What is your opinion about dacians?Were they south slavs or goths?

Status
Not open for further replies.

mihaitzateo

Regular Member
Messages
943
Reaction score
98
Points
0
Location
Bucharest
Ethnic group
Romanian
Y-DNA haplogroup
proly R1B
I am from Romania and I saw the recent Y DNA tests for the romanian population.
These tests sugest that romanians genetics are mostly south slavic people,as serbo-croatian-bosnians.
(in Romania,as in serbs,croats and bosnians most present haplogrup is I2,exactly same branch of I2 as in serbo-croatian-bosnians ).
However,the dacians are told that they were blonde with blue eyes,which is not like today serbo-croatian-bosnians people are.
Since today most serbo-croatian-bosnians and romanians are brown haired with brown eyes.
As for phisical look some are saying that romanians are 35% dinarids,30% nordids 25% mediteranean and 10% alpine.
No ideea if this is true,but in Romania you can see a lot of people looking dinarid and also a lot of people looking nordid.
As for people looking meditarenean,I did not saw that many.
What is remained today and is certain are the dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
(you can search on google images dacians arch of constatine to see since I can not post links yet).
If you look how the dacians there are looking,with high cheekbones,straight forehead,straight noses is clearly that they were either blonde blue eyed dinarids or nordid,as the south swedes are looking today,or east nordids.
From the shape of the noses I could not pronounce if they are nordids of dinarids,the look between dinarids and nordids.
So I think those dacians were a mix between goths and and old dacians and is possibile that old dacians were dinarids,but dinarids blonde haired mostly with blue eyes.Their cheekbones are looking more like east nordid or dinarid,since are very prominent.
The names of dacians cities have a south slavic sonority,Sucidava,Argidava etc.
 
Welcome to the forum.

You seem to have a lot of confusions. The Dacians were obviously neither "Gothic" nor "South Slavic". "Gothic" would imply Germanic, and it's very clear that the Dacians were not Germanic. The reason the Dacians and the Goths are often tied is due to the name "Getae" for the Dacians, which indeed sounds similar to "Goths", but is attested as early as the 5th century BC (Herodotus), long before the Germanic peoples started to be mentioned. Also, Dacian was clearly not a Slavic language: the Slavs didn't show up on the Balkans until the Migration Period. What the language of the Dacians shared with both Gothic (a Germanic language) and the South Slavic language is that it was Indo-European. What the Dacian language additionally shares with the Slavic languages is that it's a Satem language (which additionally applies for the Baltic, Armenian, Albanian and Indo-Iranic languages).

EDIT: Regarding Y-Haplogroup I2, I highly recommend reading what the administrator of this forum, Maciamo, has written on the topic. I can also highly recommend this detailed analysis of the Paleolithic remnants by board member sparkey.
 
Last edited:
I do not make any confussions.
The presence of the goths/ostrogoths on the actual territory of Romania is clearly atested by Pucioasele treasure.
Which have a ring written with runic letters.Go check on google/wikipedia Pietroasele Treasure.
Also seek on wikipedia Ring of Pietroassa.This ring is written with runic alphabet,more exactly Elder Futhark.
Is also attested,the pressence of goths and ostrogoths on the territory of Romania,by the Sântana de Mureș–Chernyakhov culture.Santana de Mures is in Transylvania,but they also found a site in south-east Romania,near Danube delta,the Pietroasele Treasure is found in central Romania and so on.
As for goths being from south sweden,how can contradict someone that,when Sweden still have some lands called Gotland Östergötland(east gotland in english,ostrogothia in latin,from where ostrogoths are suposed to come)?
All south Sweden is called "Östergötland".And it have more counties in it,2 of which were mentioned a
How you can explain that in different periods of time both today Romania and Denmark are called by historians "Dacia"?First Romania is called Dacia and after some period of time,Denmark is called Dacia.
But the most clear evidence is the presence of I1A (M253) and I1C(M223) in both Romania and ex-Yugoslavia (in a test made in Moldavia,I1A+I1C where about 6-7%;what is more weird is that they found some samples of M170 that were not either I1A or I2 or I1C),which is pretty clear that is of gothic descent,from south Sweden.Sure no one tells that goths only had I1A on their paternal line,very likely they had also some R1B branch/es and M223.I1C is one of the most clear evidences ,which can be denied,of the pressence of goths and ostrogoths in today Romania.
Just look on the map,to see where it is present.


As for dacians beeing blue eyed and blonde haired and taller than other barbarians,these are most close from today europeans with south swedes (not with romanians).Which is again weird.
 
