Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Arvioustus

Dacia Not 'backwards'

Recommended Posts

Dacia, I would not classify as backwards in any means. Just because Romans used the term barbarian does not mean they were backwards. Bulgarian archeologists just unearthed a string of mounds rewriting early European history of goldworking. Thriacians were well known for their metal works and were far ahead of the Romans in this. The time ranges of the findings were fin 4000 BC thru 800 AD and the caliber and abundance of the finely wrought work suggest the region was a center in ancient Europe. Unexpected technical expertise and a cache of 15,000 gold artifacts so meticulously crafted that the seams are invisible to the naked eye.

 

Perhaps other areas in the frontiers had similar?

January 2006 Discover magazine

Edited by Arvioustus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But doesn't the high degree of specialization in metalwoking suggest that the Dacians were producing these goldworks for trade? If so, who were their trading partners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dacia was remarkable for its architecture as well as its gold. The fortified palace of Old Sarmizegethusa was really something, as you might gather even from the partial depiction on Trajan's Column.

 

Where did I read that under one of the Dacian kings wine was banned? Does this mean they had got as far the the US in the early 20th century? Had they noticed that wine had corrupted the Celts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dacia was remarkable for its architecture as well as its gold. The fortified palace of Old Sarmizegethusa was really something, as you might gather even from the partial depiction on Trajan's Column.

 

Where did I read that under one of the Dacian kings wine was banned? Does this mean they had got as far the the US in the early 20th century? Had they noticed that wine had corrupted the Celts?

 

From Strabo Book VII

The following is an indication of their complete obedience: they were persuaded to cut down their vines and to live without wine. However, certain men rose up against Boerebistas and he was deposed before the Romans sent an expedition against him;Link to the editor's note at the bottom of this page and those who succeeded him divided the empire into several parts.

 

Though it doesn't give the reasons, you have an interesting theory. Was wine corrupting the Dacians, or worse, was it Romanizing them? We know that Burebista sided with Pompey against Caesar, and perhaps the cutting of the vines was a symbolic gesture after Pompey's defeat, intending to say... Dacia will never submit to Caesar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes yes, they had good architecture and gold working, but look who went out to put it to work to the people, the Romans of course. I think when it comes to a civilizations advanced or backwards classification, we should judge by the sophistication of the average person, the whether the average person is literate (Roman literacy rates were incredible for the time, Dacia, not so much) and the addvanced technology that effects the average persons life (such as roman aquaducts and things like that).

 

So by those terms, I think it is fair to declared Dacia inferior to the Romans. Though then again, I'm incredably bias towards the "barbarian" cultures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'literacy test' you mentioned, I am not so sure. The Romans are then backward compared to the Greeks?

The Romans idolazed the Greeks to be sure and who was it that stated ' a good Greek is better than any barbarian but a bad Greek is worse than any'? Romans were considered barbarians to the Greeks for various reasons too.

Think more data will come from this region concerning its Roman period. (probably neglected and squashed during communist era) Just the location of where Dacia is suggests a nation that can take care of itself. The Romans valued Gold above all, Dacia had gold and was free from Rome for a long time. For, example Rome view Germania inferior as a source for their typical recruitment odf sone but superior supported taxation,which menat alot to the Romans. You do not think the knowledge of Dacian gold was perhaps the real reason for Roman interest there?

The location of Dacia also supports a nation that can handle itself and maintain independence. The German tribes I am sure did all they can to invade and were repulsed. The Samartian to the east the same and of course the Romans. If I am not mistaken the largest invasion force the Romans ever assembled was needed to conquer Dacia. (except of course civil wars) The Romans lost many battles there, to be sure Romans lost battles all over but given the size of the Roman force this was a major feat.( even though I have read the Romans were most likely outnumbered,plus Dacians had German allies)

The falx was not the only thing Dacia possessed that was formadible I am sure, they traded with Greece long before the Romans did so they must have obtained much. Doubtful Dacia was backwards in most areas especially warfare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We know that Burebista sided with Pompey against Caesar, and perhaps the cutting of the vines was a symbolic gesture after Pompey's defeat, intending to say... Dacia will never submit to Caesar?

 

Why didn't you mention this in the first place? Now I'm convinced that Dacia wasn't backwards! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that Burebista sided with Pompey against Caesar, and perhaps the cutting of the vines was a symbolic gesture after Pompey's defeat, intending to say... Dacia will never submit to Caesar?

 

Why didn't you mention this in the first place? Now I'm convinced that Dacia wasn't backwards! :unsure:

 

Cato! no, now your not the real cato, the REAL cato wouldn't have been factional, he would've supported Rome, not Pompey, Pompey was not Rome. Sigh cato, am I the only real republican left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that Burebista sided with Pompey against Caesar, and perhaps the cutting of the vines was a symbolic gesture after Pompey's defeat, intending to say... Dacia will never submit to Caesar?

 

Why didn't you mention this in the first place? Now I'm convinced that Dacia wasn't backwards! :unsure:

 

Cato! no, now your not the real cato, the REAL cato wouldn't have been factional, he would've supported Rome, not Pompey, Pompey was not Rome. Sigh cato, am I the only real republican left.

 

Not factional? I'm not so sure. Maybe he was more factional than our colleague Cato ever is. In putting together a brief biography of Cato for my translation of his /On Farming/, I developed the impression that Livy was right: the political feuds aroused by Cato's censorhip 'occupied him for the rest of his life' (Livy 39.44.9).

 

Here's more on the Cato translation, by the way!

 

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/dalby/books/CatoFarming.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cato! no, now your not the real cato, the REAL cato wouldn't have been factional, he would've supported Rome, not Pompey, Pompey was not Rome. Sigh cato, am I the only real republican left.

 

You're right Sextus: mea culpa! Mea maxima culpa!!

 

Now, what's the right ritual to cleanse myself of this Pompeian miasma so I can look at the statues of my ancestors once again?

 

 

 

Not factional? I'm not so sure. Maybe he was more factional than our colleague Cato ever is.

 

My namesake was Cato Uticensis, the great grandson of Cato the Censor. It's confusing: there were 8 M Porcii Catones (see my stemmata, Kinsmen of Cato). Both of them, by the way, were factional to their very bones--the elder Cato was hauling people to court (and being hauled to court) well into his 80s, about the time he took a second wife (Salonia), who was the about the same age as his first son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Map of the Roman Empire

×