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

[Alanus]

Sorry, but this are modern scholars, from late XX and early XXI century, who wrote that, based on archeology, who dont lie and is above misinterpretations. I think the old view, with Goths as 100% germanic are really outdated. Well, it seem that the even older view, from ancient and medieval time, that they had a clear and strong Dacian/Getae origin (yes, probably mixed with germanic and sarmatian peoples too) are, indeed, the real one.

And i never said that Cimbrii and Teutones and Bastarnae are related with Getians/Dacians, but they are a mix of Germanic and Celtic origin, as Masagetae was a mix of Dacian/Getian and Iranian.

The old view that Goths were totally Germanic is outdated, and we know that other groups were in their mix including Sarmatians and Dacians. But your idea of a "Dacian/Getae origin" is faulty today as it was to elder historians.

Vortigern Studies is correct in noting the Teutonic-Cymbric connection. I believe the Gauls even worshiped a high god Teutates at Vermentum, aka "centre," near what is now Orleans. (I think this tidbit came from de Bello Gallico.)

Your statement that "Masagetae was a mix of Dacian/Getian and Iranian" has no cultural or historic value. The Massagetae extended from the Saka (a Persian word for the northeasten Scythians), and the Dacians were a totally different group.

Am I looking at some kind of agenda to glorify a perceived personal heritage. :? I think I am. And its full of holes and hopeful wishing, but not based on actuality.

And now to Recondicom, who seems to have a similar personal agenda, not to glorify the Dacians but another "group." :x