The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 17

Dacians in Poland

User666 1 | 2
4 Mar 2015 #1
Many people seem to know that there was a Celtic presence in Poland, and sometimes like to attribute the Cotini to the highlanders (Gorale). However, given other particularities of the presence of Lepita culture in southern Poland including Krakow, and the presence of Setidava in what is the historical Polish region of Kalisz.

To be fair, Celts were not meant to be mountain people. They thrive in the fields and lowland forests. The life of the mountaineer was meant for the Carpathian and Balkan peoples. The Goral people and their brethren the Boykos, Lemkos, and Hutsuls all bear strikingly similar culture, dialect, and physical appearance that make them feel closer to each other than a Goral to say a Silesian. There are as well many ties to Romania.

The tribe of the Costoboci lived not only around Moldavia and Romania, but may have in fact originated in southern Poland. This tribe, apart from their falxmen, was known for their warriors that wielded a simple bronze axe in one hand with a shield in the other, such an axe that may remind one of a particular ciupaga that the Gorale incorporate even into their folk dances. The physical characteristics of the Slavic highlanders is also distinctly Carpathian, with strong Cromagnid and Dinaric features being prevalent. The dialects are hard to reconcile with other lowland Slavic groups, with many archaic words leading to Daco-Thracian and Illyrian origin that are difficult to translate.
Crow 146 | 9,106
4 Mar 2015 #2

This image is about main direction of Thracian migrations, along the Danube basin (only possible way of expansion). So, it is their main dirrection but from where they migrated further on all other sides of Europe. Migration took place in slow process after last glacial maximum ended, around 25.000 BC. From all European ethoses, only ethnic Slavs were directly connected to the Thracians, by ancient authors. To say, Thracians were Slavs of ancient history. Under that Thracian name they were recorded. But, Thracian name represent foreign form of original native name of Rascian, after went thru Greek/Roman transcription and after pronounced by Greeks/Romans. Later, newer name of Thracians was Sarmatians. Then finally, in last 2000 years appeared name of Slavjani. For all i have sow and founded on internet, i have concluded that all these three ethnic Slavic designations: Thracians, Sarmatians and Slavs were self given, just distorted after pronounced by foreign scholars.

No doubt that Krakow coming from Racow > K-Racow.

It is said bu some aouthors that Thracians (ancient Slavs) actually didn`t populate Europe back in 25.000 BC. No, they in fact re-populated their old realm, thanks to the fact that ice started to retreated. See, Slavic history starting in time immemorial.

Celts, Dacians, Illyrians,... etc, all were ancient Slavs.
Lyzko 29 | 7,230
4 Mar 2015 #3
Some people I know have attributed the appearance of Poles in and around the vicinity of Kraków as evidence of a Celtic influence in the Polish physiognomy. It is definitely true that there are a number of "Polish looks", not only one, and that Poles from various regions of the country look different from one another, depending upon the influence of their ancestors' origins.
Crow 146 | 9,106
5 Mar 2015 #4
have in mind that ancients (old Slavs) were people that from time immemorial lived stretched on intercontinental level. Ancients from one part of their realm to another part were exposed to various climatic and all kind of environmental specific influences. They lived in different ways of life. Some lived as nomads, some as hunter-gatherers, some as farmers, etc, etc. Then, in some circumstances, in peace or due to war, they were forced to migrate and intermix, influencing each others.

Take Dacians for example. We have clear historical data that state how Dacians and Thracians were Sarmatians.

Anyway, one can be sure that when Romans committed genocide in Dacia, many Dacians (being Sarmatians) founded permanent shelter among other Sarmatians (Polish history and legends remembered Polish Sarmatian origin).

Celtic presence in Poland

To be fair, Celts were not meant to be mountain people.

Old scholars (Romans and Greeks) recorded that Celts belonged to the Scythian family. From other sources we know that Scythians were nomadic branch of Sarmatians. By analogy, Celts were Sarmats, too. So, it is clear that ancestors of the Celts were horseman that later settled. What is interesting, actual name of Scythians in Slavic languages is SKITI (1. wanderers, 2. nomads). What is also interesting actual name of Celts is SELTI (1. nomads, 2. wanderers).

BDW, in Serbian language ethnic name of Scots means - 1. NAKOT, 2. NAROD = 1. offspring/spawn, 2. people. It is even more interesting if we know that Scots coming from the Picts who were considered Celts but also Sarmatians. Serbs (from Slavic south) consider (due to historical data and national memory) themselves to originate from both, Sarmatians and Celts. Greatest Celtic tribe ever (by Roman sources), Skordisci, was founder of the Serbian capital Belgrade, back then named as Sindidun. When you analyze word DRUID in Serbian language you realize deeper meaning of the word > DRU from DRUM = road; ID from IDEM, IĆI = walking > so one who is DRUID is the ONE WHO WALK ON THE ROAD what was main description of the ancient priest caste of the ancients.
Lyzko 29 | 7,230
5 Mar 2015 #5
An enlightening post, Crow! Many thanks:-)
Crow 146 | 9,106
5 Mar 2015 #6
Thank you

and for all i said, one just needs to google. We have internet. Slavs can finally write its own history, without waiting foreigners to write for them. Data are available and most of those data was written exactly by non -Slavs. So, Slavic history isn't distorted due to the lack of data but, because of political impact on historical science, impact on those people who were responsible to explain data.
Lyzko 29 | 7,230
5 Mar 2015 #7
The word references I found especially interesting. Regrettably, many links remain inactive and thus are hard to access:-))
8 Jul 2015 #8
As a romanian I found this to be most heartwarming, in recent decades our country has tried it's best to distance itself from our dacian ancestry and it's a shame. While being romanian does make me think of myself as not a slav the fact that we share a common bloodline and we can call each-other brothers even if we're sometimes worlds apart is evidence of the need to further unveil historical facts of this nature, the positive political implications are, dare I say, world-changing.
jon357 67 | 16,836
8 Jul 2015 #9
the positive political implications are, dare I say, world-changing.

There aren't any political implications of Iron Age European history any more. Too too too long long ago...
OP User666 1 | 2
16 Aug 2015 #10
Woah, first time looking back and it looks this got going pretty well.

Celtic and Dacian were pretty even in influence around that part of Poland. Celts being right at the basin around Krakow and Dacians being up in the mountains. Dacians also expanded even further in retaliation against the Celts such as the Boii.

Still, even with the all encompassing "Slavic" theme, it's little doubt that groups like Gorals and Hutsuls are more of their own branch like Celts than they are "mainstream" Slavs.
jon357 67 | 16,836
16 Aug 2015 #11
Remember that Celt in the continental European sense is very often used by archaeologists to describe those groups wh weren't identifiably anything else; who differed from their neighbours enough for it to be worthy of mention.

There was certainly a Celtic presence in southern and western Poland. It would be interesting to know the full geographical range though for this we must wait for archaeological finds that who something that distinguish the people from other groups.
Crow 146 | 9,106
16 Aug 2015 #12

Historical data says that both, Celts and Dacians (as well as Thracians) were Sarmatians and/or Scythians (so again Sarmatians considering that Scythians were branch of Sarmats themselves). We speak about two (many) groups of Sarmats that, same as Sarmats (ie Slavs) of our time differ from region to region. They differ in language, characteristics of local culture, etc.

You mentioned Boii. By some authors Boii comes as short form of Serboi. Serboi is again considered to be form of Sarmatian name. In that sense Boii is also some corrupted form of the Sarmatian name. Furthermore, historical data speak of tribal alliance between Boii and Scordicsi and, Scordisci in turn were greatest Celtic tribe stationed in epicenter of Samaritan European foothold- western Balkans to the Central Europe (Scordisci were founders of Serbian Capital Belgrade).

Let me show you something. This map is about one local Celtic/Sarmatian state in antiquity. So, Slavic statehood existed in antiquity.

Lyzko 29 | 7,230
16 Aug 2015 #13
Being that there was so much intercontinental transmigration during and even after the so-called "Voelkerwanderungszeit" or "tribal migration period", the presence of Dacians, Scythians and Celts throughout much of Central as well as Eastern Europe should not come as too much of a shock:-) There was the Turkish invasion of Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries, not to mention the presence for many centuries of the Etruscans in Central Italy, a people originally from as far away as the Caucuses!!
Crow 146 | 9,106
16 Aug 2015 #14
Etruscans in Central Italy, a people originally from as far away as the Caucuses!!

Etruscans called themselves Rasna and Rasena (many data on it on internet). When you know that name of Thracians (Th-racians) coming from Raska what was medieval name for Serbia (in Latin Rasciani, for Hungarians Serbs were Raci, for Poles Serbs were Racowie, Germans used to say Ratzen), you see same pattern in foreign transformation of native `RAS-` ethnic name in ethnic names of Ethruscans (Eth-ruscans) and Thracians (Th-racians).

NOTE: since time immemorial Serbians were known as `Srbi` and `Rasani`. If we take as fact that ethnic name of Serbs represent preserved local version of Sarmatian name (once universal name of all Slavs) and, if we then follow that ancient parallelism in Serbian ethnic self-designation (`Srbi` and `Rasani`), we understand why in the texts of old scholars territories of Thracians and Sarmatians overlap. We then also understand that all what was said about Thracians was said about Proto or simple old Slavs, to say- Slavs of antiquity. Thracian name, same as name of Sarmatians was once universal name of all Slavs. So, Ehtruscans were old Slavs, no doubt about it (this is supported with other proofs, too).

