus "DE ORIGINE ACTIBUSQUE GETARUM", a work in 12 volumes, and, as well, inspire himself from writings of Ablabius, Claudius Ptolemeus, Dexippus, Dio Cassius, Flavius Josephus, Livius and Lucan,, Pompeius Trogus, Mela, Priscus, Strabon, etc. In fact, in antiq times, all who write about gots, consider them getians ( dacians ), or write the terms mixed. Just in medieval times, some germanics ( and french ) historians come with the opinion that gots was germanics, based on so called origin of them in Scandinavia ( take it from GETICA, but not quite viable, just a mythology, as one of romans with ENEAS )and their "travel" on germanics teritories, without any consistent evidence, and declare that Iordanes make a confiusion, dont know why, and dont have any prouve for that. From then, since nobody care to look closer to facts, this theory was considered the "right" one, but this theory is hard to believe, since all antiqs, who, ofcourse, was contemporans with events, write that gots was the same with gets ( Iordanes himself was a "got", and suposedly know the history of his nation ), and more abilitated to know his time realities. Why, for ex. Belisarius take the over name GETICUS, if, suposedly, all know the Gots, and all know the Dacians ( Gets ), as 2 diferent nations. Another example is church Sant Apollinare Nuovo, from Ravenna, build by Theodoric the Great, the king who order to Cassiodorus to write the history of <Getae>!!, his nation. On the wall of church, the 3 magicians apear not in traditional oriental costumes, as was the rule, but in dacian clothes, as <tarabostes>, with their traditional "pileus" cap, looking like ones from Traian Column, and the female martyrs who follow them are dress the same in dacian way, and you can even find today in popular costumes in Romania the same female clothes. I dont think all this peoples make a mistake, since they was contemporans with events and with gots ( and gets / dacians )or even was from that nation, and i think much later was done the confusion, and was arbritary considered that Iordanes is wrong, even he just copy from Cassiodor, who write at indication of Teodoric a history of his nation, clearly named GETS. As well Iordanes inspire himself from many other ancient chronicars, and all of them consider too that Gets are the old name of Gots, and they are one and the same nation.

I think many hear about Jordanes and his "Getica" ( inspired by Cassiodorus work ). The intriguing problem is that Iordanes ( and others ) consider that Get is the same with Got(h). First, he began to write his history of goths under the name "Getica", and mix all the time the terms and the "peoples", consider them the same. He write about the fights between Massa Getae queen Tomiris against Cyrus of Persia, saying that then was the first time when gots ( not getes, as normal ) see silk tents or the fact that Zamolxis, the supreme dacian god was the god and first legislator of goths. He saids that goths come from Scandza (today Scandinav penisula) with 3 ships ( gepids a related peoples, with just one ), but this is more like mythology, probably inspired by famous "Eneida" of Vergilius, for romans origins. The scandinavia area was too harsh as enviroment, because of hard and prolonged ice age, that big or developed exist back then ( another aspect is the fact that a society is developed around places were salt exist, since salt is a vital resource for life, human and animal as well ). Instead, getians / dacians, considered north thracians, was the most numerous peoples on earth, after indians, as Herodotus said, and, the Dacian empire of Burebista have in west the borders at Hercinic Forests, as Caesar said, in north until Baltic Sea area ( presumtive place were goths ships landed, <Gothiscandza>), and in east deep in north of Black Sea. So, is posible that after defeating of Dacian kingdoom of Decebal ( who was much smaler, thus more developed then one of Burebista )by romans under Traian, get /dacian tribes ( considered later as gots )who lived in north of established Dacian kingdoom of Decebal ( who try to escape in north, after battle for Sarmisegetuza ), joined with so called <free Dacians> ( dacians from parts of old kingdoom who was not ocupied by romans ), and begin to atack the Roman empire ( as other ancient chronicles said, and many roman emperors who take the name Dacicus, Carpicus and Goticus ). Because of little knowledge about goths, especialy germans, ( but french too ) consider them as east germans, but there is many exceptions too ( beside Cassiodorus and Iordanes ). For ex. Philostorgius (368-425) : <scythians from behind the Istros ( another name for Danube), who olders name them Geate, and the ones from our time Goths>. Claudius Claudianus write many works, in one of them, "De bello Gothico" (402) use the name "got" just in title, in the rest of writing using names Get and Dacians to designate goths. Others, as Iulian tha Apostate, Ausonius ( in a epigrame for emperor Gratian), or Prudentius ( 348-405 in Divinity of Christos )name the same goths as getae ( Prudentius even name the Alaric as Getae tiran ). Hyeronimus (345-420) said : <certainly all the erudits from the past use...for goths, the name getae, instead of Gog and Magog>. As well, Carol Lundius, in "Zamolsiz, primum Getarum legislator" (Uppsala, 1687 ), write: <without doubt, Getae and Goths was one and the same nation>. There are many others who said the same thing ( another ex., one of the greatest roman generals, Belisarius, take the overname GETICUS, after he defeate the ... goths !!!! ), and consider an important influence of getians / dacians over the north and even west Europe, but i think the post is long enough until now.