I do not make any confussions.
The presence of the goths/ostrogoths on the actual territory of Romania is clearly atested by Pucioasele treasure.
Which have a ring written with runic letters.Go check on google/wikipedia Pietroasele Treasure.
Also seek on wikipedia Ring of Pietroassa.This ring is written with runic alphabet,more exactly Elder Futhark.

Is also attested,the pressence of goths and ostrogoths on the territory of Romania,by the Sântana de Mureș–Chernyakhov culture.Santana de Mures is in Transylvania,but they also found a site in south-east Romania,near Danube delta,the Pietroasele Treasure is found in central Romania and so on.

Yes, the Goths were present in Romania, but this was only shortly before and during the Migration Period. In the 2nd century BC, the Goths lived at the right-bank of the Vistula river, in modern-day eastern Poland. You can read this in the Geography of Claudios Ptolemaios (book 3, chapter 5), and in "Germania" by Tacitus (chapter 44). They migrated to the area of modern-day Romania only later. The Getae/Dacians were an unrelated people, and they spoke a non-Germanic language. Names like "Burebista" and "Decebalus" are clearly non-Germanic.

As for goths being from south sweden,how can contradict someone that,when Sweden still have some lands called Gotland Östergötland(east gotland in english,ostrogothia in latin,from where ostrogoths are suposed to come)?
All south Sweden is called "Östergötland".And it have more counties in it,2 of which were mentioned a
How you can explain that in different periods of time both today Romania and Denmark are called by historians "Dacia"?First Romania is called Dacia and after some period of time,Denmark is called Dacia.

First off, yes, it is believed that the Goths migrated from Scandinavia. But see above, the Dacians lived in the area of modern Romania before the Goths arrived. Also, nobody ever called Denmark "Dacia".

But the most clear evidence is the presence of I1A (M253) and I1C(M223) in both Romania and ex-Yugoslavia (in a test made in Moldavia,I1A+I1C where about 6-7%;what is more weird is that they found some samples of M170 that were not either I1A or I2 or I1C),which is pretty clear that is of gothic descent,from south Sweden.Sure no one tells that goths only had I1A on their paternal line,very likely they had also some R1B branch/es and M223.I1C is one of the most clear evidences ,which can be denied,of the pressence of goths and ostrogoths in today Romania.
Just look on the map,to see where it is present.

I edited my previous post. You can find some useful links on the mentioned Haplogroups there.

As for dacians beeing blue eyed and blonde haired and taller than other barbarians,these are most close from today europeans with south swedes (not with romanians).Which is again weird.

Mediterranean peoples found features like blond hair and blue eyes exotic and thus exagerated the frequency such features did occur. Tacitus describes the Germanic peoples as all-red-haired, for instance.
 
I am from Romania and I saw the recent Y DNA tests for the romanian population.
These tests sugest that romanians genetics are mostly south slavic people,as serbo-croatian-bosnians.
(in Romania,as in serbs,croats and bosnians most present haplogrup is I2,exactly same branch of I2 as in serbo-croatian-bosnians ).
However,the dacians are told that they were blonde with blue eyes,which is not like today serbo-croatian-bosnians people are.
Since today most serbo-croatian-bosnians and romanians are brown haired with brown eyes.
As for phisical look some are saying that romanians are 35% dinarids,30% nordids 25% mediteranean and 10% alpine.
No ideea if this is true,but in Romania you can see a lot of people looking dinarid and also a lot of people looking nordid.
As for people looking meditarenean,I did not saw that many.
What is remained today and is certain are the dacians statues from the Arch of Constantine.
(you can search on google images dacians arch of constatine to see since I can not post links yet).
If you look how the dacians there are looking,with high cheekbones,straight forehead,straight noses is clearly that they were either blonde blue eyed dinarids or nordid,as the south swedes are looking today,or east nordids.
From the shape of the noses I could not pronounce if they are nordids of dinarids,the look between dinarids and nordids.
So I think those dacians were a mix between goths and and old dacians and is possibile that old dacians were dinarids,but dinarids blonde haired mostly with blue eyes.Their cheekbones are looking more like east nordid or dinarid,since are very prominent.
The names of dacians cities have a south slavic sonority,Sucidava,Argidava etc.


Blond romanians don't look nordic to me.They all have the typical easternish flavour: wide faces, big and very round eyes (nordic people tend to have a bit slanted eye-shape), etc.
 
Dacians could have been similar with Thracians, being a clan of them.For sure they weren't slavic, because slavs arrived much later than Dacians, who were present in Romania at the time of Ancient Romans.I would exclude Goths too.
 
