Dacians - Material Culture

Material Culture

See also: Thracology, Dacology, and Romanian archaeology See also categories: Dacian archaeology and Museums of Dacia

According to archaeological findings, the cradle of the Dacian culture is considered to be north of the Danube towards the Carpathian mountains, in the modern-day historical Romanian province of Muntenia. It is identified as an evolution of the Iron Age Basarabi culture. The earlier Iron Age Basarabi evidence in the northern lower Danube area connects to the iron-using Ferigile-Birsesti group. This is an archaeological manifestation of the historical Getae who, along with the Agathyrsae, are one of a number of tribal formations recorded by Herodotus.

Specific Dacian material culture includes: wheel-turned pottery that is generally plain but with distinctive elite wares, massive silver dress fibulae, precious metal plate, ashlar masonry, fortifications, upland sanctuaries with horseshoe-shaped precincts, and decorated clay heart altars at settlement sites.

There are difficulties correlating funerary monuments chronologically with Dacian settlements; a small number of inhumations are known, along with cremation pits, and isolated rich burials as at Cugir.

From the point of view of archaeology, "free Dacians" are attested by the Puchov culture (in which there are Celtic elements) and Lipiţa culture to the east of the Carpathians. The Lipiţa culture has a Dacian/North Thracian origin. This North Thracian population was dominated by strong Celtic influences, or had simply absorbed Celtic ethnic components. Lipiţa culture has been linked to the Dacian tribe of Costoboci.

Dacian burial ritual continued under Roman occupation, and into the post-Roman period..

Read more about this topic:  Dacians

Famous quotes containing the words material and/or culture:

    I wish all men to be free. I wish the material prosperity of the already free which I feel sure the extinction of slavery would bring.
    Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865)

    Any historian of the literature of the modern age will take virtually for granted the adversary intention, the actually subversive intention, that characterizes modern writing—he will perceive its clear purpose of detaching the reader from the habits of thought and feeling that the larger culture imposes, of giving him a ground and a vantage point from which to judge and condemn, and perhaps revise, the culture that produces him.
    Lionel Trilling (1905–1975)