The first documents about espionage was about babylonians and egyptians, and soon the jews "come in game", when arrive in Caanan. But the first actions closest to modern spionage was done by Hannibal, who haved a spy network in Roman republic, long before the begining of war (even an agent in Rome ), who try to know all about peoples, agriculture, and roman military. Caesar as well, haved a kind of operative inteligence service, who bring him infos about the terrain where he move, and about enemy army, and, as well, try to infiltrate the enemies with a kind of "fifth column", a spy network much agressive than one of Hannibal. Chinese have as well a lot of spy activities ( even Sun Tzi spoke about ), but the most keept military secret was the "greek fire". Byzantines keep him for 4 centuries, until, in unknow circumstances, the arabs manage to stole him. If anyone know some spectaculous spy actions from that time, i will be glad to know about.

About Zalmoxis, (or Zamolxis in another writing) is two versions. One, that was a former slave/discipol of Pythagora, from wich learn some things ( but mostly about astronomy, and not imortality, as Strabon said ), and another version, proposed by Herodot, who said that he is not sure what to believe about Zamolxis and his legend, but he think Zalmoxis live long time before Pythagoras. Is posibly, in fact, that Dacian/Thracian culture influenced Greek ones (or at least, influence each other), as Orfeu myth, or godess Bendis cult, introduced in Greece by thracian womens, and acording with the same Herodot, take it from the northern peoples (most probably dacians), and being asimilated with godess Artemis ( Diana to Romans), or god Sabazios at Dacian/Thracians, asimilated with Dyonisos to Greeks and Bachus to Romans. I believe the main greek influence was on southern branch of thracians, but in the north part (Dacia), was mostly in buildings ( in a early stage in fortress constructions ) and economy ( do to trades with greek cities from Black Sea), and dont have any significant impact in any part of Dacian society. For example, dacians try to improve theyr armies (in the last stage of Dacian kingdoom), including roman types of organization, and roman instructors and advisers (payed or prisoners), but never bother to use helenistic types of fight (probably to impresion of victories against them, even in time of Alexander the Great type of organization, and his diadochi, at the peak of helenistic era).

It's a good story about Decebal and Traian fighting after school. Maybe a good thing that Attila didn't turn up as well ... Hey, it was just a child play, nothing too serious. Unfortunately, it was no Attila there, because both "powers" was at theyr peak, and we definately decimated the huns hords.

I am not sure if my romanian language is the closest to the old latin (but i think the most unitar), and we have probably the greatest number of Roman names, not only imperial (beside few Dacian as Decebal / or Dochia (Dochita) for female). And i start with : Ene, from old Eneas >< Romulus >< Remus >< Adrian / Adriana >< Claudiu / Claudia >< Sabin(Savin) / Sabina >< Marius (even more spread than Traian, surprinzing) >< Valentin / Valentina <> Ovidiu <> Iulian (Iuliu) / Iuliana (Iulia, and as a city name as well - Alba-Iulia) <> Cornel / Cornelia <> Liviu / Livia <> Cezar <> Tiberiu <> Aurelian / Aurelia <> Octavian / Octavia >< Valeriu / Valeria >< Augustin ( Augustus) >< Sergiu <> Galeriu >< Nero (as a dog name) >< Anton >< Traian, ofcourse (a little of topic, when i was on school i haved two colegues, one named Decebal, and one named Traian, and we have a lot of games, after school, spreading in two groups, one "dacians" with Decebal, and ones "romans" with Traian, and fight with rudimentar wood swords, little bows, paper helmets and carton scutum, made by us). And many other names who dont come in my mind now. And i agree with Traianus about reading and understanding of Latin textes (we haved in the finish clases of gimnazial school the study of old ancient latin, and even for the begining most of words and lectures was understandable, even if some just partial, without any previous teaching ).

