Getae and Dacians? Are they the same? Or is this unknowable?

[Alanus]

Hailog, Diegis

Good to hear from you. Let's go over a few points of interest:

I might disagree with gothic linguistic influence in north of Danube, since clearly the superior civilization was dacians, both cultural and material, even after the kingdom of Decebalus was distroyed and a part of Dacia was transformed in roman province...

I believe the "Gothic language influence" north of the Danube was probably only within the Guitilda, the gens itself, and not in the general population outside the gens. I do agree that the Dacian culture was more civilized than what see in the Goths. But the Dacian infrastructure was mostly destroyed first by Trajan and then almost immediatly finished-off by the raiding Sauromatae, who actually arrived before the Goths. So, in this case can we blame the Goths? Probably not.

And, as an interesting comparition, there is a kind of reversed "Getica", the "Gesta Normanorum", where this time a small group of dacian warriors migrate from Dacia to the north under leadership of Rollo (remaind me the names of some dacian kings as Roles and Oroles), where they put the bases of normans. Because of this fact (or legend) Denmark was called for a period Dacia, and Carol Lundius, from Uppsalla university write somewhere in XVII century if i remember corect, a book about Zalmoxes, the first legislator of Getae, making the same conection of getae/dacians and Sweden/Gotland areas. Should we believe this tradition as well then?

Caral Lundius sounds like quite the character. Imaginative. However he was writing a 17th-century quasi-legendary book about a guy who dropped out of candy wrapper. I don't think its analogous to the Getica.

Dont get me wrong, i fully agree that goths had a germanic part, which pretty much keep many of its traditions, but they was very mixed with other peoples, who as well keep their traditions, and as well is hard to see what is real and what is not in Jordanes writing, who, as Justin and Rumo said (and me previous) is very possible to inspire from roman legend of Eneas, to write something similar (goths coming from a far and exotic place) to impress the roman audience. So, at least for me, is hard to say anything as 100 % sure.

I certainly agree with most of that. The Germanic element appears to have kept their traditions (and gods) intact; and other cultures that homogonized with the Goths appear to have done likewise. That's why we find the varying burial rites side by side. The crucial factor only arrived with Christianity, which threatened to pacify the Gothic hero-volk, change him into a nice "flower child" as it were. This is the way Aoric perceived it and the reason he began torching people.

I disagree with Justin and Rumo (and I guess you too) claiming it was "possible" that the Roman legend of Aeneas was the inspiration for the Scandia element. Yes, it's "possible" but highly "improbable." I would call it a "reacher." With a scenario like that, you chaps can sit down to lunch with Wilson, Blackett, Littleton, Malcor, and Davis-Kimball. The Scandia connection is found in totally independent sources, yet all arrive from Scandian culture. Like I said, the ringer is the sword Tyrfing in the Hervar Saga. To claim that Vergil was read by the Icelanders in the period when the Hervar Saga was a night's entertainment is a "incredibly long reacher." It's a lot like claiming Geats really enjoyed a quiet game of tidilly-winks over a good brawl and a swilling horn of mead. Like King Hedric reading Keats-- "Oh, gwacious yes. Absowutely thwilling!" :roll: