Thrace

Narrowing:

****GK: My view on the other hand is that "Ancient

Scythia" is Herodotus' way of referring to the

political situation here antecedent not only to the

arrival of the "Royal" Scythians ca. 650 BC but also

prior to the Cimmerians. He used "Ancient Scythia" for

lack of a better term. It extended from the Danube to

appr. the isthmus of Perekop, therefore WEST of the

"Royal" Scythian lands of Herodotus' time. ****

 

My (H.) translation says (on disk in MSword..so traditional line reference codes are beyond my formatted copy, please excuse.) “old”..not ancient, but clearly refers to a distinct NW Pontic coastal presence beginning above the Northern most Danube connection with the Black Sea..and Eastward to a North Pontic presence. There is no doubt of western Scyth influence < after > N. Pontic consolidation.  There is no question to earlier eastern IE traffic into the Danube basin and the Carpathians. However: in my view there was no significant, defining or politically important Scythian presence west of the Dniester prior to Scyth consolidation of Cimmeria.

 

The center element of our dispute seems to be the question: Was there a Thrace North of the Danube, or was that region instead an earlier form of any sort of “Scythia”?  (Or more one than the other?) I stand by Thrace either side of the question.

 

 I have only seen one map so far; that presents itself as copied forward from pre-Roman political situations: and It unambiguously portrays Thracia  extending MOSTLY North of the Danube encompassing the Carpathians, Transylvania and all between the Carpathians, Adriatic and Black Sea western shore;  as does all other evidence. 

 

*****GK: I am not referring to a tiny Roman province,

but to a large though undefined area SOUTH OF THE

DANUBE.

 

IMO you are referring to Odryssia which is bigger than the Roman province of the name Thrace (by the inclusion also of the province(s) of Moesia and parts of Macedon and Illyricum), but only a fraction of Thrace.  But I agree part of the problem is inappropriate usage of terms, and political names applied out of time. While I offer that Thracian is more accurate than Scythian..which seem to be where you wish to take the point. So lets keep it Geographic:

 

The Carpathian to Black Sea area, N of the Danube: Did it have more in common culturally, tribally, linguistically, ethnically with people referred to Classically as:  Thracian..or Scythian?

 

As defined by Herodotus, the limited Thrace doesn‘t fit.  The population there in H’s time never approached that of the SE Corner of Anatolia he called home, and would not be remarkable for power and potential.  Your sub Danube Thrace kinda’ has to be defined at its largest potential between The Black Sea, The Aegean, The Illyrians (Which H. References) and The Danube.  Most of H’s Thracian references deal only with Persian passage against the Greeks; which Is the problem, that and Aegean stories of Thrace at the North of said Aegean limiting the perception..all too common in Classical studies of a few decades ago, without input from several disciplines.  Scythia was a peripheral focus of obvious interest to H. himself.. but the Thracian implications are still clearly there, falling incidentally between his primary Story elements: Persia, Greece and N. Pontic Scythia (He even manages to tie Egypt to Thrace J).  

 

If you check all contexts where Herodotus

speaks of Thrace, including the one where he makes his

comment about their numbers, you will find that he

nowhere knows of a Thrace North of the Danube. In fact

he even located the Getae south of the Danube.

 

There <were> Getae south of the Danube. I have already stated that Dobrodgea was primarily Getic, with Moesi and Greek…but the Getae were also north, east, and N. West of there, extensively, even when capitoled there..which seems to be the case when Darius passed through.  Now you will dismiss Tyragetae (as well as Thyssagetae and the admittedly questionable Massagetae) ? 

 

****GK  I am

quite willing to accept that by "AGATHYRSI" he meant

the Daco-Getan population NORTH of the Danube (he

localizes the Agathyrsi in Transylvania and in the

Rumanian plain west of Scythia). What is interesting

to me here is that these "Agathyrsi" are closely

related to the Scythians (Pontic Greek Foundation

Legend).******

 

Pre-Roman Dacia, and Roman Dacia are just inconvenient name confusions into Scythia?  I can’t limit my position to the Agathyrsi: I think they were one small tribal group of at least twenty five or so such groups I can list that were Getae, Dacian or other Thracian tribal groups..both banks of the Danube. They also incorporate a river name..North of the Danube..listed as Thracian by H.  in the tradition also of Tyragetae.  Unless you choose to label all IE influence moving west of the Dniester with out regard for time as Scythian; or charge anybody ever on a Horse was a Scyth:  It doesn’t work (IMO). 