"Salve", Gaius and Flavius. I must respond some things to your previous posts. First (even is somehow out of topic), about the hate, betwen US and the "rest" of the world. I dont think anybody (except probably some fanatics around the world) hate the average american citizen, but the US govern and policy. But this is probably misunderstand, or wrong interpreted, in your country, and some, as you said, not very educated, or informed peoples think that world hate them, and they must hate back. About the US army, at the end of civil war, yes, probably was the largest, as you said, but was not the strongest, or in position to dominate the world, or to atack and defeat any european major power. In WW 1 US enter at the end, and just finish the war quickly, but was not an turning point. In WW 2, yes, was one of the major player, but especially in the Pacific. In Europe, without any US intervention the war probably last longer,quite longer, but the end will was the same, Germany alliance defeated by USSR-UK alliance, but yes, US haved an important roll here,and was a turning point, but ufortunately just for western Europe. And a Coke and a big Mac is not culture (and is not even very spread here). People not die to drink a Cola, nor consider this a sign that is a superior person. The only cultural superority of US i consider is spreading of english language, but for now just as a language used in international economy and affairs, not as a language to replace the main language of another nation, even in a mix way, as latin language spread by Romans do in some regions. About the realizations of Rome vs US, i think there is a diference in impact too. Even today, after 2000 years, we use the kind of things who Romans invented (from urbanization, curent water in middle of cities, multi level buildings with apartments, cement-Colloseum was long time,almost 2000 years the bigger arena in the world, to use of military medics who care of wounded soldiers in battle). Yes ,the TV and computers is important, but i dont know if we will still use them after couple century as today, or will last and have the same impact as some of Romans realizations. The US is still to young to see if have the same impact as Rome, even if today try to resembling the domination of world who Rome haved. And dear M. Porcius Cato, dont flame and victimize yourself too much. If you have enemies, it means that you exist, and you are on top. The fouls and the leaders allways pay for theyr position (too weak nations and the powerfull empires who try to dominate the whole world exist now just in history books). And nobody hate US because exist, but because what you do.

I think that US have resembling in some parts what was Rome on time, but is not yet in position to be compared with. Economically, the EU is surpassing, slower, the US, and, military, there is, at least, one power (Russia), who can destroy in such way the US, that will cannot be considered a viable society, or even a viable place to live. Ofcourse, US can do the same to Russia (or China), but i cant see in predictible future US army (even in a conventional war) threaten and do the same to Moscow or Beijing what Roman army do to Cartagina, Ctesiphon or our Sarmisegetuza. Yes, they have an edge on military, but they are still far to be as powerfull and able over theyr rivals, as Roman army was in his time. Culturally, i think is the weakest point of comparation. USA is a young country, without the rich and oldest cultures of many other countries, and i, at least, i cant see many other countries adopting (or be influenced in such way by) the american culture, language and way of life, to resembling the "romanization" and civilization who bring Romans to others in theyr times. Who, knows, in the future, but i think the peak of USA power was at the end of 80`, begining of 90`, when USSR fall, and they lead a world coalition (including arab states as Siria) in a astonishing victory over what was than considered (i believe just as number, not as over all power) the 4-th military power (Irak, a little ironic for today).

First, yes, he was born at Serdica, but his mother was from north of Danube, the old Dacia, and go to south because the volatile situation in north ( free Dacian tribes atacks against romans, combined with other "barbarians"atacks, who go because the lack of stability, dacians revolts. etc). She influenced the Galerius very much, especialy in religion (she believe in a mountain deity, most probably the old Zamolxis religion). And why to lie Lactantius about Galerius ? In that times was not a science fiction culture, to invent new emperors who exist just in writings, just if you presume that "De mortibus persecutorum" was such a s.f. thing. Why he said is was Dacian, not Thracian, or Illiryan for example, since this nationalities was very know in that times. The ancient writers, was, besides the archeology, the only reliable sources to know what was than,true, sometimes with exagerations (like the 700,000 troops army of Darius the First who come in Europe), with personal interpretations, but mainly true. Dont forget about Homer and his Troian war story "Iliada"(and Odiseea).Nobody believed a long time that Troia actually existed, until was discovered. And Galerius army who conquered Mesopotamia (including persian capital Ctesiphon and teritory east of Tigris, the greatest extention of Roman empire on east) was formed mainly from Dacians type warriors, how is see on his Triumph Arch. I want to say just in that times, the "non roman" ethnies, but with roman citizenship began to take almost full control over the empire, and the empire began to be conquered by inside, by his older enemies, transformed in romans.

