1st century BC 's
Geographia (c. 140 AD)
Linguistic area Dacian was probably one of the major languages of
south-eastern Europe, spoken in the area between the
Danube, Northern Carpathians, the
Dnister River and the Balkans, and the
Black Sea shore. According to historians, due to the linguistic unity of the Getae and Dacians that are found in the records of ancient writers Strabo,
Cassius Dio,
Trogus Pompeius,
Appian, and
Pliny the Elder, contemporary historiography often uses the term Geto-Dacians to refer to the people living in the area between the Carpathians, the Haemus (Balkan) Mountains, the Black Sea, Dnister River, Northern Carpathians, and middle Danube. Strabo provided more specific information, noting that "the Dacians speak the same language as the Getae," a dialect of the Thracian language. The information provided by the Greek geographer is complemented by other literary, linguistic, and archaeological evidence. Accordingly, the Geto-Dacians may have occupied territory in the west and north-west, as far as Moravia and the middle Danube, to the area of present-day
Serbia in the south-west, and as far as the Haemus Mountains (Balkans) in the south. The eastern limit of the territory inhabited by the Geto-Dacians may have been the shore of the Black Sea and the Tyras River (Dnister), possibly at times reaching as far as the
Bug River, the northern limit including the Trans-Carpathian westernmost
Ukraine and southern
Poland. Over time, some peripheral areas of the Geto-Dacians' territories were affected by the presence of other people, such as the
Celts in the west, the
Illyrians in the south-west, the
Greeks and
Scythians in the east and the
Bastarnae in the north-east. Nevertheless, between the Danube River (West), the Haemus Mountains (S), the Black Sea (E), the Dniester River (NE) and the northern Carpathians, a continuous Geto-Dacian presence as majority was permanently maintained, according to some scholars. According to the Bulgarian linguist Georgiev, the Daco-Mysian region included Dacia (approximately contemporary Romania and Hungary east of the
Tisza River, Mysia (Moesia) and Scythia Minor (contemporary Dobrogea).
Chronology 1st century BC In 53 BC,
Julius Caesar stated that the lands of the Dacians started on the eastern edge of the Hercynian Forest. This corresponds to the period between 82 and 44 BC, when the Dacian state reached its widest extent during the reign of King
Burebista: in the west it may have extended as far as the middle Danube River valley in present-day Hungary, in the east and north to the Carpathians in present-day Slovakia and in the south to the lower Dniester valley in present-day south-western Ukraine and the western coast of the Black Sea as far as Appollonia. At that time, some scholars believe, the Dacians built a series of hill-forts at
Zemplin (Slovakia),
Mala Kopania (Ukraine),
Oncești, Maramureș (Romania) and
Solotvyno (Ukraine). The
Zemplin settlement appears to belong to a Celto-Dacian horizon, as well as the river
Patissus (Tisa)'s region, including its upper stretch, according to Shchukin (1989). According to Parducz (1956) Foltiny (1966), Dacian archaeological finds extend to the west of Dacia, and occur along both banks of the Tisza. Besides the possible incorporation of a part of Slovakia into the Dacian state of Burebista, there was also Geto-Dacian penetration of south-eastern Poland, according to Mielczarek (1989). The Polish linguist
Milewski Tadeusz (1966 and 1969) suggests that in the southern regions of Poland appear names that are unusual in northern Poland, possibly related to Dacian or Illyrian names. On the grounds of these names, it has been argued that the region of the Carpathian and Tatra Mountains was inhabited by Dacian tribes linguistically related to the ancestors of modern Albanians. Also, a formal statement by Pliny indicated the river
Vistula as the western boundary of Dacia, according to Nicolet (1991). Between the Prut and the Dniester, the northern extent of the appearance of Geto-Dacian elements in the 4th century BC coincides roughly with the extent of the present-day Republic of Moldova, according to Mielczarek. According to
Müllenhoff (1856), Schütte (1917), Urbańczyk (2001) and Matei-Popescu (2007),
Agrippa's commentaries mention the river Vistula as the western boundary of Dacia. Urbańczyk (1997) speculates that according to Agrippa's commentaries, and the map of Agrippa (before 12 BC), the Vistula river separated Germania and Dacia. This map is lost and its contents are unknown However, later Roman geographers, including
Ptolemy (AD 90 – c. AD 168) (II.10, III.7) and Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117) considered the Vistula as the boundary between Germania and Sarmatia Europaea, or Germania and Scythia.