Blond romanians don't look nordic to me.They all have the typical easternish flavour: wide faces, big and very round eyes (nordic people tend to have a bit slanted eye-shape), etc.

Dacians could have been similar with Thracians, being a clan of them.For sure they weren't slavic, because slavs arrived much later than Dacians, who were present in Romania at the time of Ancient Romans.I would exclude Goths too.

All discussions about the outward appearance and the supposed ethnolinguistic affiliation based on that are completely moot in my opinion, anyways.
 
The dacians from Arch of Constantine do not have at all rounded eyes.
I do not think the dacians were thracians either.

Thracians seems to be the ancestors of today norwegians bearing the branches of norse R1A1,check the tests made by David Faux on R1A1 branches that the vikings were bearing,he propose and I think he got some arguments, that those branches of R1A1 are from Central Asia in origin.
(you will find the pdf is you search david faux central asian ).
And vikings were described as red haired,with blue eyes,like the thracians were.More Snori Sturlson in his Prose Edda tells that the vikings came from Troy.Beside is pretty clear that thracians were sea farers,the ruins of Troy were found near sea shore.Also the thracians are described in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey as excelent sea farers,now neither bulgarians neither romanians or yugoslavians have any traditions linked with sea.
Sure dacians were allied with thracians,but that does not means they were same people.

I highly doubt you will find some norse R1A1 in Romania or Bulgaria,where the thracians could have come.
(or ok maybe you will find something like 1% from all Y DNA or so,but that can be from the raids vikings made in Europe).

As for today romanians with rounded eyes,I have not saw such a thing till now,maybe there are and I did not looked good enough at them.See that you can find on youtube a video with romanian male faces,just search romanian male faces.
And tell what you think about those faces.
 
The dacians from Arch of Constantine do not have at all rounded eyes.
I do not think the dacians were thracians either.

Thracians seems to be the ancestors of today norwegians bearing the branches of norse R1A1,check the tests made by David Faux on R1A1 branches that the vikings were bearing,he propose and I think he got some arguments, that those branches of R1A1 are from Central Asia in origin.
(you will find the pdf is you search david faux central asian ).
And vikings were described as red haired,with blue eyes,like the thracians were.More Snori Sturlson in his Prose Edda tells that the vikings came from Troy.Beside is pretty clear that thracians were sea farers,the ruins of Troy were found near sea shore.Also the thracians are described in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey as excelent sea farers,now neither bulgarians neither romanians or yugoslavians have any traditions linked with sea.
Sure dacians were allied with thracians,but that does not means they were same people.

I highly doubt you will find some norse R1A1 in Romania or Bulgaria,where the thracians could have come.
(or ok maybe you will find something like 1% from all Y DNA or so,but that can be from the raids vikings made in Europe).

As for today romanians with rounded eyes,I have not saw such a thing till now,maybe there are and I did not looked good enough at them.See that you can find on youtube a video with romanian male faces,just search romanian male faces.
And tell what you think about those faces.

well strabo verifies that Visii Getae lived in today S Romania - Bulgaria,
in some othaer post about Dacian Language I strongly supported that they were a link language among Greek and Germanic, and Thracians I supported that they were Centum,

personally I believe that they were a middle language among South and old Languages (Greek - Aryan - Sanshqrit ) and Northen Germano-Slavic (Baltic)
I believe that they moved to Scandinavia and Return Back later to re establish the lost trade of Volga river as Goths-Germans,
possible is also that the climate condition in Baltic which was very warm in 1000 BC but almost non vital at 400 BC (Herodotus times) to have Goths from scandinavia moved to Dacia at about 600 BC and the later Visii Goths movements west, when at 1rst century AD starts a new warming era wich ends at about 600 AD when we have years of very cold weather,


most possible for me is that they were pre or para Germanic which start to move west after pressure of Scythians before and after Roman empire,

it is not only the similarity getae -Goths but also the similarity Dac-Deutsch-Dutc
and some other similarities in religion whic I expressed in another post,

It semms like Thraco-Dacians + scythians moved North and West as Goth-Germanic, while scythians + Sarmatians create Slavs,
remember that Herodotus clearly identifies Sarmatians as Sauromates, and describe them as living in wooden houses and reign Deer breeders,
the word that Herodotus Descibes is ταρανδος (ta-rando-s) from what I know the famous and originally reign Deer breeders were Suomi-Saami populations, considering also the description of their tents we might recogn Sarmatians as the today non IE populations of North, the finns
while the rest mixed with Scythians and Getae create Slavic (or adopted Slavic when they adopted Christianity)

Romania is an area that was the start or the end of many devastations, and big and well fortified in some areas to keep ancient populations safe
 
Thracians seems to be the ancestors of today norwegians bearing the branches of norse R1A1,check the tests made by David Faux on R1A1 branches that the vikings were bearing,he propose and I think he got some arguments, that those branches of R1A1 are from Central Asia in origin.
(you will find the pdf is you search david faux central asian ).

