Coordinates: 45.7000°N 26.

5000°E

Roman Dacia
Roman Dacia (also Dacia Traiana "Trajan Dacia" or Dacia Felix "Fertile/Happy
Dacia") was a province of the Roman Empire from 106 to 274–275 AD. Its PROVINCIA DACIA
territory consisted of eastern and south-eastern Transylvania, the Banat and Ἐπαρχία Δακίας
Oltenia (regions of modern Romania). It was from the very beginning organized
Province of the Roman Empire
as an imperial province, fitting a border area, and remained so throughout the
Roman occupation. Historians' estimates of the population of Roman Dacia range ← 107–275
from 650,000 to 1,200,000.[1]

The conquest of Dacia was completed by Emperor Trajan (98–117) after two
major campaigns against Decebalus' Dacian kingdom. The Romans did not
occupy the entirety of the old Dacian kingdom, as the greater part of Moldavia,
together with Maramureș and Crișana, was ruled by Free Dacians even after the
Roman conquest. In 119, the Roman province was divided into two departments:
Dacia Superior (Upper Dacia) and Dacia Inferior (Lower Dacia; later named
Dacia Malvensis). In 124 (or around 158), Dacia Superior was divided into two
provinces: Dacia Apulensis and Dacia Porolissensis. During the Marcomannic
Wars the military and judicial administration was unified under the command of
one governor, with another two senators (the legati legionis) as his subordinates; Roman province of Dacia (125 AD)
the province was calledtres Daciae (Three Dacias) or simply Dacia.
Capital Ulpia Traiana
The Roman authorities undertook a massive and organized colonization of Dacia. Sarmizegetusa
New mines were opened and ore extraction intensified, while agriculture, stock Historical era Classical
breeding, and commerce flourished in the province. Dacia began to supply grain Antiquity
not only to the military personnel stationed in the province but also to the rest of • Annexed by 107
the Balkan area. It became an urban province, with about ten cities known, eight
Trajan
• Withdrawal by 275
of which held the highest rank of colonia, though the number of cities was fewer
Roman Emperor
than in the region's other provinces. All the cities developed from old military Aurelian
camps. Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, the seat of the imperial procurator (finance
Today part of Romania
officer) for all the three subdivisions, was the financial, religious, and legislative
center of the province. Apulum, where the military governor of the three
Serbia
subdivisions had his headquarters, was not simply the greatest city within the
province, but one of the biggest across the whole Danubian frontier
.

There were military and political threats from the beginning of Roman Dacia's existence. Free Dacians who bordered the province
were the first adversary, who, after allying themselves with the Sarmatians, hammered the province during the reign of Marcus
Aurelius. Following a calmer period covering the reigns of Commodus through to Caracalla (180–217 AD), the province was once
again beset by invaders, this time the Carpi, a Dacian tribe in league with the newly arrived Goths, who in time became a serious
difficulty for the empire. Finding it increasingly difficult to retain Dacia, the emperors were forced to abandon the province by the
270s, making it the first of Rome's long-term possessions to be abandoned.[2] Dacia was devastated by the Germanic tribes (Goths,
Taifali, Bastarns) together with the Carpi in 248–250, by the Carpi and Goths in 258 and 263, and by the Goths and Heruli in 267 and
269.[3][4] Ancient sources implied that Dacia was virtually lost during the reign of Gallienus (253–268), but they also report that it
was Aurelian (270–275) who relinquished Dacia Traiana. He evacuated his troops and civilian administration from Dacia, and
founded Dacia Aureliana with its capital at Serdica in Lower Moesia.
The fate of the Romanized population of the former province of Dacia Traiana has become subject of spirited controversy. One
theory holds that the Latin language spoken in ancient Dacia, where Romania was to be formed in the future, gradually turned into
Romanian; in parallel, a new people—the Romanians—were formed from the Daco-Romans (the Romanized population of Dacia
Traiana). The opposing theory argues that the Romanians descended from the Romanized population of the Roman provinces of the
Balkan Peninsula.