1st century AD Around 20
AD,
Strabo wrote the
Geographica that provides information regarding the extent of regions inhabited by the Dacians. On its basis, Lengyel and Radan (1980), Hoddinott (1981) and Mountain (1998) consider that the Geto-Dacians inhabited both sides of the
Tisza river before the rise of the Celtic Boii and again after the latter were defeated by the Dacians. The hold of the Dacians between the Danube and the Tisza appears to have been tenuous. However, the Hungarian archaeologist Parducz (1856) argued for a Dacian presence west of the Tisza dating from the time of Burebista. According to
Tacitus (AD 56 – AD 117) Dacians were bordering Germany in the south-east while Sarmatians bordered it in the east. In the 1st century AD, the
Iazyges settled in the west of Dacia, on the plain between the Danube and the Tisza rivers, according to some scholars' interpretation of
Pliny's text: "The higher parts between the Danube and the Hercynian Forest (Black Forest) as far as the winter quarters of Pannonia at Carnuntum and the plains and level country of the German frontiers there are occupied by the Sarmatian Iazyges, while the Dacians whom they have driven out hold the mountains and forests as far as the river Theiss". Archaeological sources indicate that the local Celto-Dacian population retained its specificity as late as the 3rd century AD. Archaeological finds dated to the 2nd century AD, after the Roman conquest, indicate that during that period, vessels found in some of the Iazygian cemeteries reveal fairly strong Dacian influence, according to Mocsy. M. Párducz (1956) and Z. Visy (1971) reported a concentration of Dacian-style finds in the Cris-Mures-Tisza region and in the Danube bend area near Budapest. These maps of finds remain valid today, but they have been complemented with additional finds that cover a wider area, particularly the interfluvial region between the Danube and Tisza. However, this interpretation has been invalidated by late 20th-century archaeology, which has discovered Sarmatian settlements and burial sites all over the Hungarian Plain on both sides of the Tisza, e.g., Gyoma in south-eastern Hungary and Nyiregyhaza in north-eastern Hungary. The
Barrington Atlas shows the Iazyges occupying both sides of Tisza (map 20).
2nd century AD Written a few decades after the Roman conquest of Dacia 105–106 AD, Ptolemy's
Geographia defined the boundaries of Dacia. There is a consensus among scholars that Ptolemy's Dacia was the region between the rivers
Tisza, Danube, upper
Dniester, and
Siret. The mainstream of historians accepted this interpretation: Avery (1972)
Berenger (1994) Fol (1996) Mountain (1998), Waldman Mason (2006). Ptolemy also provided Dacian toponyms in the Upper
Vistula (Polish: Wisła) river basin in Poland: Susudava and Setidava (with a manuscript variant Getidava. This may be an echo of Burebista's expansion. It appears that this northern expansion of the Dacian language as far as the Vistula river lasted until 170–180 AD when the
Hasdings, a Germanic tribe, expelled a Dacian group from this region, according to Schütte (1917) and Childe (1930). This Dacian group is associated by Schütte (1952) with towns having the specific Dacian language ending 'dava' i.e. Setidava. A previous Dacian presence that ended with the Hasdings' arrival is considered also by who says that the Hasdings Vandals "attempted to take control of lands which had previously belonged to a free Dacian group called the Costoboci" Several tribes on the northern slopes of the Carpathians were mentioned that are generally considered Thraco-Dacian, i.e. Arsietae (Upper Vistula), Biessi / Biessoi and Piengitai. Schütte (1952) associated the Dacian tribe of Arsietae with the Arsonion town. The ancient documents attest names with the Dacian name ending
-dava 'town' in the Balto-Slavic territory, in the country of Arsietae tribe, at the sources of the Vistula river. The Biessi inhabited the foothills of the Carpathian Mountains, which on Ptolemy's map are located on the headwaters of the Dnister and Sian Rivers, the right-bank Carpathian tributary of the Vistula river. The Biessi (Biessoi) probably left their name to the mountain chain of Bieskides that continues the Carpathian Mountains towards the north (Schütte 1952). Ptolemy (140 AD) lists only Germanic or Balto-Slavic tribes, and no Dacians,on both sides of the Vistula (ref: II.10; III.7), as does the
Barrington Atlas (map 19). After the
Marcomannic Wars (166–180 AD), Dacian groups from outside Roman Dacia had been set in motion, and thus were the 12,000 Dacians "from the neighbourhood of Roman Dacia sent away from their own country". Their native country could have been the Upper Tisza region but other places cannot be excluded.