Thracians as ancestors of Norwegians? Sorry, that's complete nonsense and completely unnecessary to assume. Haplogroup R1a has been in Europe since the Copper Age, and R1a has been found in samples from Germany from circa 2600 BC, which belong to the Corded Ware Culture. An offshot of the Corded Ware Culture, the so-called Battle Axe Culture, spread into Scandinavia, and it stands to reason that R1a was present in Scandinavia since then. R1a is originally from the steppe, but it already arrived during the Copper Age, not in historic times.

Regarding David Faux, my honest opinion is that he has a lot of rather unsubstantiated and unlikely hypotheses. To pick an example, his idea that R1b-U152 is of Anglo-Saxon origin, for instance, can be readily dismissed.

And vikings were described as red haired,with blue eyes,like the thracians were.More Snori Sturlson in his Prose Edda tells that the vikings came from Troy.Beside is pretty clear that thracians were sea farers,the ruins of Troy were found near sea shore.Also the thracians are described in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey as excelent sea farers,now neither bulgarians neither romanians or yugoslavians have any traditions linked with sea.

This is complete nonsense. The connection to Troy is clearly a frabrication of the medieval ages. There's a lot of similar medieval myths along these lines, such as the claim that the British are descended from Brutus. The Scandinavians were native to Scandinavia since at least the bronze age.

Sure dacians were allied with thracians,but that does not means they were same people.

From what little is known of both languages, they were indeed closely related.
 
well strabo verifies that Visii Getae lived in today S Romania - Bulgaria,
in some othaer post about Dacian Language I strongly supported that they were a link language among Greek and Germanic, and Thracians I supported that they were Centum,

I've said before, the Getae and Goths were completely unrelated, and Thracian clearly was a Satem language, there's no point denying that (for example Thracian "zalmos" - "skin/hide" vs. German "helm").

personally I believe that they were a middle language among South and old Languages (Greek - Aryan - Sanshqrit ) and Northen Germano-Slavic (Baltic)
I believe that they moved to Scandinavia and Return Back later to re establish the lost trade of Volga river as Goths-Germans,
possible is also that the climate condition in Baltic which was very warm in 1000 BC but almost non vital at 400 BC (Herodotus times) to have Goths from scandinavia moved to Dacia at about 600 BC and the later Visii Goths movements west, when at 1rst century AD starts a new warming era wich ends at about 600 AD when we have years of very cold weather,

The Goths were present at the right-bank of the Vistula in the 2nd century AD (Ptolemy book 3, chapter 5).

most possible for me is that they were pre or para Germanic which start to move west after pressure of Scythians before and after Roman empire,

Seriously, where does this idea come from that the Germanic peoples originated in the east? You keep bringing this up again and again.

it is not only the similarity getae -Goths but also the similarity Dac-Deutsch-Dutc
and some other similarities in religion whic I expressed in another post

No offense Yetos, but this is complete nonsense. The words "Dacia" and "Deutsch"/"Dutch" are completly unrelated. There are the Germanic sound shift. Thus "Deutsch"/"Dutch" is a cognate with Irish "tuath", Welsh "tud", Lithuanian "tauta" - which all mean "people" or "tribe". There's also Latin "tota"/"totum", which means "all"/"whole" instead.
 
I've said before, the Getae and Goths were completely unrelated, and Thracian clearly was a Satem language, there's no point denying that (for example Thracian "zalmos" - "skin/hide" vs. German "helm").



The Goths were present at the right-bank of the Vistula in the 2nd century AD (Ptolemy book 3, chapter 5).



Seriously, where does this idea come from that the Germanic peoples originated in the east? You keep bringing this up again and again.



