Map of the geographical distribution of attested placenames with the -dava suffix, a Dacian word meaning "settlement" or "fort."
This article contains a list of reconstructed words of the ancient Dacian language. They have been restored by some linguists from attested place and personal names (toponyms and anthroponyms) from the historical region of Dacia.[1][2]
In the case of words reconstructed from onomastic evidence, the original meanings ascribed to the names in question are derived from examination of closely cognate words and placenames in other Indo-European languages, complemented by analysis of the historical evolution of such placenames.[3][4] However, the results are hypothetical and subject, in many cases, to divergent etymological interpretations.[5]
Reconstructions derived from Romanian and Albanian words that have not been attested to be Dacian or that have not been documented in Dacian territory are speculatively based on the unproven theory that Dacian constitutes the main linguistic substratum of Romanian and a closely related language to Albanian, a circular method criticised by mainstream historical linguistics.[6]
Reconstruction of words from place and personal names
Georgiev argues that one can reliably decipher the meaning of an ancient place-name in an unknown language by comparing it to its successor-names and to cognate place-names and words in other IE languages, both ancient and modern. He gives several examples of his methodology, of which one is summarised here:
The city and river (a tributary of the Danube) in eastern Romania called Cernavodă. In Slavic, the name means "black water". The same town in Antiquity was known as Άξίοπα (Axiopa) or Άξιούπολις (Axioupolis) and its river as the Άξιος (Axios). The working assumption is, therefore, that Axiopa means "black water" in Dacian. According to the known rules of formation of IE composite words, this breaks down as axi = "black" and opa or upa = "water" in Dacian (the -polis element is ignored, as it is a Greek suffix meaning "city"). The assumption is then validated by examining cognate placenames. The axi element is validated by a tributary of the Vardar called the Axios, which is today known as Crna reka (located in Republic of Macedonia "black river") and by the older Greek name for the Black Sea, Άξεινος πόντος (Axeinos pontos, later altered to the euphemism Euxeinos pontos = "Hospitable sea"). The opa/upa element is validated by the Lithuanian cognate upė ("river").[4] This etymology is questioned by Russu: Axiopa, a name attested only in Procopius' De Aedificiis, may be a corrupt form of Axiopolis.[7] Even if correct, however, Russu's objection does not invalidate the decipherment of the axi- element.
Apart from Duridanov and Georgiev, other scholars have attempted to reconstruct Dacian and Thracian words. Russu (1967) attempted to decipher Thracian and Dacian onomastic elements (placenames and personal names) by reference to presumed proto-Indo-European roots-words.[8] Georgiev considers such a methodology (known as Wurzeletymologien = "root-etymologies") to be "devoid of scientific value".[9] This is because the root-words themselves are reconstructions, which are in some cases disputed and in all cases subject to uncertainty; multiple root-words can often explain the same word; and the list of proposed IE root-words may not be complete. Reichenkron (1966)[8] assumed that so-called "substratum" words in Romanian (those whose etymology cannot be ascribed to any of the fully documented languages that have influenced Romanian: Latin, Slavic, Hungarian, Greek, Turkish etc.) are of Dacian origin. But Polomé considers that such a methodology is not reliable.[10] This is because there is no guarantee that the substratum words are, in fact, Dacian. Instead, they could derive from other, unknown or little-known tongues at some period current in Dacia or Moesia: for example, possible pre-Indo-European language(s) of the Carpathians.
Methodological problems
The methodology used by Georgiev and Duridanov has been questioned on a number of grounds, including:
The phonetic systems of Dacian and Thracian and their evolution are not reconstructed from elements derived directly from the ancient languages in question but from their approximative Greek and Latin transcripts.[11][12] For example, Greek and Latin had no dedicated graphic signs for phonemes such as č, ġ, ž, š and others. Thus, if a Thracian or Dacian word contained such a phoneme, a Greek or Latin transcript would not represent it accurately.[13] This could result in the wrong cognate being selected to decipher the Dacian name.
