The Dacians: Rome\'s Greatest Enemy?

[diegis]

Hello again diegis.

Salve Frostwulf, and sorry i dont have time to answer you too detailed

The Emperor Domitian decided to restore order and organized defenses on the basis of an Upper and Lower Moesia. The following year General Cornelius Fuscus crossed the Danube and was marching on Sarmizegetusa, when he was killed in an ambush and his army massacred. pg.10-11

I will like to see a primary source talking about an ambush, not some modern interpretation, because such interpretations i can do myself too

It is suggested that Julianus based himself at Viminacium when the time came to enter Dacia, since this is the gateway to the heartland, leading to the Dacian stronghold of Sarmizegethusa. This would lead him across the Banat- on the same route that Trajan followed in 101- leading to Tapae on the south-western edge of Transylvania, where the final battle was fought, a victory for the Romans. Little is known of the details of the preliminaries of the battle, or the troops involved. The Dacians were soundly defeated, but not eradicated. Dio describes how Vezinas, next in rank to Decebalus, pretended to be dead and later escaped. The story continues with the bizarre description of how Decebalus cut down trees and placed armour on the remaining stumps so that the Romans would think they were warriors and withdraw, instead of attacking the royal residence. Nothing more is known of the fighting, save the decorations won by a centurion of II Adiutrix may have been won during the campaign. The battle of Tapae may have been fought too late in the year to pursue the Dacians right into their capital. Domitian had recieved two further Imperial salutations by September 88, and another by October, reaching a total of 17. Julianus probably thought it prudent to avoid pursuing the campaign in hostile territory in winter and Domitian may have approved or advocated plans for another attack beginning in the following spring. But before the victory could be followed up and the coup de grace delivered, another rather more immediate problem had arisen. Pg.100

The story continues with the bizarre description of how Decebalus cut down trees and placed armour on the remaining stumps so that the Romans would think they were warriors and withdraw, instead of attacking the royal residence.
This is the phrase that need to look at a bit more deeply, and which i consider is no more then Roman propaganda.
If Domitian received an Imperial salutation by September 88 it means that the battle was already fought by then, and the news reached Rome in late August or September. The winter seasons here start in late November lets say, with 1st December being considered the begining of winter
However, Tapae is at maybe two days of walk from Sarmizegetusa. Why do you think Tettius Iulianus, achieveing such a great victory and eliminating a big part of Dacian army and having his way open to the Dacian capital, just turned around and retreated back in the empire? Still having some two months maybe until the winter will come?

Most logically is that Tettius Iulianus advanced by surprise and meet some local Dacian troops (probably from garrisons in that area), gathered in a hurry by Vezina, second in comand after Decebalus, and who was probably left to protect the area. Decebalus, who usually comanded the army wasnt even present. Romans scored a tactical victory (not without suffering too losses) against that hastly assembled (and rather very small) Dacian army who fight to delay their advance and then retreated before to face the main Dacian army which probably started to gather coming from all over Dacia, under Decebalus comand.

This was enough to empower Domitian vanity who get an Imperial Salutation soon after.
Then Domitian, instead to go against Dacia to finish the business after that, switched against Marcomani. The reason isnt at all that Marcomani was some danger for Romans, but because (Dio CAssius book http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...o/67*.html

<<7 1 Domitian, wishing to requite the Quadi and the Marcomani because they had not assisted him against the Dacians, entered Pannonia with the intention of making war upon them; and he put to death the second group of envoys which had been sent by the enemy to propose terms of peace.>>

Basically Domitian tried to find a weaker oponent to win over and score some successes for himself too. He knew Dacians are too strong so he just found a whatever reason to attack Quadi and Marcomani, who not just didnt threatened the Romans but send too couple envoys to ask for peace. Actually Domitian did same thing with Suebii, when he get the throne and conquered some region in Germania, it was something more symbolically, to show he is a good comander.

Choosing an convenient adversary (not too weak, but not too strong either) was the best way to do it, before to advance to harder ones (same thing as in professional boxing if you wish, when the "new hope" for the belt isnt throw from the begining against the champion or the stronger adversaries, but start with smaller names to get experience, make a name and get self thrust)

If he would be that bend on to eliminate Dacians, and thought thats possible, he would just invade them, as Quadi and Marcomani wasnt in any situation to attack the empire.

