Why were the dacians so autistic /his/? They literally in the

Were the Dacians Indoeuropeans?

>>2040424
yes

>>2038658


tfw Dacians will never call a crusade in the name of Zalmoxis

>>2038658
IMHO we lack the numbers to actually determine what caused what.

But according to what sources there are, the Dacians were pretty balls-out fearless, aggressive and borderline ignorant of death, all of which probably did not make them more likely to avoid a conflict they might lose.

Plus, there's the question of whether the Romans really would've ever left them alone.

File: dacia.png (117KB, 439x524px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 439x524px

>>2038658
>They annoyed Rome so hard that Rome built one of the longest ancient bridges over the Danube just to smack dacian ass.

I don't think you get it. Roman diplomacy was famously based on creating false pretexts for war and smacking down potential threats on their borders, or more commonly, throwing a shit ton of gold at the problem and having the barbarians fuck each other up for them. The Dacians are the only group that managed to create a semi-civilized kingdom on the northern borders of the Roman Empire. It is unsurprising that the Romans destroyed them to take their incredible gold mines.

>>2040492
>Plus, there's the question of whether the Romans really would've ever left them alone.
Worst case scenario, they would have made Dacia a client state.

>>2041088
>Worst case scenario, they would have made Dacia a client state.

That wouldn't have been bad at all. It actually would have been a very sound move if you look at the big picture of the Roman Empire's fortunes on the Danubian frontier. On the eastern frontier strong client states like the Ghassanids were incredibly useful in helping protect the Empire. On the Danube the Romans were faced with very hostile tribes like Sarmatian Iazyges. With a strong client Dacian kingdom beyond the river Rome wouldn't have had to put so many legions there, and could have better protected Gaul. Dacia would have survived with a high degree of its own culture intact.

>>2040956
>>2041088
Nah, best case scenario, they would have not killed them long enough for them to transform into a buffer-state for when half of Eurasia decided to invade.

>>2041120
>On the eastern frontier strong client states like the Ghassanids were incredibly useful in helping protect the Empire.
Yeah, but the eastern romans also disarmed the armenians that kept the east secure because they were too powerful, which made the turks invasion easier.

>>2041138
Well it was obviously a fine balancing act. Plus Armenia was a liability in some ways too due to the constant fighting over who got to put the new king on the throne, Persia or Rome.

>>2041125
But that's basically what Rome did to migrating Eurasians: settled them in fallow land along the frontier, in essence renting the land in exchange for a self-organizing border patrol and obligatory quota of fighting men.

Problem was that Romans treated them like shit and used them as cannon fodder without the Romanization that had defined their previous conquests, and people can only be pushed around for so long before they revolt.

Another weird thing about Dacians was that they were the last to get conquered by Romans and the first to shake off their rule. During some 160 years of Roman rule Dacians completely forgot their original native language, accepting Latin instead. This is weird because it was unprecedented, no other ethnicity in Roman Empire fully abandoned their language, culture and beliefs in such a short span. This is why Romanians today speak somewhat altered version of Latin.

Makes you wonder if Romans really cucked the Dacians that hard to cause this.

>>2041731
I watched a documentary a few days ago that claimed that Dacian and Latin are actually two languages coming from the same root.

IMHO that's just a Romanian retcon, but who knows.

>>2041125
Had they left dacians alone or made them into a client state they would've migrated into the west come the huns, and maybe today Dacia would still exist, but in spain or some shit

>>2042665
Whoa

>>2042631
>Dacian and Latin are actually two languages coming from the same root

That's propaganda of shady origins no serious Romanian takes seriously. Dacian was not directly related to Latin, it wasn't even in the same group (satem not centum)
It can only be speculated that it had similarities with Albanian and Baltic languages.