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

[Rumo]

Hi R?zvan,

The writings of Herodotus survived until today, the cult of Zalmoxis didn't. Yet you seem to suggest it was rather the latter which is reflected by most authors, even though most of the "Thracian" information is more or less the same. If many different people believe the Scots are cheap (even by adding various anecdotes to support such a claim), is because they were in Scotland and carefully observed the life there and not because they promote an ethnic stereotype (influencing and influenced by traditions)?

The birth in a chapter signals the literary existence (real people are not born that way, right? :wink: ). You seem to sense a dichotomy between literary characters and real ones, however we should have in mind that both Frodo Baggings and Alexander the Great have a consistent literary dimension. We are rather ignorant of a real god or deified man named Zalmoxis in the lands of the Getae (though perhaps there was one), all we have are Greek and later stories, in which is hard to separate truth from fiction. Hartog tries no such thing, he merely details how Salmoxis is constructed and presented to Herodotus' readers.

Since I mentioned Alexander the Great, one rich tradition continued in medieval Europe, in Latin and Slavonic literature and from the latter in Romanian folklore. What you won't find in the petit dictionnaire is that Nagomudri is a Slavic calque after gymnosophistai, the Greek term for 'naked sages', which are mentioned in the accounts of Alexander's campaigns in India (by Plutarch and so many others). Would you appreciate a scholarly narrative about the real Alexander relying on such apocryphal testimonies?

As well, the quote from Julian the Apostate, i dont think is based on Herodotus, but on Traian memoirs (lost today, unfortunately) about his war against Dacians.

In Julian's Caesars there are two mentions of Zamolxis: see 309C and 327D. The second text has some points in common with a passage from Iamblichus' De Vita Pythagorica, an author who was appreciated by Julian. We have the same tradition of a slave of Pythagoras teaching the Getae the laws and about immortality.

But there are other information about Zalmoxies, from later chronicars, one being if i remember correct, that he was covered with a bear skin when was born, and that was a kind of explanation of his name, and this is an information we dont see at Herodotus from what i know.

Certainly there's information about Zalmoxis ("a whole library" as Boia suggested), but most of it not about an authentic Getan cult.
Many ancient writers invented etymologies because they believed that explaining a name is also part of understanding what is behind it. This etymology belongs to Porphyry of Tyre who also wrote that according to others Zalmoxis stands for "foreign man". Modern Romanian pseudo-scholars are no less inventive. Nicolae Densu?ianu believing that Romanian continues the ancient Dacian language asserted that Zalmoxis means "Zeul Mo?" (the old god). The metathetical form Zamolxis also allowed several etymological speculations such as the "chthonic links" with the Greek Semele and with the Slavic zemlja (enforced also by the episode of katabasis, which is rather a Pythagorean motif).

Even that inscription find from Sorin Oltean site, with that word "kaga", is put in conection with the "holly mountain" of dacians, related with zalmoxian religion, named Kogaion, so this is a material prouve as well, of his existence.

The only mention of that mountain is Strabo's. As you can see it's the same story of a freed slave of Pythagoras, spiced up with an esoteric journey to Egypt, and then living in his subterranean hideout (a cave). The position of Zalmoxis is re-interpreted from a late Hellenistic perspective, with obvious elements of stoicism and euhemerism. Sorin Olteanu indeed suggested the name Kôgaionon might be the Greek rendering of a native word derived from kaga, however in the more recent English version of his article, in footnote 2, he also doubted Slu?anschi's etymology.
A careful reading of our source reveals we have (at least) two distinct accounts - that of Zalmoxis (the slave of Pythagoras) and that of the current kings of the Getae having deified counsellors (of whom Strabo believed they still follow the doctrine of Pythagoras). Kôgaionon is a sacred mountain (and river) only for the latter Getae.
You already agreed the story about a slave of Pythagoras is not authentic (you called it "legend"). So I guess we have Strabo following this tradition and interpreting the underground place mentioned by Herodotus to be a cave, matching the other story he knew about a sacred mountain.

countless greeks and romans had all kind of contacts with dacians, even lived in Dacia, and travel back in Greece or Rome, and they will know if that such doctrine or religion doesnt exist in fact

Ovid lived in Tomis for many years and we find mentions of the Getae quite often in his poetry, but no Zalmoxis (or Zamolxis or any other form even remotely similar). The natives themselves whenever they testified for their religious beliefs in votive or funerary inscriptions they mentioned no Zalmoxis but other deities.

i know he is a psychologist, but i think he have lately a specialization in history too [...] And yes, i agree that in the past (or even now) some exaggerated the dacians realizations (mostly was not historians, and who make let say, silly afirmations with dacians reaching Japan and America, etc. )