Dacian linguistic zone in the early Roman imperial era (30 BC – AD 100) Historical linguistic overview Starting around 400 BC, Celtic groups, moving out of their
La Tène cultural heartland in southern Germany/eastern Gaul, penetrated and settled south-eastern Europe as far as the Black Sea and into
Anatolia. By c. 250 BC, much of the modern states of Austria, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania, and Bessarabia and Moesia, were under Celtic cultural influence and probably political domination in many regions. This migratory process brought Celtic material culture, especially advanced in metallurgy, to the Illyrian and Dacian tribes. Especially intensive Celtic settlement, as evidenced by concentrations of La Tène-type cemeteries, took place in Austria, Slovakia, the Hungarian Plain, Transylvania, Bessarabia and eastern Thrace. Central Transylvania appears to have become a Celtic enclave or unitary kingdom, according to Batty. It is likely that during the period of Celtic pre-eminence, the Dacian language was eclipsed by Celtic dialects in Transylvania. In the territory that in Roman times became Moesia, South of the Danube, there was also extensive Celticisation. An example is the
Scordisci tribe of Moesia Superior, reported by the ancient historian
Livy to be Celtic-speaking and whose culture displays Celtic features. By 60 BC, Celtic political hegemony in the region appears to have collapsed, and the indigenous Dacian tribes throughout the region appear to have reasserted their identity and political independence. This process may have been partly due to the career of the Getan king
Burebista (ruled ca 80 – 44 BC), who appears to have coalesced several Getic and Dacian tribes under his leadership. It is likely that in this period, the Dacian language regained its former predominance in Transylvania. In 29–26 BC, the southern Danubian area that later became known as Moesia was conquered and annexed by the Romans. There followed an intensive process of Romanisation. The Danube, as the new frontier of the empire and main fluvial supply route for the Roman military, was soon dotted with forts and supply depots, which were garrisoned by several
legions and many
auxiliary units. Numerous colonies of Roman army veterans were established. The presence of the Roman military resulted in a huge influx of non-Dacian immigrants, such as soldiers, their dependents, ancillary workers and merchants, from every part of the Roman Empire, especially from the rest of the Balkans, into Moesia. It is likely that by the time the emperor Trajan invaded Dacia (101–6), the Dacian language had been largely replaced by Latin in Moesia. The conquest of Dacia saw a similar process of Romanisation north of the Danube, so that by 200 AD, Latin was probably predominant in the zone permanently occupied by the Romans. In addition, it appears that some unoccupied parts of the dava zone were overrun, either before or during the Dacian Wars, by Sarmatian tribes; for example, eastern Wallachia, which had fallen under the
Roxolani by 68 AD. By around 200 AD, it is likely that the Dacian language was confined to those parts of the dava zone occupied by the
Free Dacian groups, which may have amounted to little more than the eastern Carpathians. Under the emperor
Aurelian (r. 270–275), the Romans withdrew their administration and armed forces, and possibly a significant proportion of the provincial population, from the part of Dacia they ruled. The subsequent linguistic status of this region is disputed. Traditional Romanian historiography maintains that a Latin-speaking population persisted into medieval times, to form the basis of today's Romanian-speaking inhabitants. But this hypothesis lacks evidential basis (e.g., the absence of any post-275 Latin inscriptions in the region, other than on imported Roman coins/artefacts). What is certain is that by AD 300, the entire North Danubian region had fallen under the political domination of Germanic-speaking groups, a hegemony that continued until c. AD 500: the
Goths held overall hegemony, and under them, lesser Germanic tribes such as the
Taifali and
Gepids. Some historians consider that the region became Germanic-speaking during this period. At least one part,
Wallachia, may have become Slavic-speaking by AD 600, as it is routinely referred to
Sklavinía (Greek for "Land of the Slavs") by contemporary Byzantine chroniclers. The survival of the Dacian language in this period is impossible to determine, due to a complete lack of documentation. However, it is generally believed that the language was extinct by AD 600.