The etymologies that are adduced to validate the proposed Dacian and Thracian vowel- and consonant- changes (that are, in turn, used for word-reconstruction by the comparative method) are open to divergent interpretations, since the material is strictly onomastic, with the exception of Dacian plant-names and of the limited number of glosses.[14] Because of this, there are divergent and even contradictory assumptions for the phonological structure and development of the Dacian and Thracian languages.[14] Polomé (1982) notes that, in the case of personal names, the choice of etymology is often based on such assumed phonological rules.[15]
Dana argues that both Georgiev and Duridanov ignore the context of the names and start from arbitrary assumptions, such as considering a name to be of Dacian origin simply because it is attested in Dacia. In Dana's opinion, the Dacian origin of some of the names is doubtful or even excluded. Also, Duridanov's method is unreliable because most of the names he considers are unique.[16]
Dana questions the validity of the Baltic etymologies used to decipher the Dacian names.[16]
According to Messing, Duridanov's results are in contradiction with the reconstruction of a Balto-Slavic language group, as they show many parallels between Dacian and Baltic, but only a few with Slavic languages.[17] (This objection is irrelevant if Baltic and Slavic constitute separate branches of IE (i.e. "Balto-Slavic" never existed, as some linguists maintain); or if, as Duridanov argues, Dacian acquired Baltic words through long-term proximity interaction with Baltic languages, rather than through a genetic link).
Despite these objections, Georgiev and Duridanov claim a high degree of reliability for their reconstructions. However, Polomé (1982), in his survey of the state of research into paleo-Balkan languages for Cambridge Ancient History, considers that only "20–25 Dacian, and 40–45 Thracian words have had reasonable, but not certain, Indo-European etymologies proposed". [18] This compares with c. 100 Dacian words reconstructed by Duridanov, and c. 200 Thracian words by Georgiev.
(i) According to Georgiev, Dacian Axiopa was translated by Slavic successor-population into mod. name Cernavoda ("Black Water"). River Axios was similarly translated into mod. Bulg. name Crna Rijeka ("Black River")
(ii) Acc. to Parvulescu, Axios name reflects the Iranic (via the Scythian language) root a-xsei 'black, dark' .[30] (iii) Russu argues Axiopa is not a Dacian name, but a corrupt rendition of Axiopolis (a town of Scythia Minor).[7]
Ancient Greek phalos, phalios, anc. Greek balios "dappled"(< balios is considered a loan from Thracian or Illyrian; it is attested as far back as Homer's Iliad)[48]
Dacia Malvensis meant "river-bank Dacia", ref. to its situation on (north) bank of Danube. Name Latinised to Dacia Riparia or Ripensis (Latin: rīpa = "riverbank") in new province created by Aurelian on south side of Danube after evacuation of Dacia.
Alleged words reconstructed from Romanian and Albanian
Georgiev, Duridanov and Russu concur that the Dacian language constitutes the main pre-Latin substratum of the modern Romanian language. Duridanov also accepts Georgiev's theory that modern Albanian is descended from "Daco-Moesian". Where words in modern Albanian and/or Romanian can be plausibly linked to an Indo-European root and modern cognates of similar meaning, a reconstruction of the putative Dacian originals have been proposed by Duridanov, who included them in a separate list from words reconstructed from placenames.
CAVEAT: The following word-reconstructions are based on the assumption that the Albanian language is descended from "Daco-Moesian". This theory is contested by many linguists, especially Albanian, who consider the language a direct descendant of the extinct Illyrian language.[91] Thus, reconstructions based on modern Albanian words, or Romanian substratum words with Albanian cognates, may in reality represent ancient Illyrian, rather than Dacian, elements. In addition, the reconstructions below, unlike those in Table A above, are not validated by Dacian place- or personal names. The "Dacianity" of the reconstructions is therefore completely speculative, in comparison to those derived from placenames. (N.B. Even if Albanian is descended from Illyrian, the reconstructions below could nevertheless represent Dacian elements if the "Daco-Illyrian" theory - that the Dacian and Illyrian languages were closely related - is correct; or if the words below represent Illyrian borrowings from "Daco-Moesian", but not if they represent "Daco-Moesian" borrowings from Illyrian)
TABLE C: ALLEGED DACIAN WORDS RECONSTRUCTED FROM ALBANIAN AND ROMANIAN WORDS[92]
↑ Georgiev, Vladimir I.. "Thrakisch und Dakisch". Band 29/2. Teilband Sprache und Literatur (Sprachen und Schriften [Forts.]), edited by Wolfgang Haase, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 1983. p. 1180. doi:10.1515/9783110847031-015
↑ Thracian according to Detschew 1957, p.109, but Latin or Celtic according to Beševliev 1970, pp.25, 114: Gribus possibly derived from a Celtic *gravo = "sand".