No offense Yetos, but this is complete nonsense. The words "Dacia" and "Deutsch"/"Dutch" are completly unrelated. There are the Germanic sound shift. Thus "Deutsch"/"Dutch" is a cognate with Irish "tuath", Welsh "tud", Lithuanian "tauta" - which all mean "people" or "tribe". There's also Latin "tota"/"totum", which means "all"/"whole" instead.

and how sure you are that Daci had not similar shift and meant the same,

besides the way that sarmatians moved south and back to north again the times I mention could be the same with Goths and Getae,
 
bolinthos - bull,in english
bríza "emmer-wheat, rye" Norwegian brok "kind of grass"
germe - warm old prussian gorme,hot
skálmē - a knife, a sword old norse skolm "short sword, knife"

So there are words from thracian in norwegian/old norse,prussian,english also.
How can you explain it?
 
bolinthos - bull,in english
bríza "emmer-wheat, rye" Norwegian brok "kind of grass"
germe - warm old prussian gorme,hot
skálmē - a knife, a sword old norse skolm "short sword, knife"

So there are words from thracian in norwegian/old norse,prussian,english also.
How can you explain it?
Maybe these words have the same Indo-European roots? But that doesn’t mean that folks whose languages are distantly related to each other have the same roots ethnically speaking. With other words people can have and use common words without belong to the same 'race'.

So is 'Germe' in Kurdish (Iranic language) 'warm' / 'hot' too.
 
in Kurdish its "germ" for warm and not "germe"
 
in Kurdish its "germ" for warm and not "germe"
Are you serious? Are you goin' to give me a lesson in my native language? :LOL: What dialect do you speak??


"Germe" is "warm" in Kurdish too.


2 Examples:

Mala ma germe - our home is warm (with '-e')

Like, 'home' in Kurdish can be 'mal' and 'mala'. And in this sentence it's 'mala'. Conjugated wit '-a'

Germ buja - it's became warmer (without '-e') ('buja' and 'became' have also the same 'Indo-European roots')

Germ katija - the 'heat' arrived
 
the "e" in your example is a suffix or shortcut for the word "is" andhas nothing to do with the word itself.

Example.
Our home is cold = Mala (The a is Izaffe) ma Sar ê (the ê is suffix used as is in Kurmanci)
 
Well if thracians went to Norway,and settled there,after greeks won the Trojan war and burned down Troy did they (the thracians who manage to escape unkilled) imposed their language?
I doubt,they were fugitives so is pretty common sense that they learned the native language there (whatever old norse was spoken those times) and brought only some terms,for things that were not known there,as how happened for the word used for helm.
 
Well if thracians went to Norway,and settled there,after greeks won the Trojan war and burned down Troy did they (the thracians who manage to escape unkilled) imposed their language?
I doubt,they were fugitives so is pretty common sense that they learned the native language there (whatever old norse was spoken those times) and brought only some terms,for things that were not known there,as how happened for the word used for helm.
I think that's basically a fairy-tale. Scandinavians and Germans are just native to their homeland. These Germanic folks have some very specific haplogroups that only belong to them. Like hg. 'I1' is only native to Northern parts of Europe.

All folks in South-Scandinavia spoke Proto-Norse, close to Proto-Germanic. The first proto-IE folks that migrated into Norway were Battle-Axe warriors. With other words Scandinavians and Germanic people in Europe share the same proto-Indo-European (Battle-Axe) ancestors.

Modern Germanic tribes are actually an admixture of 3 main haplogroups: I1, R1a and R1b!

If Dacians were I1, R1a & R1b folks they were Germanic. If they missed only 1 of these haplogroups like 'I1' and were 'I2' instead they were NOT Germanic.
 
bolinthos - bull,in english
bríza "emmer-wheat, rye" Norwegian brok "kind of grass"
germe - warm old prussian gorme,hot
skálmē - a knife, a sword old norse skolm "short sword, knife"

So there are words from thracian in norwegian/old norse,prussian,english also.
How can you explain it?

I'd like to explain here what the Centum/Satem split is all about:
the three sounds in question which the split is all about are reconstructed for Proto-Indo-European as *k´ *g´ *g´h. These are called the palato-velars.

- In the Centum languages (Celtic, Germanic, Italic, Greek and Tocharian), they are merged with the so-called "plain" velars (*k, *g, *gh).

- In the Satem languages (Albanian, Armenian, Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranic) they are turned into fricative sounds (such as s, z, ʃ, etc.).

To pick some good example:

English "hundred", Breton "kant", Latin "centum", Greek "Hekaton" vs. Latvian "simts", Russian "sto", Sanskrit "satam"
English "gold" vs. Latvian "zelts" and Russian "zoloto"
Gothic "taihun", Gaulish "decametos", Latin "decem", Greek "deka" vs. Latvian "desmit", Russian "desyat", Sanskrit "dasa"

So, it's pretty clear that Dacian was a Satem language ("zalmos", "briza"). There's additionally Dacian loanwords in both Albanian and modern-day Romanian.

Oh, and by the way, Old Prussian is a Baltic language, not a Germanic one.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

This thread has been viewed 50970 times.

Back
Top