Contents
Dacian Kingdom and the Roman Empire
Dacia under the Antonine and Severan emperors (106–235)
Establishment (106–117)
First re-organizations (117–138)
Consolidation (138–161)
Marcomannic Wars and their effects (161–193)
Revival under the Severans (193–235)
Life in Roman Dacia
Native Dacians
Colonists
Roman army in Dacia
Settlements
Economy
Religion
Last decades of Dacia Traiana (235–271/275)
After the Roman withdrawal
Settlement of the Tervingi
Late Roman incursions
Controversy over the fate of the Daco-Romans
See also
Footnotes
References
Sources
Ancient
Modern
External links

Dacian Kingdom and the Roman Empire

The Dacians and the Getae frequently interacted with the Romans prior to
Dacia's incorporation into the Roman Empire.[5] However, Roman attention on
the area around the lower Danube was sharpened when Burebista[5] (82–44
BC)[6] unified the native tribes and began an aggressive campaign of
expansion. His kingdom extended to Pannonia in the west and reached the
Black Sea to the east, while to the south his authority extended into the
Balkans.[7]

By 74 BC,[7] the Roman legions under Gaius Scribonius Curio reached the
Dacian Kingdom around 100 AD, before
the Roman conquest. lower Danube and proceeded to come into contact with the Dacians.[8] Roman
concern over the rising power and influence of Burebista was amplified when
he began to play an active part in Roman politics. His last minute decision just
before the Battle of Pharsalus to participate in the Roman Republic's civil war by supporting Pompey meant that once the Pompeians
were dealt with, Julius Caesar would turn his eye towards Dacia.[9] As part of Caesar's planned Parthian campaign of 44 BC, he
planned to cross into Dacia and eliminate Burebista, thereby hopefully causing the breakup of his kingdom.[10] Although the planned
expedition into Dacia did not happen due to Caesar's assassination, Burebista failed to bring about any true unification of the tribes he
ruled. Following a plot which saw him assassinated, his kingdom fractured into four distinct political entities, later becoming five,
each ruled by minor kings.[11][12]

From the death of Burebista to the rise of Decebalus, Roman forces continued to clash against the Dacians and the Getae.[5] Constant
raiding by the tribes into the adjacent provinces of Moesia and Pannonia caused the local governors and the emperors to undertake a
number of punitive actions against the Dacians.[5] Yet for all this, there existed a measure of social, diplomatic, and political
interaction between the Roman Empire and the Dacians during much of the late pre-Roman period.[5] This saw the occasional
granting of favoured status to the Dacians in the manner of being identified as amicii et socii – friends and allies– of Rome, although
by the time of Octavianus this was tied up with the personal patronage of important Roman individuals.[5] An example of this was
seen in Octavianus's actions during his conflict with Marcus Antonius. Seeking to obtain an ally who could threaten Antonius's
European provinces, in 35 BC Octavianus offered an alliance with the Dacians, whereby he would marry the daughter of the Dacian
, Julia.[13][14]
King, Cotiso, and in exchange Cotiso would wed Octavianus' daughter

Although it is believed that the custom of providing royal hostages to the Romans may
have commenced sometime during the first half of the 1st century BC, it was certainly
occurring by Octavianus's reign and it continued to be practised during the late pre-
Roman period.[15] On the flip side, ancient sources have attested to the presence of
Roman merchants and artisans in Dacia, while the region also served as a haven for
runaway Roman slaves.[15] This cultural and mercantile exchange saw the gradual
spread of Roman influence throughout the region, most clearly seen in the area around
the Orăştie Mountains.[15]

The arrival of the Flavian dynasty, in particular the accession of the emperor Domitian,
saw an escalation in the level of conflict along the lower and middle Danube.[16] In
approximately 84 or 85 AD the Dacians, led by King Decebalus, crossed the Danube
into Moesia, wreaking havoc and killing the Moesian governor Gaius Oppius
Sabinus.[17] Domitian responded by reorganising Moesia into Moesia Inferior and
Trajan's Column (1820) Moesia Superior and launching a war against Decebalus. Unable to finish the war due to
troubles on the German frontier, Domitian concluded a treaty with the Dacians that was
heavily criticized at the time.[18] Yet this episode was merely a prelude to the emperor
Trajans wars of conquest in Dacia.[16] Trajan led the Roman legions across the Danube,
penetrating Dacia and focusing on the important area around the Orăştie Mountains.[19]
In 102,[20] after a series of engagements, negotiations led to a peace settlement where
Decebalus agreed to demolish his forts while allowing the presence of a Roman garrison
at Sarmizegetusa Regia (Grădiștea Muncelului, Romania) to ensure Dacian compliance
with the treaty.[19] Trajan also ordered his engineer, Apollodorus of Damascus,[21] to
design and build a bridge across the Danubeat Drobeta.[20]
Trajan receives homage from a
Trajan's second Dacian campaign in 105–106 was very specific in its aim of expansion
Dacian chieftain who has
betrayed Decebalus. and conquest.[19] The offensive targeted Sarmizegetusa Regia.[22] The Romans besieged
Decebalus' capital, which surrendered and was destroyed.[20] The Dacian king and a
handful of his followers withdrew into the mountains, but their resistance was short-
lived and Decebalus committed suicide.[23] Other Dacian nobles, however, were either captured or chose to surrender.[24] One of
those who surrendered revealed the location of the Dacian royal treasury, which was of enormous value: 500,000 pounds (226,800
kilograms) of gold and 1,000,000 pounds (453,600 kilograms) ofsilver.[24]
 It is an excellent idea of yours to write about the Dacian war. There is no subject which offers such scope and such a
wealth of original material, no subject so poetic and almost legendary although its facts are true. You will describe
new rivers set flowing over the land, new bridges built across rivers, and camps clinging to sheer precipices; you will
tell of a king driven from his capital and finally to death, but courageous to the end; you will record a double triumph
one the first over a nation hitherto unconquered, the other a final victory
.

