In his description of the population of the new province, Eutropius men
tions that after the conquest "Trajan ... had transferred there infinite masses from the entire Roman world to settle the fields and cities. Dacia lost all its m en in the long war of Decebal".33 The historian's words clearly imply that the native population of Dacia suffered considerable losses during the course of the long wars and that Trajan had, in essence, to repopulate the territory.
A conscious settlement policy was usually adopted for the "provincializa- tion" of freshly conquered territories in the course of which discharged sol
diers received land grants. The veterans were soon joined by their families and a number of tradesmen. If this is what had happened in the case of Dacia as well, Eutropius would not have stressed the fact so emphatically.
The real reason for the settlement is fairly evident. The area had becom e depopulated owing to the heavy losses suffered by the native population.
The fate of the native population of any newly conquered territory de
pended largely on how and after what preliminaries it came into the hands of Rome. If the province had been acquired peacefully and without
resist-33. E u tr o p iu s , Breviarium ... VIII, 6, 2.
a nee, the population suffered few losses. In Dacia, however, the situation was different. Trajan annexed the territory to the imperium after two bitter and protracted wars, at the end of a one and a half century long process.
These struggles and the occasional Roman defeats made the Dacians a hated and m uch-despised enem y.34 This im pression was only aggravated by Decebal's treacherous actions after the first Dacian war. For Rome, he was the man who broke his oaths, a man to be mistrusted at all times, for he had not observed the peace treaty. His actions subsequent to the outbreak of the new war won him no more credit. He first tried to persuade Longinus, a captured commander in the Roman army, to defect to his side, and when this attempt failed "he asked that he might receive back his territory as far as the Ister and be indemnified for all the money he had spent on the war, in return for restoring Longinus". Longinus committed suicide and Trajan was then able to reject these unacceptable terms.35 Decebal then made an abor
tive attempt to have Trajan murdered by assassins at his Moesian head
quarters.36
The deeds of Decebal for centuries determined the Roman attitude to
wards the Dacians. Little wonder, then, that after the preliminaries to the second Dacian war "the emperor wished to exterminate them utterly". We might recall here that the physical annihilation of barbarians who dared to attack the Imperium Romanum in no way posed a moral problem to Rome.
This sentiment, first voiced by the Emperor Augustus37 was later put into practice. Marcus Aurelius had, for example, contemplated the extermina
tion of the Jazyges.38 Extermination, in the Roman sense of the word, meant not only the execution of all rebels, but also that the native population was sold off as slaves, with the men drafted into the army and sent to faraway provinces. Those Dacians who had been thrown in their lot with Decebal could expect no mercy. This bleak perspective undoubtedly influenced their last desperate act — which is also depicted on Trajan's memorial column.
The Dacian ruling elite committed mass suicide. When Trajan returned to Rom e "h e gave spectacles on one hundred and twenty-three days, in the course of which ... ten thousand gladiators fought"39 — most of them prob
ably Dacian prisoners of war. According to Criton, who was a physician in the imperial court, and who participated in the wars and later wrote their history, the num ber of prisoners from the Dacian wars was extrem ely high.
Trajan, however, spared the lives of only some forty men after his final, all- decisive victory. Even if these numbers are somewhat exaggerated, they nonetheless reflect one aspect of the Dacian-Roman relationship, as well as the high toll on Dacian life.
The surviving Dacian men were drafted as auxiliary troops and were sent to Britannia and the east. Their later fate is not known. There is no evidence that after their discharge they returned to their former homeland.
34. D io n C a s s iu s , LXVII, 6.1, 6.5.
In any evaluation of the extent of the depopulation it should be borne in mind that the new province was centered on the heartland of D ecebal's kingdom, the area which had suffered the greatest losses in human life, not only because of the long wars, but also because it was these people who had remained loyal to Decebal — to the point of draining the poison cup. It was the inhabitants of this region who were massacred by the Romans. It was they who were sold into slavery, and who fled to unoccupied territories in face of the Roman conquest.
The incorporation of the native population into an administrative and territorial organization (civitas peregrina) convenient to Rome was an essen
tial point in the establishing of any new province. These civitates were at first placed under military control, although the leaders of the native popu
lation were also drafted into the administration. The administration of the civitates later passed into the hands of the tribal elite (principes) who enjoyed various privileges. The civitas system in part provided the institutional frame
w ork for romanization and in part formed the nucleus of later urban com munities. However, in contrast with other provinces, no traces of this sys
tem can be detected in Dacia. One reason is the lack of a tribal aristocracy:
this had either been eliminated by Decebal or had perished with the rest of the Dacian "nobility" during the wars. Characteristically enough, only a single tribal or ethnic name survived into the provincial period in Dacia:
the vicus Anar(torum), the village of the Anartii in northern Transylvania.40 This village, however, was inhabited not by Dacians, but by Celts who had been subdued by them. Only a single princeps is known by name: T. Aurelius Aper, who was not a Dacian but a tribal leader from Dalmatia.41 The small native population would, perhaps, explain why Rome considered the intro
duction of an administrative system designed for the dissemination of Ro
man civilization — the civitates — unnecessary for the surviving Dacians.
This situation would imply that the surviving native population took no part in the urban life that eventually led to romanization. The inscriptions from the province suggest that persons with "Thraco-Dacian" names were not represented in urban bodies and institutions.
The written sources and the archaeological evidence offer an insight into the process of the settlement ex toto orbe Romano (from the entire Roman world), to quote Eutropius. The first group of immigrants were the legion
ary veterans who already enjoyed full Roman citizenship and who arrived after the founding of Sarmizegethusa. Another group can be traced back to the legions stationed in the Rhineland, western Pannonia and Moesia; their names betray an Italian ancestry. A western Pannonian or Norican origin is rarely indicated on the inscriptions. However, the distribution of character
istic proper names clearly reveal Pannonian and Norican origins, judging by the occurrence in northern Dacia of burial rites formerly restricted to the area of Noricum and Pannonia, and by the distribution of various artifact types, the number of arrivals from those regions was fairly high.
The other group of settlers from the Middle Danubian region cam e to Dacia from Dalmatia. Various inscriptions clearly show that they arrived as 40. C1L III, 8060.
41. CIL III, 1322.
46
close-knit communities and that they were essentially resettled along tribal lines, mainly in the territorium metalli (ore territory). A segment of this group did not yet enjoy Roman citizenship but w ereperegrini. They settled in closed communities (vicus Pirustarum) in the Erchegyseg, and mining on a larger scale only began with their arrival. A few descendants of these Dalmatian, N orican and Pannonian settlers later became municipal leaders. Besides Roman citizens, the colonists from Pannonia and Noricum included also a num ber of Celts, as indicated by their names (Bonio, Bucco, Cotu, Veponius).
The military, too, contributed to the ethnic heterogeneity of the prov
ince. The auxiliary troops stationed in Dacia included a number of units organized along ethnic lines. Surprisingly enough, the proportion of Thracian names is conspicuously low in spite of the many soldiers of Thracian origin and the large mass of Balkanic immigrants. This can perhaps be attributed to the fact that the soldiers who had been recruited from nearby areas did not settle in Dacia after their discharge but returned to their former homes.
There was a large influx of people from the oriental provinces and from the southern Balkans, the Greek-speaking territories of the empire. The Ro
m ans often deployed special units, such as Palmyrian archers, in regions w ith varied topography that could only be defended with difficulty. Three units of archers were stationed in Dacia. There were other Syrian troops as well, generally archers and other Commagenian units. The proportion of im m igrants from the east, from Anatolia, rose perceptibly after the Marco- m ann wars.
The proper names which can be evaluated from the province total about three thousand. Seventy-five per cent (about two thousand) are Roman, one hundred and twenty are Illyrian, seventy are Celtic and sixty are Se
mitic (Syrian). Thracian-Dacian names number about sixty, that is, about two per cent of the entire onomastic material. These are mostly true Thracian names held by persons who had arrived from areas lying south of the Dan
ube River. Since no throughgoing attempt to distinguish Dacian names from Thracian has yet been carried out — the relatedness of the two ethnic groups is still subject to debate — these names are lumped together. It is nonethe
less conspicuous that expressly Dacian names (Bitus, Butus, D ecebalus, Diurpaneus, Sassa, Scorilo) occur not in Dacia, but in other parts of the imperium w here Dacians were taken as slaves. Names from the native population com prise about 24 per cent of the total in Noricum, where rom anization began a full century earlier than in Dacia. This would suggest that Dacian participation in the romanization of Dacia was minimal.