↑ Thracian according to Detschew 1957, p.461, but Latin according to Beševliev 1970, p.100: squama = "scale, metal plate".
↑ Thracian according to Detschew 1957, p.459,461, related to the Thracian tribe Σκόμβροι, and to the mountain name Σκόμβρος, but Latin according to Beševliev 1970, pp.57, 111: scomber = "mackerel".
Zibelthiurdos is a Thracian god of heaven, lightning and rain, whose name is known mainly from epigraphic monuments. The only known reference to this god so far in ancient literature is in Cicero's speech against Pizon, where he is mentioned under the name Jovi Vrii. According to Cicero, Jupiter Urius had the most ancient and venerated of the barbarian temples, which was sacked by invading armies and resulted in diseases from which those afflicted never recovered.
The Dacians were the ancient Indo-European inhabitants of the cultural region of Dacia, located in the area near the Carpathian Mountains and west of the Black Sea. They are often considered a subgroup of the Thracians. This area includes mainly the present-day countries of Romania and Moldova, as well as parts of Ukraine, Eastern Serbia, Northern Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary and Southern Poland. The Dacians and the related Getae spoke the Dacian language, which has a debated relationship with the neighbouring Thracian language and may be a subgroup of it. Dacians were somewhat culturally influenced by the neighbouring Scythians and by the Celtic invaders of the 4th century BC.
Dacian is an extinct language generally believed to be a member of the Indo-European language family that was spoken in the ancient region of Dacia.
The proposed substratal elements in Romanian are mostly lexical items. The process of determining if a word is from the substratum involves comparison to Latin, languages with which Romanian came into contact, or determining if it is an internal construct. If there are no matching results, a comparison to Albanian vocabulary, Thracian remnants or Proto-Indo-European reconstructed words is made.
The Thracian language is an extinct and poorly attested language, spoken in ancient times in Southeast Europe by the Thracians. The linguistic affinities of the Thracian language are poorly understood, but it is generally agreed that it was an Indo-European language.
The origin of the Albanians has been the subject of historical, linguistic, archaeological and genetic studies. The first mention of the ethnonym Albanoi occurred in the 2nd century AD by Ptolemy describing an Illyrian tribe who lived around present-day central Albania. The first certain attestation of medieval Albanians as an ethnic group is in the 11th century, when they continuously appear in Byzantine sources.
The Getae or Gets were a Thracian-related tribe that once inhabited the regions to either side of the Lower Danube, in what is today northern Bulgaria and southern Romania. Although it is believed that the Getae were related to their westward neighbours, the Dacians, several scholars, especially in the Romanian historiography, posit that the Getae and the Dacians were the same people.
The Paleo-Balkan languages are a geographical grouping of various Indo-European languages that were spoken in the Balkans and surrounding areas in ancient times. In antiquity, Dacian, Greek, Illyrian, Messapic, Paeonian, Phrygian and Thracian were the Paleo-Balkan languages which were attested in literature. They may have included other unattested languages.
The Costoboci were a Dacian tribe located, during the Roman imperial era, between the Carpathian Mountains and the river Dniester. During the Marcomannic Wars the Costoboci invaded the Roman empire in AD 170 or 171, pillaging its Balkan provinces as far as Central Greece, until they were driven out by the Romans. Shortly afterwards, the Costoboci's territory was invaded and occupied by Vandal Hasdingi and the Costoboci disappeared from surviving historical sources, except for a mention by the late Roman Ammianus Marcellinus, writing around AD 400.
The term Thraco-Illyrian refers to a hypothesis according to which the Daco-Thracian and Illyrian languages comprise a distinct branch of Indo-European. Thraco-Illyrian is also used as a term merely implying a Thracian-Illyrian interference, mixture or sprachbund, or as a shorthand way of saying that it is not determined whether a subject is to be considered as pertaining to Thracian or Illyrian. Downgraded to a geo-linguistic concept, these languages are referred to as Paleo-Balkan.
The linguistic classification of the ancient Thracian language has long been a matter of contention and uncertainty, and there are widely varying hypotheses regarding its position among other Paleo-Balkan languages. It is not contested, however, that the Thracian languages were Indo-European languages which had acquired satem characteristics by the time they are attested.
Thracology is the scientific study of Ancient Thrace and Thracian antiquities and is a regional and thematic branch of the larger disciplines of ancient history and archaeology. A practitioner of the discipline is a Thracologist. Thracology investigates the range of ancient Thracian culture from 1000 BC up to the end of Roman rule in the 4th–7th centuries AD. It is believed 'modern' Thracology started with the work of Wilhelm Tomaschek in the late 19th century.
Dacology is a branch of Thracology which focuses on the scientific study of Dacia and Dacian antiquities and is a regional and thematic branch of the larger disciplines of ancient history and archaeology. A practitioner of the discipline is a Dacologist. Dacology investigates the range of ancient Dacian culture from c. 1000 BC up to the end of Roman rule in the 4th-7th centuries. It is directly subordinated to Thracology, since Dacians are considered a branch of the Thracians by most mainstream research and historical sources. Other theories sustain that the Daco-Thracian relation is not as strong as originally thought and as such Dacology has the potential to evolve as an independent discipline from Thracology.
Aizis was a Dacian town mentioned by Emperor Trajan in his work Dacica. Located at Dealul Ruieni, Fârliug, Caraș-Severin, Banat, Romania.
Dava was a Geto-Dacian name for a city, town or fortress. Generally, the name indicated a tribal center or an important settlement, usually fortified. Some of the Dacian settlements and the fortresses employed the Murus Dacicus traditional construction technique.
Abramea, Anna P (1994). Thrace. Idea Advertising-Marketing. ISBN9789608560918.
Asenova, Petja (1999). "Bulgarian". Handbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik. Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz. ISBN9783447039390.
Athanassakis, Apostolos N. (1999). "Okeanos: Mythic and Linguistic Origins". Proceedings of the tenth annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, Los Angeles, May 21–23, 1998. pp.95–116.
Beševliev, Veselin (1970). Zur Deutung der Kastellnamen in Prokops Werk "De Aedificiis". Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert.
Fraser, P.M. (1959). Samothrace: no. 1. The inscriptions on stone edited by Karl Lehmann, Phyllis Williams Lehmann. Pantheon Books.
Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World (2000)
Gordon, Childe (1930). The Bronze Age/With Map. Biblo-Moser. ISBN978-0819601230.
Crossland, R.A. (1982). "Linguistic problems of the Balkan area in the late prehistoric and early Classical period". In Boardman, John (ed.). The Cambridge Ancient History. Vol.III.1. Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0521224963.
Dana, Dan (2003). "Les daces dans les ostraca du désert oriental de l'Égypte. Morphologie des noms daces". Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik. 143: 166–186.
Detschew, Dimiter (1957). Die thrakischen Sprachreste. Vienna: Rudolf M. Rohrer.
Duridanov, I. (1969): Die Thrakisch- und Dakisch-Baltischen Sprachbeziehungen
Fisher, Iancu (2003). Les substrats et leur influence sur les langues romanes: la Romania du Sud-Est / Substrate und ihre Wirkung auf die romanischen Sprachen: Sudostromania in Romanische Sprachgeschichte. Mouton De Gruyter. ISBN978-3110146943.