The cultural movement known as Dacomania (or Thracomania, or Protochronism) is based on a chauvinist ideology holding the superiority (from almost any imaginable point of view) and the persistence of Dacians. Dacia was an important ancient civilization (usually most important, or second after Rome) of Europe or even Eurasia. The history of Dacians started millenia before Christ (many supporters link it to the cultures of the Neolithic and mythical prehistoric populations such as the Pelasgians) and continued in the Middle Ages (as Vlachs) or even today (a widely held belief is that Romanians are Dacians and Romanian language is nothing but the evolved Dacian, the argument being that Dacian was close to Latin or, in the most extreme case, that all linguists are wrong and Romanian is no Romance language). Their vital space, usually called "Carpatho-Danubiano-Pontic", covers most of South-Eastern Europe, sometimes extending in Central Europe, Eurasian steppe or even Greece. Much of the known history is reinterpreted so that Dacians are behind many important events and the Romanian (and often not only) folklore and mythology is considered mostly or even entirely of Dacian origin.
Some of the promoters are Napoleon S?vescu, Timotei Ursu, Ion Pachia Tatomirescu, Dan Romalo and also this Dan Oltean. They have their own institutions (Dacia Revival International Society), journals (Dacia Magazine) and congresses (The International Congress of Dacology). A funny thing is that they often adorn their names with "Ph.D." or "Prof." without saying what's their area of recognized expertise. For instance Napoleon S?vescu is a physician. They also insist on revealing the "true history" which is obscured by conspirative "official historians" working against the Romanian people.

I don't have the books of Dan Oltean (I wouldn't spend a dime on them anyway) but you can find samples of his "wisdom" in Dacia Magazine.
In "Pas?rea sufletului la daci ?i români" (The Dacian and Romanian Soul-bird) the author speculates on the ritual of cremation reflecting a Dacian belief of souls rising to heavens. Identifying a bird in some geometrical motives carved on a stone (though to this reader is unclear how that stone relates to such beliefs), Oltean concludes the soul travelled to skies as a bird. For him also Plato's words on rising souls (Phaedrus, 246A - obviously a distortion, as the author ignores the passage on souls soaring downwards) reflect a Thracian belief, very similar with the Dacian one. The last part of the article is about Romanian folklore, about funerals and birds carved in wood.
There's also the delirious "Traian, un 'conchistador' renegat" (Trajan, a repudiated 'conquistador'). Here Oltean draws parallels between Trajan, Attila, Hitler and Cortés, arguing Trajan was a robbing, blood-thirsty, pedophile, anti-Christian emperor who was rightly forgotten for a long time by history because of his excesses. According to Oltean "the Dacian treasure saved the finances of the corrupted Roman Empire. The empire was in moral and economic putrefaction after 2nd century p.Chr." He also claims the Romanian word 'troian' (snowbank) derives from the name of this 'conquistador' because he started a 'historical winter' with his wars (see also above for this tendency of creating etymologies out of nothing). One traditional carol telling the story of a certain Badea Troian (a clumsy but illustrative translation would be Mr. Snowbank) preparing to plough and to plant seeds is used as evidence for the ineptitude of Romanian peasants (allegedly believing they should plough in December) misguided by such a bad ruler!
There are several other articles by him on Dacian fortifications in mountains, with speculations based on old walls discovered here and there, but lacking any archaeological investigation or any other attempt of dating the finds!
I haven't read what he wrote about Dacian priests hidden in mountains and performing secret Zalmoxianic rituals. However I guess I read enough to conclude his argumentation can't improve. This belief of mine is sealed by Dan Dana's negative review.

stuff from mythology and folklore (who, as i said, have deep roots in some dacian ones)

For several years at the International Congress on Medieval Studies there are few presentations on Dacians and Romanians, many perspectives coming from mythology and folklore ("Thracian Influence and Contributions to the Greek Mythology as Reflected in the Romanian Culture and Art", "Some Relevant Aspects and Spiritual Particularities of the Thraco-Dacian Medicine", "Some Consideration about Cultural and Spiritual Life of Old Daco-Roman Transylvania", "Daco-Roman Roots of the Romanian Christmas Traditions, Colinde, and Legends" etc.). All these were denounced (the text is in English and Romanian) by a group of Romanian scholars, but "freedom of speech" prevailed. According to these scholars the materials of S?vescu & Co are "nationalist exaggerations", part of the "doctrine known as 'protochronism'" promoting a "particularly pernicious, 'nativist' discourse", "hostile to ethnic minorities and cultural exchange" and they "have nothing to do with the principles of scholarly exchange". You should also note that Sorin Olteanu added post-factum his name on that petition against this "shameful doctrine".
The above materials by Dan Oltean confirm this verdict.