Dacia and Moesia: zone of toponyms ending in -dava or deva'' ending considered to be characteristic of the Dacian language. They are mostly found throughout
Dacia and northern
Thrace, some also in eastern
Illyria. At the start of the Roman imperial era (30 BC), the Dacian language was probably predominant to the north of the Danube in
Dacia, and also spoken south of the Danube in parts of the region that became known as
Moesia in Roman times. North of the Danube, the dava-zone is largely consistent with Ptolemy's definition of Dacia's borders (III.8.1–3) i.e. the area contained by the river
Ister (
Danube) to the south, the river
Thibiscum (
Timiș) to the west, the upper river
Tyras (
Dniester) to the north and the river
Hierasus (
Siret) to the east. To the west, it appears that the
-dava placenames in Olteanu's map lie within the line of the Timiş, extended northwards. However, four davas are located beyond the Siret, Ptolemy's eastern border. But three of these,
Piroboridava,
Tamasidava and
Zargidava, are described by Ptolemy as
pará (Gr."very close") to the Siret:
Piroboridava, the only one securely located, was 3 km from the Siret. The location of
Clepidava is uncertain: Olteanu locates it in north-east
Bessarabia, but Georgiev places it further west, in south-west Ukraine, between the upper reaches of the Siret and Dniester rivers. South of the Danube in the Roman era, a dialect of Dacian, referred to as "Daco-Moesian" by some modern scholars, was also spoken in the region called Moesia by the Romans, which was divided by them into the
Roman provinces of
Moesia Superior (roughly modern Serbia) and
Moesia Inferior (modern northern Bulgaria as far as the Balkan range plus Roman
Dobruja region). This is evidenced by the distribution of
-dava placenames, which occur in the eastern half of Moesia Superior and all over Inferior. However, the dava-zone was not exclusively or uniformly Dacian-speaking during historical times. Significant Celtic elements survived there into the 2nd century AD: Ptolemy (III.8.3) lists two Celtic peoples, the
Taurisci and
Anartes, as resident in the northernmost part of Dacia, in the northern Carpathians. The partly Celtic
Bastarnae are also attested in this region in literature and the archaeological record during the 1st century BC; they probably remained in the 1st century AD, according to Batty.
Republic of Moldova To the east, beyond the Siret River, it has been argued by numerous scholars that Dacian was also the main language of the modern regions of
Moldavia and
Bessarabia, at least as far east as the river Dniester. The main evidence used to support this hypothesis consists of three
-dava placenames which Ptolemy located just east of the Siret; and the mainstream identification as ethnic-Dacian of two peoples resident in Moldavia: the
Carpi and
Costoboci. However, the Dacian ethnicity of the Carpi and Costoboci is disputed in academic circles, and they have also been variously identified as Sarmatian, Germanic, Celtic or proto-Slavic. Numerous non-Dacian peoples, both sedentary and nomadic, the Scytho-Sarmatian
Roxolani and
Agathyrsi, Germanic/Celtic Bastarnae and Celtic Anartes, are attested to in the ancient sources and in the archaeological record as inhabiting this region. The linguistic status of this region during the Roman era must therefore be considered uncertain. It is likely that a great variety of languages were spoken. If there was a
lingua franca spoken by all inhabitants of the region, it was not necessarily Dacian: it could as likely have been Celtic or Germanic or Sarmatian.
Balkans To the south, it has been argued that the ancient Thracian language was a dialect of Dacian, or vice versa, and that therefore the Dacian linguistic zone extended over the Roman province of Thracia, occupying modern-day Bulgaria south of the Balkan Mountains, northern Greece and European Turkey, as far as the Aegean Sea. But this theory, based on the testimony of the Augustan-era geographer Strabo's work
Geographica VII.3.2 and 3.13, is disputed; opponents argue that Thracian was a distinct language from Dacian, either related or unrelated. (see
Relationship with Thracian, below, for a detailed discussion of this issue).
Hungarian Plain The hypothesis that Dacian was widely spoken to the north-west of Dacia is primarily based on the career of Dacian king Burebista, who ruled approximately between 80 and 44 BC. According to Strabo, Burebista coalesced the Geto-Dacian tribes under his leadership and conducted military operations as far as Pannonia and Thracia. Although Strabo appears to portray these campaigns as short-term raids for plunder and to punish his enemies, several Romanian scholars have argued, on the basis of controversial interpretation of archaeological data, that they resulted in longer-term Dacian occupation and settlement of large territories beyond the dava zone. Some scholars have asserted that Dacian was the main language of the sedentary population of the
Hungarian Plain, at least as far as the river
Tisza, and possibly as far as the Danube. Statements by ancient authors such as
Caesar, Strabo and
Pliny the Elder have been controversially interpreted as supporting this view, but these are too vague or ambiguous to be of much geographical value. There is little hard evidence to support the thesis of a large ethnic-Dacian population on the Plain: • Toponyms: Ptolemy (III.7.1) provides 8 placenames for the territory of the
Iazyges Metanastae (i.e. the Hungarian Plain). None of these carry the Dacian
-dava suffix. At least three -
Uscenum,
Bormanum and the only one which can be located with confidence,
Partiscum (
Szeged, Hungary) – have been identified as Celtic placenames by scholars. • Archaeology: Concentrations of La Tène-type cemeteries suggest that the Hungarian Plain was the scene of heavy Celtic immigration and settlement in the period 400–260 BC (see above). During the period 100 BC – AD 100, the archaeology of the sedentary population of the Plain has been interpreted by some dated scholars as showing Dacian (Mocsy 1974) or Celto-Dacian (Parducz 1956) features. However, surveys of the results of excavations using modern scientific methods, e.g., Szabó (2005) and Almássy (2006), favour the view that the sedentary population of the Hungarian Plain in this period was predominantly Celtic and that any Dacian-style features were probably the results of trade. Of 94 contemporaneous sites excavated between 1986 and 2006, the vast majority have been identified as probably Celtic, while only two as possibly Dacian, according to Almássy, who personally excavated some of the sites. Almássy concludes: "In the Great Hungarian Plain, we have to count on a sporadic Celtic village network in which the Celtic inhabitants lived mixed with the people of the Scythian Age [referring to traces of an influx of Scythians during the 1st century BC], that could have continued into the Late Celtic Period without significant changes. This system consisted of small, farm-like settlements interspersed with a few relatively large villages... In the 1st century AD nothing refers to a significant immigration of Dacian people." Visy (1995) concurs that there is little archaeological evidence of a Dacian population on the Plain before its occupation by the Sarmatians in the late 1st century AD. • Epigraphy: Inscription AE (1905) 14 records a campaign on the Hungarian Plain by the Augustan-era general
Marcus Vinucius, dated to 10 BC or 8 BC i.e. during or just after the Roman conquest of
Pannonia (
bellum Pannonicum 14–9 BC), in which Vinucius played a leading role as governor of the neighbouring Roman province of
Illyricum. The inscription states: "Marcus Vinucius...[patronymic], Consul [in 19 BC] ...[various official titles], governor of Illyricum, the first [Roman general] to advance across the river Danube, defeated in battle and routed an army of Dacians and Basternae, and subjugated the Cotini, Osi,...[missing tribal name] and Anartii to the power of the emperor Augustus and of the people of Rome." The inscription suggests that the population of the Hungarian Plain retained their Celtic character in the time of Augustus: the scholarly consensus is that the Cotini and Anartes were Celtic tribes and the Osi either Celts or Celticised Illyrians.
Slovakia To the north-west, the argument has been advanced that Dacian was also prevalent in modern-day
Slovakia and parts of Poland. The basis for this is the presumed Dacian occupation of the fortress of
Zemplin in Slovakia in the era of Dacian king Burebista – whose campaigns outside Dacia have been dated c. 60 – 44 BC – and Ptolemy's location of two
-dava placenames on the lower Vistula River in Poland. The hypothesis of a Dacian occupation of Slovakia during the 1st century BC is contradicted by the archaeological evidence that this region featured a predominantly Celtic culture from c. 400 BC; and a sophisticated kingdom of the
Boii Celtic tribe. Based in modern-day
Bratislava during the 1st century BC, this polity issued its own gold and silver coinage (the so-called "
Biatec-type" coins), which bear the names of several kings with recognised Celtic names. This kingdom is also evidenced by numerous Celtic-type
fortified hill-top settlements (
oppida), of which Zemplin is the foremost example in south-east Slovakia. Furthermore, the archaeological
Puchov culture, present in Slovakia in this period, is considered Celtic by mainstream scholars. Some scholars argue that Zemplin was occupied by Burebista's warriors from about 60 BC onwards, but this is based on the presence of Dacian-style artefacts alongside the Celtic ones, which may simply have been cultural imports. But even if occupation by Dacian troops under Burebista actually occurred, it would probably have been brief, as in 44 BC Burebista died and his kingdom collapsed and split into 4 fragments. In any case, it does not follow that the indigenous population became Dacian-speakers during the period of Dacian control. Karol Pieta's discussion of the ethnicity of the Puchov people shows that opinion is divided between those who attribute the culture to a Celtic group – the Boii or
Cotini are the leading candidates – and those who favour a Germanic group, e.g., the
Buri. Despite wide acknowledgement of Dacian influence, there is little support for the view that the people of this region were ethnic Dacians.
Poland The hypothesis of a substantial Dacian population in the river Vistula basin is not widely supported among modern scholars, as this region is generally regarded as inhabited predominantly by Germanic tribes during the Roman imperial era, e.g., Heather (2009).
The fate of Dacian . In particular, parts of
Dacia had been under Roman rule (
Roman Dacia) for 170 years. From the earliest times that they are attested, Dacians lived on both sides of Danube and on both sides of the Carpathians, evidenced by the northern Dacian town
Setidava. The first Roman conquest of part of Dacia did not extinguish the language, as Free Dacian tribes may have continued to speak Dacian in the area north-east of the Carpathians as late as the 6th or 7th century AD. == Sound changes from Proto-Indo-European ==