Fol, Alexander (1996). Thracians, Celts, Illyrians and Dacians in History of Humanity: From Seventh Century B.C. to the Seventh Century A.D. Bernan Assoc. ISBN978-9231028120.
Jones, A. H. M. (1964): The Later Roman Empire, 284-602
Kitson, Peter R. (1996). "Reconstruction, typology and the "original homeland" of the Indo-Europeans". In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). Linguistic reconstruction and typology. Mouton De Gruyter. pp.183–239. ISBN978-3110149050.
Lloshi, Xhevat (1999): Albanian in Handbuch der Südosteuropa Linguistik Band 10 (online)
Messing, Gordon M. (1972). "'Thrakisch-dakische Studien, I: Die thrakisch- und dakisch-baltischen Sprachbeziehungen by Ivan Duridanov' reviewed by Gordon M. Messing Cornell University Edited by George Melville Bolling". Language. 48 (4). Linguistic Society of America: 960–963. doi:10.2307/412001. JSTOR412001.
Nandris, John (1976). The Dacian Iron Age A Comment in a European Context in Festschrift für Richard Pittioni zum siebzigsten Geburtstag. Wien, Deuticke, Horn, Berger. ISBN9783700544203.
Paliga, Sorin (1986). The social structure of the South-East European Societies in the Middle Ages. A Linguistic View. Vol.s 26–29. Linguistica.
Papazoglu, Fanula (1978). The Central Balkan Tribes in Pre-Roman Times:Triballi, Autariatae, Dardanians, Scordisci, & Moesians, translated by Mary Stansfield-Popovic. John Benjamins North America, Incorporated. ISBN9789025607937.
Parvan, Vasile (1928). Dacia. The Cambridge University Press.
Parvulescu, Adrian (1989). 'Black water' in the Thracian hidronymy Thracians and Mycenaeans: Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Thracology Rotterdam, 24–26 September 1984. Brill Academic Pub. ISBN978-9004088641.
Poghirc, Cicerone (1989). "Considerations chrono-geographiques sur l'oscillation a/o en Thrace et en Daco-Mesien" published in Thracians and Mycenaeans: Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Thracology Rotterdam, 24–26 September 1984. Brill Academic. ISBN978-0819601230.
Polomé, Edgar Charles (1982). "Balkan Languages (Illyrian, Thracian and Daco-Moesian)". Cambridge Ancient History. Vol.III.1. pp.866–888.
Posner, Rebecca; Green (1981). Trends in Romance Linguistics and Philology. Mouton De Gruyter. ISBN978-9027978868.
Rădulescu, Mircea-Mihai (1987). "The Indo-European position of Illyrian, Daco-Mysian and Thracian: A historica-methodological approach". Journal of Indo-European Studies. ISSN0092-2323.
Renfrew, Colin (1987): Archaeology and Language: the Puzzle of Indo-European Origins
Russu, Ion Iosif (1962). "Les toponymes dans la péninsule des Balkans dans le "De aedificiis"". Studii şi Cercetări Lingvistice. XIII: 393–403.
Russu, Ion Iosif (1963). "Die Ortsnamen der Balkanhalbinsel in De Aedificiis". Revue de Linguistique. VIII: 123–132.
Russu, Ion Iosif (1967). Limba traco-dacilor. Bucharest: Editura Ştiinţifică.
Russu, Ion Iosif (1969). Die Sprache der Thrako-Daker.
Solta, Georg Renatus (1980). Berücksichtigung des Substrats und des Balkanlateinischen. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
http://dnghu.org/indoeuropean.html Indo-European Etymological Dictionary – Indogermanisches Etymologisches Woerterbuch (JPokorny). A database that represents the updated text of J. Pokorny's "Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch", scanned and recognized by George Starostin (Moscow), who has also added the meanings. The database was further refurnished and corrected by A. Lubotsky.
1 Dacian kingdoms succeeding Burebista's state and preceding Decebalus' state
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