The settlement of populations from N oricum-Pannonia and Illyria is re
flected by the occurrence of tumulus graves in Dacia, mainly in Transylva
nia. Either a large or small mound was constructed over the ashes of the dead who were cremated on a funeral pyre. This custom was widespread in western Pannonia and in neighbouring eastern Noricum. The close ties between the two areas are reflected not only by these tumulus burials but also by characteristic N orican-Pannonian clay vessels, such as three-footed bowls, bowl-shaped lids and large straight-walled bowls deposited in these Dacian graves. A large (perhaps the largest) cemetery of these N orican- Pannonian settlers with over three hundred tumulus burials has been un
earthed at Hermany. Other cemeteries have been identified at Kalbor and
Magyarigen. In addition to earthen tumuli, burial mounds encircled by a stone wall or a "parapet" have also been found. A most impressive, early burial of this type has been uncovered at Sarmizegethusa: the huge tumulus (whose diam eter was twenty-one metres) erected by the Aurelius family over the burial of a twelve year old girl. The graves in the small cemetery at Csolnakos were encircled by a stone wall. Parallels to it have been noted in western Pannonia (Camuntum, Austria).
We know little about religious belief in the Norican-Pannonian territory aside from these burial customs. The cult of Suleviae, Epona and Hercules Magusanus was probably introduced by settlers from Celtic and Germanic territories. The spread of the cult of Silvanus in Dacia perhaps reflects the closer relations with Pannonia. The altar dedicated to Jupiter Depulsor sug
gests the presence of settlers from Poetovio in southwestern Pannonia where a number of altars erected to the "averting" Jupiter have been found; the Dacian altar was dedicated by a person with an Illyrian name.
Little is known about the tools and implements of everyday life, or about the personal ornaments and costume of the southern and eastern, mainly Syrian immigrants. Considerably more is known, however, about their be
liefs. One type of tombstone, which depicts the deceased in the midst of a funerary feast, can be traced to southern, Greek iconography. The w ide
spread distribution of marble cult images of Danubian rider gods can like
wise be traced to southern influences. Finds of this type have mostly come to light in the southern part of the province. The pottery industry of south
ern Dacia also shares numerous similarities with that of Moesia.
The number of altars and temples dedicated by the settlers of eastern origin to their local gods (diis patriis) is considerable. First among the re
vered deities was the supreme god of Doliche who was identified with Ju
piter. Altars and cult images dedicated to this particular god have com e to light all over Dacia. The Palmyrians had their own temples in Sarm izege
thusa, Micia and Porolissum. The numerous eastern deities mentioned in inscriptions also testify to the diversity and heterogeneous origins of the gods venerated by the provincial population (Jupiter Tavianus, Erusenus, Mater Troclimene, Jupiter Heliopolitanus, Azizus, Bonus Puer, Balmarcades, Nabarazes, Malagbel, Bellahamon, Benefal, Jarobolas).