It is know that in empire was a mix of many nationalities, but before germanic rulers take control, (especially in west), it was a lot of emperor and a lot of soldiers who was from thracian/dacian origins (Maximinus Thrax, Decius, Aurelian, Maximian, Galerius, Constantine the Great, Justinian etc.), and, i will want to know if any know more about one of them, Caius Galerius Valerius Maximianus (250-311 a.C.). He was the emperor who extend the empire to his most eastern border, and ,how is see on his Arch of Triumph from Tesalonik (Greece), most of his soldiers was dacians (look, clothes, and especially weapons and flags, famous "draco"). Acording with Lactantius, an early roman christian autor who live in that period, and who write about him in his "De Mortibus Persecutorum" (The deaths of the persecutors), Galerius strongly afirmed his dacian identity,when he reach the highest power, and "he had avowed himself the enemy of the roman name, and he proposed the the empire should be called not the Roman, but the Dacian empire", and threated the romans as a conqueror treated the conquered, as Traian treated his forefathers dacians two centuries ago. It was in that time the roman element of empire so weak, that he can be changed that way, even his name ? Was posible such change ?

I will try to rectify some of mistakes made by Ramses the Great. Dacians not living in Moesia, near the Alps. By contrary, they center of country was in north of Danube, in Carpathian Mounts. They are the north branch of thracians. Was not a semi-civilized peoples, they have a kingdoom (a very strong one in his time), an original religion (not influenced at all by celts), by the way, the name of suprem god was Zamolxis or Zalmoxis. Some of they old gods (thracians/dacians gods) influence the greek/romans gods as well (godess Bendis became Artemis/Diana to greeks/romans, or god Sabazios became Dyonisos/Bachus to greeks.The dacians was influenced by greeks and romans especially in economy (mades of coins) and in military (they take some battle machines ,used especially by romans, like ballistes and catapults). About their military organization, some historians say that they have a proportion 1 to 3 betwen cavalry and infantry(this proportion is given even by macedonians writers who tell about Alexander the Great incursion in north of Danube. The cavalry have all bows,many with poisoned arrows (probably spears and ofcourse ,swords).Swords was 3 models.One (with a little spread) was a right one handed sword,"akinakai", inspired by persians sword used by soldiers of Darius the First, who fight against Getians(Dacians) in time of his expedition against schitians. Most spread was the "sica", a one handed curved sword, sharpened on inside edge.The larger model of this was the famous "falx".Because was too large and heavy, and was for 2 hands use, the soldiers dont have a scutum for defence, a big problem when they faced with roman pilum. The falx was used by a limited number of troops, when melee start. The soldiers take a nail formation, storm inside enemy lines and try to breake. Because of this eficacity of this tactic, romans reinforce their armours, and use special prepared legionaires units, who enter in battle just when the falxmen atack. They use the same a ring armour vest and a circular scutum. I hope this will help you a little and i will answher you to other question if i know.

Hello to all, and, because i am Romanian, i will say something about my language too.First, romanian language have 4 dialects( 3 -aroman,istro-roman and megleno-romana, spoked in south of Danube,in Bulgaria, former Yugoslavia and Greece,and the main one ,daco-romana,spoked in Romania,north of Danube).Much of scientists consider that romanian( like all the others romanic languages) came from so called vulgar latin, combined with language of people who live the land before romans come.The romanian is most closed language to this latin,and in our language the proportion of considered latin words is arround 66%-70%.There is a large number of considered dacian words ( for example,almost all rivers have the ancient dacians names,villages or cities names have dacians origins, and the name of our mounts-Carpathians,is dacian too).There is some15%-20% words considered of slavic origins, and a little number from other languages( especially germans,greeks, hungarian or turks).There is a debate now who say that is a number of words considered slavic or latin, who, infact, is dacian. Ex. word in english-water: in romanian -apa: in latin- aqua: in ancient sanskrit- apa,apam.It is much probable that this word (is many in this situation) to not have latin roots,like is considered (and ofcourse,not be taken from old indians), but have dacians origins.About dacian language,who is considered belong to satem group,as sanskrit,but oldest than slavic,there is some who considered that have centum caractheristics too,like latin,and this is the reason that was a short time for so named latinization of conquered population and of large number of dacians who live in non conquered teritories,and romanian language,who is spoked betwen population with non roman languages (south Danube and Balkans-slavic,west fino-ugric,north east-slavic)have such similarities with ancient latin.

For Pertinax, i believe the historian who say about Thracians that words is greek historian Herodot, the "father of history".And about thracian warriors, yes, they were highly valued for their fight calities, because they religious believes (originated from Zamolxis god) theach him that the most brave warrior live the best life in to <the other world>, so everyone try the be the best in battle(this means not a foolish bravery, but an inteligent fight too,to defeat the enemy, and be prepare to a bravery death in all the moments).For Ancestor, the romanian and albanian languages, because have almost the same roots(romanian-north thracian,daco-getian, albanian-south thracian,illyrian), they have many close words.The "strigoi",in his primary sense, means the people who ,from some specifical reasons, dont go to ,<other world> when die,or come back in this world when die.In many times, they suck the blood of other peoples,or even killing them.The female<strigoi>,or <strigoaica>, is in many times related to witchcraft too.This believes originated in antiq times,and is it not know if romans has some close believes,or take this believes from thracians(including the name),and then spread in all empire,but, in medieval and than modern time, this mit, transformed in vampires mit, was spread in all western world(even if other antiq cultures have mits close to this), and become a modern mit.But, like one of ours great poets, Eminescu, say, "in this world,all is new and all is old".

The most interesting info about pelasgians(and most controversial) is the story about Atlantida, write by Platon.In this writing, a personage tell a story heard from Solon, who, himself, know about this from an old egiptian priest.The story say that some 11 000 years ago(9000 BC ), an invazion of Atlantida peoples was reject by athenians ancestors.This was before the Atlantida disaper under a great cataclism.This athenians ancestors was pelasgians,because in that times greeks dont exist.Platon tell about their society,spread in castes,wariors,agricultors and handicrafts.The wariors cast live separately,in their own fort,and was composed by a nomber of 20 000 fighters,an equal nomber of men and women.Pausanias say that <pelasgian was born by the black earth to be the beginer of human race>. Unfortunately,the prouve of Atlantida existance and this wars was not found yet(like prouves about Troia), but there is some archeological prouves of existance of a high civilization(for that times) in south east Europe and so called Asia Minor(today Romania ,Serbia, Bulgaria ,Greece, Creta island, Turkey and even Palestina,and this was probably the pelasgians.Before the aparition of indo-european tribes(there is some opinions that indo-european was in fact european tribes who just start migration from Black Sea region in all directions)in this region was developed some interesting cultures( so called by american historian Maria Gimbutas <old european culture>),like Lepenskii Vir-Schela Cladovei culture,Vinca-Turda culture,Cucuteni Culture, and others.The most interesting discovery in this cultures was the Tablets from Tartaria,considered by ones scientists the first write of human,older with 1000 years than first sumerian tablets.Warever,here was the metalurgical center of Europe(and probably of world), with first metal object made, from copper.Unfortunately,some natural disasters put in shadow this civilization.3-4 milenium BC,the black Sea was separated from Med.Sea by a rock relief.After a great earthquick the rock was crushed and Medit.Sea debouch into Black Sea and flood all the souronding areas,combined with a devastating rain, who, acording with Platon, wash the earth on actual Greece,and let just stones.The Creta island was destroyed too later by a vulcan eruption,and,unfortunately,probably many archeological foundings was disaper in this catastrophies, and we know such few things about this civilization.

Antiq greeks have a sort of martial art fight style,<pancrateon>,a combination betwen box and wrestling,with many permited hits and tactics.It was an olimpic discipline too,and many warriors of Alexander the Great,for example,was familiar with this unarmed fight style.It is posible that romans adopt this <pancrateon>,or some of fight tactics from this,after conqer the greek world.