 

 

****GK: But as mentioned above Herodotus knew of no

THRACE north of the Danube. And that is more than 400

years before the Romans.*******

 

1)  I think rather he assumes it to be known; and talks of unique features and customs of small groups when it pleases him while telling a very Persian story with color and a splash of Scyth. He certainly refers to the Getae as Thracian, and from a Greek view there was no difference (Dacians = Getae)  The Romans reversed this.  (The former came at them nautically from the East; the latter overland and from west and linguistic and [Thracian] cultural similarities lumped them in two piles of perspective: Dacian and Getic.)   

 

2) He discusses a traverse by Sesostris from Asia (the western extent Marked above the Pontic by Scythia AND the Dniester.)  into Europe westward from N. Pontic (marked by Thrace) while wondering about accurately about the markers for the separation between Asia, Europe (and others)..mentioning the Dniester in my interpretation of his N Pontic marker.  Then in this case he directly mentions that the traveler leaves Thrace overland to return to Egypt via Colchis “on his way”.  Now, whether Sesotris ever made the trip or no tis not the issue:  One does not Leave S the Danube, and circumnavigate the Black Sea to get south east; and one telling such a story from your view of Thrace does not state:

 

“Returning to Egypt from Thrace, he came, on his way, to the banks of the river Phasis.” (Colchis)

 

3)The “old Scythia” Reference is specific to Darius’ travel.  Darius crosses the Ister (Danube) at the Delta fork (having taken some Getae south), and moves North and east From the Delta Branch point: Through clearly Dacian customs reported of some of the tribes (Wolf people) to get to:  N. Pontic  Scythia..through named dominated Tribes and Greek cities on the Coast.   But starting < not > at Darius’ crossing point but well east at the North most delta branch mouth at the Sea. His objective is still Cimmeria, North of the Taurians, and quite well laid out by H. He may be in Odessa before he sees a Scyth, and sixty days later hasn’t pinned ‘em in.   The Delta branch bridge ( in the tale)  was certainly a good distance from the contact region.  There is not a hint that the lower Danube fronts a Scythia.  There is much river confusion in H.: but Even so he defines residences of Scyths quite clearly..between the the Danube mouth (Which runs:  “through Europe < til > Scythia” in my translation.  I still see no conflict.

 

“I shall now describe the measurements of the seashore of Scythia. Immediately that the Ister is crossed, Old Scythia begins, and continues as far as the city called Carcinitis, fronting towards the south wind and the mid-day. Here upon the same sea, there lies a mountainous tract projecting into the Pontus, which is inhabited by the Tauri, as far as what is called the Rugged Chersonese, which runs out into the sea upon the east. For the boundaries of Scythia extend on two sides to two different seas, one upon the south, and the other towards the east..”

 

4) At the Delta fork, telling his bridge guard how to time his return (Standing < NORTH >  of the Ister in H.s own tale) H. goes on:

 

“When Darius had thus spoken, he set out on his march with all speed. Before you come to Scythia, on the sea coast, lies Thrace. The land here makes a sweep, and then Scythia begins.”

 

5) Trying to exclude sub-Tribal names, or south banking the Getae won’t help. (Per H.:)

 

“The Thracians bear many names in the different regions of their country, but all of them have like usages in every respect, excepting only the Getae, the Trausi, and those who dwell above the people of Creston. Now the manners and customs of the Getae, who believe in their immortality, I have already spoken of. The Trausi in all else resemble the other Thracians,..”

 

6) He then talks of the South to North Illyrian Rivers feeding the Ister, counting the Ister as first river Boundary of Scythia counting < from > the west specifically: but limits that to delta region river confusion; but then defines North Pontic residences between named rivers for Scyths of several stripes..and their neighbors as other than Scyth. Then he lists these rivers as Thracian in Darius’ time:

 

“the Athrys, the Noes, and the Artanes, which all pass through the country of the Crobyzian Thracians.”

 

7) Although IAW H. the Getae resistance/battle with Darius was south of the Ister, it does not limit them there, and logically can’t.  Then the Scyths via H. are credited as presenting to North, East, and South potential allies; the following argument: 

 

“All the tribes of the Thracians have been brought under his sway, and among them even our next neighbours, the Getae."

 

8) The King Scythas story by H. has the hero (?) escaping his  home capitol to a Greek city, on into Thrace, pursued by Scyth forces in mass, defended by a defined Thracian Army, Armies meeting in stand off, arrayed, kings negotiating, and Scythas finally traded/beheaded:  < ALL >  with nobody ever crossing the Danube, and the Army meeting specifically limited to North of the Ister.  

 

He never defines Thrace to you satisfaction, because he had no need to and it was peripheral to his tale: He uses it in his narrative often however.  Herodotus is not going to answer the question to the resolution of our different views, nor to the satisfaction of assembled crew on list here: but he precludes nothing from the point, and IMO does < not > support the opposition beyond finding N. Pontic Scythia of personal and story interest.

 

Cu Stima;

Rex H. McTyeire

(Message over 64 KB, truncated)