The Getae or Getai ( or , or ;“Getae.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Getae Ancient Greek: Γέται; also Getans) were a large nation who inhabited the regions to either side of the Lower Danube in what is today northern Bulgaria and southern Romania, throughout much of Classical Antiquity. The main source of information about the Getae are Greek and Roman chroniclers, who write that the Getae were closely related to the neighbouring Thracians to the south and Dacians to the north. Cassius Dio writes that the Getae are the same people as the Dacians, Getae being the Greek name for the Dacians. Modern scholars continue to debate the details of these relationships.
The Getae first appear in historical records as fierce opponents of the Persian invasion in 513 BC, as described by the early Greek historian Herodotus. They faded out of historical records during the Roman Empire, when many appear to have become Romans, and others north of the Danube were gradually overwhelmed by other peoples moving from the north and east towards the Roman frontier.
Ethnonym The ethnonym Getae () was first used by Herodotus. The root was also used for the Tyragetae, Thyssagetae, Massagetae and others.
Getae and Dacians
Ancient sources
Strabo stated in his Geographica ( 7BC – 20AD) wrote that the term "Dacian" was used by some people to refer to the western part of the Getae who lived north of the Danube "towards Germania and the sources of the Danube", and the other Getae lived in the eastern parts, towards the Black Sea, both south and north of the Danube. According to him, the Dacians and Getae spoke the same language, after stating the same about Getae and Thracians.
In his time, Strabo believed that the lands of these western Getae stretched north of the Danube to the boundary of Germania, embracing a part of the mountains of the Hercynian Forest where the Suevi lived. From here their lands stretched very far to east of the Carpathians, to the lands of the Tyragetae, who lived near the Dniester, although he cautioned that the precise boundaries were not known to him.
Pliny the Elder, in his Naturalis Historia (Natural History), c.77–79AD, refers to "the Getae, by the Romans called Daci".
Appian, who began writing his Roman History under Antoninus Pius, Roman Emperor from 138 to 161, noted: "[B]ut going beyond these rivers in places they rule some of the Celts over the Rhine and the Getae over the Danube, whom they call Dacians".
Justin, the 3rd century AD Latin historian, wrote in his Epitome of Pompeius Trogus that Dacians are spoken of as descendants of the Getae: "Daci quoque suboles Getarum sunt" (The Dacians as well are a scion of the Getae).
In his Roman History (c.200AD), Cassius Dio added: "I call the people Dacians, the name used by the natives themselves as well as by the Romans, though I am not ignorant that some Greek writers refer to them as Getae, whether that is the right term or not...".
Modern interpretations There is a dispute among scholars about the relations between the Getae and Dacians, and this dispute also covers the interpretation of ancient sources. Some historians such as Ronald Arthur Crossland state that even Ancient Greeks used the two designations "interchangeable or with some confusion". Thus, it is generally considered that the two groups were related to a certain degree; J. J. Wilkes mentions "the Getae of the Dobrudja, who were akin to the Dacians"; (p. 562) the exact relation is a matter of controversy.
Same people
Strabo, as well as other ancient sources, led some modern historians to consider that, if the Thracian ethnic group should be divided, one of this divisions should be the "Daco-Getae". See p. 364, n. 41: "If there is any justification for dividing the Thracian ethnic group, then, unlike V. Georgiev who suggests splitting it into the Thraco-Getae and the Daco-Mysi, I consider a division into the Thraco-Mysi and the Daco-Getae the more likely." The linguist Ivan Duridanov also identified a "Dacian linguistic area" in Dacia, Scythia Minor, Lower Moesia, and Upper Moesia.
Romanian scholars generally went further with the identification, historian Constantin C. Giurescu claiming the two were identical. "They (Dacians and Getae) are two names for the same people [...] divided in a large number of tribes". See also the hypothesis of a Daco-Moesian language / dialectal area supported by linguists like Vladimir Georgiev, Ivan Duridanov and Sorin Olteanu. The archaeologist Mircea Babeș spoke of a "veritable ethno-cultural unity" between the Getae and the Dacians. According to Glanville Price, the account of the Greek geographer Strabo shows that the Getae and the Dacians were one and the same people., p. 120 Others who support the identity between Getae and Dacians with ancient sources include freelance writer James Minahan and Catherine B. Avery, who claim the people whom the Greek called Getae were called Daci by the Romans. This same belief is stated by some British historians such as David Sandler Berkowitz and Philip Matyszak. The Bulgarian historian and thracologist Alexander Fol considers that the Getae became known as "Dacians" in Greek and Latin in the writings of Caesar, Strabo and Pliny the Elder, as Roman observers adopted the name of the Dacian tribe to refer to all the unconquered inhabitants north of the Danube. Also, Edward Bunbury believed the name of Getae, by which they were originally known to the Greeks on the Euxine, was always retained by the latter in common usage: while that of Dacians, whatever be its origin, was that by which the more western tribes, adjoining the Pannonians, first became known to the Romans. Some scholars consider the Getae and Dacians to be the same people at different stages of their history and discuss their culture as Geto-Dacian.
