The Draco standard

[diegis]

Two:
Arrianus, Tactica 35:
'however when charging they fill with air through the wind so they are most like the beasts and even hiss when a strong wind flows through much movement.'

Ammianus Marcellinus, 16.10.7:
'... the dragons, sewn from purple covers and placed on the gilded and jewel-studded tips of spears, letting wind through an enormous opening and in that way hissing as if they had been aroused in anger and the bodies of their tails flowing in the wind.'

Very good, this is what I was refering too. Keep these quote in mind for later :evil:

Then please do tell us why this one that was found was in fact a dragon's head, which was totally the same as the name for the things, which is recorded in a lot of sources.

Not the head made the dragon, but the entire body. A dragon doesnt had necessary a lizard head, but was a made up "entity", some have horns, wings, different heads, multiple heads etc. In Iranian mythology they are described in different ways, sometime even as a wolf, sometime as a dark mist etc.
A dragon was so a type of predatory mythological animal with a serpent like body eventually.

DACIANS ISN'T GETAE. please stop referring to them as if these are two names for the same people. I also noticed that you are also describing items from the 'Bronze Age Thracians' as if these belong to the very same group. They do not, there are centuries and centuries between them.
Of course they knew that other tribes beside the Dacians used windsocks of sorts, such as the Scythians (Arrian wrote that).

What, Dacians isn't Getae now :grin: ? Thats something new, and in contradiction with pretty much any ancient or modern sources we can find. At most you can say that not all Getae (northern Thracians) was Dacians (but all Dacians was Getae). Its like saying that Spartans isn't Greeks, or Gauls isn't Celts.
And its not me describing items from the 'Bronze Age Thracians' as if these belong to the very same group, I was just quoting some historians and archaeologists, like Parvan or those from Cambridge University. Check again the source
About what Arrian wrote, he said that:
'however when charging they fill with air through the wind so they are most like the beasts and even hiss when a strong wind flows through much movement.'

It is said pretty clear, 'when charging' and 'when a strong wind flows through much movement'.
So the "draco" of those people called Scythians (they surely wasnt Scythians however, as those was long gone by the time when Arrian wrote that) is filled with air when they galloping and when they are filled by air during that movement and as the horses speed up. This isnt helpful to know the speed and direction of wind, dont you think?
Not to mention that on the Column the "draco" is used by Dacian infantry or is put near a Dacian vexilium somehwere in a forest or in a fortress.
Using it in a static position as windsock is more helpful for the enemy actually, then for those who use it.

Now tell us please where you found the evidence that the Romans, in spite of that knowledge, related this symbol to the dacians ONLY, as you claim?
Frankly, I don't see any evidence for that besides your own wishful thinking. :-(

Hmm, on Trajan Column the "draco" is used exclusevly by Dacians, and then there is coins with Dacia name on them and with a "draco" stamped on them. Thats pretty much a tight relation in the view of Romans.
I am not saying however that Romans didnt saw such standards to other, but the strongets relation they made was with Dacians/Getae

So now you are indeed claiming that nobody but the Dacians are using a draco? What new evidence has come to light that would make us believe that anyone using a windsock on Trajan's Column is a dacian because they "exclusively" use the darco? I assume you found a letter by the artist assuring us that he was only depicting Dacians and Romans?

I said that on Trajan Column the draco is used just by Dacians, yes. If you disagree with what basically everyone (and I mean scholars too here) say, and you have some extraordinary evidence that those from the Trajan Column arent Dacians but Scythians or Sarmatians or whatever, please share it with us, I am quite curious.
You can use images from the Column and we can discuss them one by one if you wish. Not to mention that we can argue more argumented against the presence of Sarmatians there for example, as Dacians used too the scale armour (I posted a while ago an archeology source about that, with findings and such) and was great archers and cavalrymen too (I can show you several quotes from ancient sources on this).
Not to say that Sarmatians arent mentioned among the enemies of Trajan, which means that their presence in that wars wasnt too important.

My opinion about "draco" is that was a symbol from the mythology of proto-indoeuropean people, existing even before the indo-europeans split and developed in independent, separate populations. Some of those population retained some of the old spirituality and others adopted something different. Possibly was even a religious war or so, and thats why in most of indo-european mythologies the supreme god (Sky-Father of Marja Gimbutas) or some hero fought against a dragon/giant serpent at some point.
Same for the wolf who is a negative presence with just few exceptions, same as the dragon. Beyond the languages they aquired over time, few of such indo-european groups (beside Dacian/Getae I includ here Dahae/Parthians and Scythians/Sarmatians, and at least partially Romans, for the wolf part at least, later for the dragon too) kept some common mythology I suppose, and for them the "dragon" (or/and the wolf) was a positive force, instead for majority it became a negative symbol, because some religious changes or something.
So, I am not saying that the draco was exclusevly Dacian, but they was the most representatives people who use it in the eyes of Romans, and have the strongest connection with it. And the draco was a symbol, not a windsock (or a windsock is some later secondary use for it, if so, as I doubt even that).

The draco was introduced in Roman army with the introduction of Dacian/Getae and Thracian auxiliars, it was even some cults very spread in Roman army, as those of Thracian and Dacian/Danubian riders. Then when Rome started to be ruled by emperors with Thracian and Dacian origins and Thraco-Dacians became a significant presence in Roman army this symbol was widspread and adopted by the entire Roman army.
I already mentioned Maximinus Trax, but you can see Galerius, an emperor of Dacian origin and who used many troops from Thracia and Dacia areas in his army. On his Arch of Triumph from Salonic his troops use the same draco.
Lactantius even said that Galerius wished to change the name of the empire, from Roman empire to Dacian empire.
Then Constantin (the Great) who was of possible Dacian origin too (I am not say he was for sure) from his father side (Moesia was a teritory inhabited mostly by Getae/Dacians and part of Getae/Dacian kingdom of Dromichaetes and Burebista) fought the final war for the Roman empire with Licinius.
Licinius was as well of Dacian origin and a childhood friend of Galerius, in fact during Galerius rule the entire tetrarchy was at some point made of Thraco-Dacian emperors (with Maximinus Daia and such).
After Constantine will defeat Licinius and he will impose Christianity as the first religion in the empire, the symbol of the "bad dragon" reappeared and developed again.
Around V-VI century AD the Thraco-Daco-Roman element became ousted in Roman Eastern empire so their old symbols are eliminated too, especially as they was opressors of Christianity at some point, and enemies for western empire sometime.
The final struggle between St George who killed the dragon with his spear and saved a girl (the origin of medieval knights tales) represent in fact a reversed "draco" standard thrown on the ground. This symbolize the cut between the old Roman army made up in large part of Thraco-Dacians and who opressed the Christians (see Galerius, the worst opressor) and the new religion that became the only one allowed under Theodosius.