But why that dualism in ethnic self-designation in Serbs (`Srbi` and `Rasani`)?

It is ancient atavism, remnants of truly deep past, proof how ethnic Slavs were formed in time immemorial. For only really long period of time needs to pass that one civilization comprehend itself in that way. By many internet sources, name of Serbs for ancients meant `a lot of people`, `numerous people` (in Ukrainian you have word `posarbitsya` - to collect in English). Scholars have suggested that the Indo-European root *ser- 'to watch over, protect', akin to Latin servare 'to keep, guard, protect, preserve, observe' (applied in particular to herds and flocks of domesticated animals). Most probably that word `Ser` in old England was influenced by the ethnic name of Sarmatians who were seen as overlords. In some Caucasian languages, "Sur" means "man" (singular) with the suffix "-bi" becomes "men, people" (plural). In Armenian, Surb means "holy, saint"

On the other side, name of `Rasani`, in Serbian language stays connected with red and pink color. RUJNA color is in fact ancient Serbian term for red/pink color.

So, when ancients said they are Serbs (ie Sarmatians) they meant they are `people` (comprehending itself as numerous and important people). Yes, they had that element of self-awareness. They were aware that is their language spoken on intercontinental level (on vast territory), that they are strong people. Just look how they designated those who didn`t speak their (Sarmatian/Thracian/Slavic) language - `nemci`, meaning `mute people`, `those who don `t speak`. Our Slavic ancestors were overlords in their realm, no doubt about it.

But, when ancients said they are `Rasani` they wanted to say how are they people that is red, pink in their physical appearance. Meaning, they were aware how are they Whites. No, when think of it don`t vulgarize term `whites`. For ancient people wasn`t politically colored as we are today. They were simple people, self-aware and that what they were they were and they named it. Also, have in mind that is White people in fact truly pink people (thru their white skin you have red pigmentation). So, `Rasani` must be how ancients racially comprehended itself, of course in comparison to the rest of the world.

As for how did terms (`Srbi` and `Rasani`) survived in parallel use till the middle age and even to the modern time, that must be in connection to the fact that Western Balkan was ancient so called `Ice age refugium` for ancients, for our civilization. To say, tradition survived in old core. After old core, first migrations were in direction of Baltic (Balkan-Baltic line) along the great rivers, so thru Lusatia as new core. That is why in Lusatia also survived memory on Sarmatian name in form of Sorb.

i actually hardly can found words to tell you how are Slavs old civilization. No wonder that some authors (as Czech Jandacek) places Proto Slavs and formation of their diverse dialects even 40.000 years in past, speaking of them as true natives of Europe that shared life and competed with Neanderthals. Must be that all Whites inherit from Slavs, due to different circumstances.

Just for the record.

There is the small town in Romania, cultural center of local Serbian minority in Romania. Town is close to the Serbian border, too. Region was populated in antiquity and was one of centers (a Danube river port) of Roman province of Dacia.

Name of town is Orșova (Orshawa) what sound pretty much like Warshawa. Nearest village to the town of Orshava, have name Svinica. Considering that we speak of port, it reminded me of Świnoujście in Poland. So, logic in naming places is same.

Sarmats everywhere.
OP User666 1 | 2
1 Sep 2015 #15
What I was trying to say is, even if all of those groups are related to Slavs anyway, it's almost undeniable that Carpathian highlander groups are more Vlach than "Slavic proper".
Ziemowit 13 | 4,235
1 Sep 2015 #16
The opinion of the hellenistic scholar Dionysius of Halicarnassus (c. 30 B.C.) on the Etruscans' origins is that they were autochthonous residents of Italy. He also says the Etruscans called themselves Rasenna.
Crow 146 | 9,106
1 Sep 2015 #17
Carpathian highlander groups are more Vlach than "Slavic proper".

Vlachs themselves are sub-group of Slavs that was exposed to foreign influence (to level of the Hellenic cultural influence).

Etruscans called themselves Rasenna


It is also interesting that greatest rebel slave Spartak (Spartacus - ie Sarmatian), great slave leader against Roman oppressors, also was by old sources of the Thracian origin. So, we again here have that ancient dualism (as a rule), that something that stays in connection with Sarmatian name (Spartak) also stays closely related to the Thracian name/Thracia (Th-racia).

Home / History / Dacians in Poland
BoldItalic [quote]
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.