Same language, distinct people Historian and archaeologist Alexandru Vulpe found a remarkable uniformity of the Geto-Dacian culture; however, he is one of the few Romanian archaeologists to make a clear distinction between the Getae and Dacians, arguing against the traditional position of the Romanian historiography that considered the two people the same. Nevertheless, he chose to use the term "Geto-Dacians" as a conventional concept for the Thracian tribes inhabiting the future territory of Romania, not necessarily meaning an "absolute ethnic, linguistic or historical unity".
Crossland suggested the two designations may refer to two groups of a "linguistically homogeneous people" that had come to historical prominence at two distinct periods of time. He also compared the probable linguistic situation with the relation between modern Norwegian and Danish languages. In chapter "20c Linguistic problems of the Balkan area", at page 838, Ronald Crossland argues "it may be the distinction made by Greeks and Romans between the Getae and Daci, for example, reflected the importance of different sections of a linguistically homogenous people at different times". He furthermore recalls Strabo's testimony and Georgiev's hypothesis for a 'Thraco-Dacian' language. Paul Lachlan MacKendrick considered the two as "branches" of the same tribe, speaking two dialects of a common language. "The natives with whom we shall be concerned in this chapter are the Getae of Muntenia and Moldavia in the eastern steppes, and the Dacians of the Carpathian Mountains. Herodotus calls them 'the bravest and the justest of the Thracians,' and they were in fact two branches of the same tribe, speaking two dialects of the same Indo-European language." (p. 45)
The Romanian historian of ideas and historiographer Lucian Boia stated: "At a certain point, the phrase Geto-Dacian was coined in the Romanian historiography to suggest a unity of Getae and Dacians". Lucian Boia took a sceptical position, arguing the ancient writers distinguished among the two people, treating them as two distinct groups of the Thracian ethnos. Boia contended that it would be naive to assume Strabo knew the Thracian dialects so well, alleging that Strabo had "no competence in the field of Thracian dialects". The latter claim is contested, some studies attesting Strabo's reliability and sources. The author concluded Strabo's claim sums an experience following of many centuries of neighbourhood and cultural interferences between the Greeks and the Thracian tribes There is no reason to disregard Strabo's belief that the Daci and the Getae spoke the same language. Boia also stressed that some Romanian authors cited Strabo indiscriminately.
A similar position was adopted by Romanian historian and archaeologist G. A. Niculescu, who also criticized the Romanian historiography and the archaeological interpretation, particularly on the "Geto-Dacian" culture. He dedicates a large part of his assessment to the archaeology of "Geto-Dacians" and he concludes that with few exceptions "the archaeological interpretations [...] are following G. Kossinna’s concepts of culture, archaeology and ethnicity". In his opinion, Alexandru Vulpe saw ancient people as modern nations, leading the latter to interpret the common language as a sign of a common people, despite Strabo making a distinction between the two.
History
7th – 4th centuries BC From the 7th century BC onwards, the Getae came into economic and cultural contact with the Greeks, who were establishing colonies on the western side of Pontus Euxinus, nowadays the Black Sea. The Getae are mentioned for the first time together in Herodotus in his narrative of the Scythian campaign of Darius I in 513BC, during which the latter conquered the Getae.The Cambridge Ancient History, Volume 10 - Persia, Greece, and the Western Mediterranean Cambridge University Press, 1982. p 494 According to Herodotus, the Getae differed from other Thracian tribes in their religion, centered around the god (daimon) Zalmoxis whom some of the Getae called Gebeleizis.Herodotus, the Histories. Edited by Paul Cartledge. Translated by Tom Holland, Penguin Books, 2015. Page 296 - 297
Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BC, the Getae were mostly under the rule of the flourishing Odrysian kingdom. During this time, the Getae provided military services and became famous for their cavalry. After the disintegration of the Odrysian kingdom, smaller Getic principalities began to consolidate themselves.
Prosperity Before setting out on his Persian expedition, Alexander the Great defeated the Getae and razed one of their settlements.Arrian. Anabasis, Book IA. "The Getae did not sustain even the first charge of the cavalry; for Alexander’s audacity seemed incredible to them, in having thus easily crossed the Ister, the largest of rivers, in a single night, without throwing a bridge over the stream. Terrible to them also was the closely locked order of the phalanx, and violent the charge of the cavalry. At first they fled for refuge into their city, which was distant about a parasang from the Ister; but when they saw that Alexander was leading his phalanx carefully along the side of the river, to prevent his infantry being anywhere surrounded by the Getae lying in ambush, but that he was sending his cavalry straight on, they again abandoned the city, because it was badly fortified." In 313BC, the Getae formed an alliance with Callatis, Odessos, and other western Pontic Greek colonies against Lysimachus, who held a fortress at Tirizis (modern Kaliakra).Strabo. Geography, 7.6.1. "On this coast-line is Cape Tirizis, a stronghold, which Lysimachus once used as a treasury."