Btw, about the peace proposal coming from Dacians, those sound like this (from same Dio Cassius)

<<5 Decebalus, the king of the Dacians, was making overtures to Domitian, promising him peace; but Domitian sent Fuscus against him with a large force. On learning of this Decebalus sent to him an embassy anew with the insulting proposal to make peace with the emperor, on condition that every Roman should elect to pay two obols to Decebalus each year; otherwise, he declared, he would make war and inflict great ills upon the Romans. >>

Interesting thing is that probably Romans accepted at the end that insulting proposal and paid to Dacians about 1% of total empire revenues.

In a sort of modern alternative history comparation was something like this:

Lets say that US for ex. in the 50'-60', had Mexic invading Texas, burning the cities there, destroying US army they find there, killing the governor and the general in charge etc. Then, US president himself arrive there, bringing troops from Vietnam, Korea (abandoning the wars there), and he manage to drive out the mexican army, and send the highest rank general of the country, with quite a big army, to invade Mexic and punish the attack. But, he is killed too, his army defeated quite bad, first division of US marines is pretty much destroyed and its flag is captured.
Then US attack again by surprise, win a tactical battle and then quickly retreat back to US. Then the president instead to prepare another attack in Mexic give the order to attack Cuba, because they didnt joined him in the war, but is defeated there too.
Then, after previously refused the insulting peace offers coming from Mexican president he hurry to ask him for peace. This one doesnt even bother to come to sign the peace and send just the prime-minister to meet the US president. Peace is signed, US agree to pay huge amounts of money to Mexic (something like 2000 $ for each american citizen), send engineers to build them tanks and aircrafts, and instructors to show them US military style, and mexican companies are allowed to come free in US and make any bussines freely, without to be bothered by IRS. The flag of that division who was captured is not returned, nor most of the war booty and even prisoners.
Then, US president celebrate his victory at Washington, dressing some poor canadians and cubanese refugees in mexican uniforms and show them as they are mexican prisoners and from the national treasure he took lots of money to make gold statues of him everywhere in US.

This is the appropiate comparation with what happened betwen Domitian and Decebalus back then. And even more, Romans was more proud and we can say even racist compared with Americans, when it comes about their glory, preeminence in the world and views and comparation with "Barbarians".

So i think is more clear now why Roman historians of that era prefered to keep silence, as Paulus Orosius said. And probably why even a rather small victory as that of Tettius Iulianus was presented as such a big one, and the number of Roman losses wasnt mentioned at all, except something like "large armies, large forces, legions lost" etc

So yes 2 legions is a large army!

I agree with Bennett(pg.88) and Goldsworthy of 9 legions. Moving men through that territory takes time, just like Tettius Julianus. The professionals I have read say that Trajan was being cautious and moving a good amount of men takes time.

Gosh my friend, if 2 legions is a large army, then 9 legions is an imense, almost incomensurable army. Dont forget quite few other historians talk about 12-14 legions.

So please allow me to consider the 5-6 legions hypotheses more appropiate of "a large army"

About moving cautious, i agree, but keep in mind that the distance from the Danube to Sarmizegetusa can be covered in maybe one week of walk (maybe even less, Legionars marched up to 40 km per day, but here is about a mountaneus area were is harder to march).
And Trajan needed up to a year to reach there, in both wars, 101-102 AD and 105-106 AD

It is well-known that the Getae and the Dacians were reputed for their military value, to which one could add the recollection of their joining Pompeis’ party.

pg.98(21)

At the end of three difficult campaigns, during which the Dacians fought with a bravery matching their reputation, Decebalus had to ask for peace.

pg.201
Georgescu, Chrisan,Berciu,Haraszti,Pascu,Grumeza, etc. etc. who say about the same thing as Lica? Have you even bothered to read their books? I already know the answer is no, because you would hardly be saying that if you had!

Trust me, i do read quite few history books here. Is not that they dont present DAcians/Getae as reputed for their military qualities. Is that many exaggerate Romans and so can't pass over an invisible border (which i think shouldnt exist) when comparing the two, and are mostly Romanophiles and dont want to "denigrate" too much the Romans