Dacia was a Latin province in the sense that the language of adm inistra
tion and public life was Latin and that most inscriptions were worded in this language. The use and spread of Latin was promoted by the legionaries stationed in Dacia who had been recruited from Latin territories and by in Dacia. The same is true of the Pirustae from Dalmatia. Other settlers had arrived from territories where the administrative language was Greek. Sim i
larly to the native western colonists, some groups came from areas whose population had not been entirely hellenized. They still spoke their native
1. Gold jewellery finds from the Bronz Age, Somogyom
2. Scythian finds: 1. "Bronze bell", Gemyeszeg; 2. Bronze mirror, Makfalva
2
3. Dacian silver jewellery:
1. Torock6szentgy0rgy, the vicinity of Nagyenyed and Nagyv£rad; 2-3. Nagyk'igya Darlac and Cserbel
i
4. Coins from Dacia: 2. Coin minted at the time of the foundation of the province of Dacia;
2-3. Denarii minted at the end of the Dacian wars with personalized representations of Dacia subjugated and the Danube River; 4. Coin minted in Viminacium during the reign of Philip- pus showing Dacia and the insignia of the emperor's legions
5. Wax tablets found at Verespatak
6. Gothic pottery in Transylvania: ornate dish found at Bereck; side and bottom
7. Gepid jewellery: 1. Gold earring set with precious stones, B&nffyhunyad; 2. Gold pendant set with precious stones, NagyvSrad; 3. Ornate sword pommel, Transylvania; 4. Gold bracelet, Transylvania; 5. Gold ring, Nagyszentmikl6s; 6-7. A pair of gilt silver fibulae; 8. Gold pearls;
9. Gilt bronze fibula, NagyvArad
K 0 . 1 4 *
8. Relics from early Avar graves: 1-2. A pair of stirrups from the remains of a funeral pyre, Dics6- szentm&rton; 3. Gold earring, Transylvania; 4-6. Bridle-bit and a pair of stirrups, N6metpereg; 7. A pair of gold earrings from the grave of a high-ranking lady, Torda
tongue (e.g., the Galatae). The Palmyrian archers and their families were num erically strong and comprised a considerable portion of the popula
tion. They had their own writing system which they sometimes employed in their Dacian inscriptions. These inscriptions are extremely important in spite of their scarcity since they are lacking in other Syrian communities in Europe. Several Greek, as well as Syrian, inscriptions have been recovered from not one, but several Dacian towns. Pottery vessels and tiles inscribed in Greek or some other oriental language are also quite common. This would suggest that both languages were spoken throughout the province. Note
worthy as well is the fact that Apulum was called Chrysopolis, "gold city"
not in Latin, but in Greek, as well as the fact that the high priest of the em peror's cult was designated using Greek terminology.
The southern settlers came from Thrace, where the official language was Greek, and from Moesia where the official language was Latin. (The latter area was in fact bilingual, a Greek-Latin territory.) The Thracians from the south did not contribute to the dissemination of the Latin language. They were mostly soldiers who were compelled to speak Latin during their serv
ice in the army but whose original homeland was part of the Greek speak
ing world. They continued to use their native tongue over a long time and m aintained the use of their typical names until the early Byzantine period.
Consequently, these soldiers of Thracian origin, who in the early second century had only been under Roman administration for about sixty years, would not have spoken Latin as their native tongue in Dacia. If we accept the related ness of the Thracians and the D acians, the exam ple of the Thracians, who stubbornly remained one of the most un-romanized popu
lation of the imperium, most em phatically suggests that the process of rom anization was long and drawn out for the Dacians as well. The adop
tion of Latin by the native population cannot be documented in the prov
ince of Dacia which existed for a mere 165 years, the shortest-lived of all the provinces of the Roman Empire.
Dacia was, thus, rather heterogeneous linguistically. A linguistically uni
form community never evolved. The language most suited to this role would undoubtedly have been Latin, the official language of the province. H ow
ever, this was only spoken as a native tongue by the leading officials in the administration, army officers and the majority of soldiers serving first in the one, and later — after 167 — in the two legions stationed in the prov
ince. In the absence of strong Latin communities among the new settlers, there was lacking the precondition for the linguistic transformation of the native population.
The extent to which the native population could have been romanized was, thus, quite restricted and, in contrast to the native populations of other provinces, the government did not deem the romanization of the Dacians to be particularly important. What was the nature of this native popula
tion? The archaeological record definitely suggests that a few Dacian groups stayed behind in the province after the conquest. A few of their settlements and cemeteries have been unearthed and investigated. Their num ber is low, however, nor is the chronology of these sites secure. It is still open to debate w hether these partially excavated settlements were also occupied after the
Roman conquest. Graves that can be linked to the native population have been unearthed at Orb&zsa, Maroslekence, Mez6szopor, Radnot and Seges-
Roman conquest. Graves that can be linked to the native population have been unearthed at Orb&zsa, Maroslekence, Mez6szopor, Radnot and Seges-