— Pliny the Younger: Letters (Book VIII, Letter 4: To Caninius Rufus)[25]

Dacia under the Antonine and Severan emperors (106–235)

Establishment (106–117)

Trajan conquered the Dacians, under King Decibalus, and made Dacia, across
the Danube in the soil of barbary, a province that in circumference had ten
times 100,000 paces; but it was lost under Imperator Gallienus, and, after
Romans had been transferred from there by Aurelian, two Dacias were made
in the regions of Moesia andDardania.

— Festus: Breviarium of the Accomplishments of the

Roman People (VIII.2)[26]

With the annexation of Decebalus' kingdom, Dacia was turned into Rome's newest province,
only the second such acquisition since the death of Augustus nearly a century before.[27] All
that was left to deal with were Decebalus' Sarmatian allies to the north, requiring a number of
campaigns that did not cease until 107 at the earliest;[28] however, by the end of 106, the
legions began erecting new Castra along the frontiers.[29] Trajan returned to Rome in the
middle of June 107.[30]

Roman sources list the Dacia as an imperial province on 11 August 106.[31] It was governed
by an imperial legate of consular standing, supported by two legati legionis who were in
Captive Dacian (Capitoline
charge of each of the two legions stationed in Dacia. The procurator Augusti was responsible
Museums)
for managing the taxation of the province and expenditure by the military.[32] The territory
conquered by Trajan was portioned between the newly formed province and the existing
provinces bordering imperial Dacia. Moesia Inferior absorbed what eventually became South Moldavia, Muntenia, and Eastern
Oltenia,[33] while Dacia Traiana was composed of the western portions of Oltenia,Transylvania, and the Banat.[33]

To Roman Dacia's east and south was the province of Moesia, which the
emperor Domitian had split into two in 86 AD – Moesia Superior, having its
capital at Singidunum (modern Belgrade in Serbia), and Moesia Inferior, with
Tomis as its capital (modern Constanţa, Romania).[34] Along Roman Dacia's
exposed western border and stretching towards the vast Pannonian Plain lived
the Iazyges, a Sarmatian tribe.[35] Northern Moldavia was the home of the
Bastarns,[36] Roxolani,[37] and Carpi,[38] while the northern section of
Transylvania was populated by the remaining non-Romanized Dacians and
another Dacian tribe, theCostoboci.[39]

Transforming Dacia into a province was a very resource-intensive process. The provinces of the Roman Empire in
117, with Dacia highlighted.
Traditional Roman methods were employed, including the creation of urban
infrastructure such as Roman baths, forums and temples, the establishment of
Roman roads, and the creation of colonies composed of retired soldiers.[40] However, excluding Trajan's attempts to encourage
colonists to move into the new province, the imperial government did hardly anything to promote resettlement from existing
provinces into Dacia.[40]

An immediate effect of the wars leading to the Roman conquest was a decrease
in the population in the province.[41] Crito wrote that approximately 500,000
Dacians were enslaved and deported, a portion of which were transported to
Rome to participate in the gladiatorial games (or lusiones) as part of the
celebrations to mark the emperor's triumph.[28] To compensate for the
depletion of the population, the Romans carried out a program of official
colonisation, establishing urban centres made up of both Roman citizens and
non-citizens from across the empire.[1] Nevertheless, native Dacians remained
at the periphery of the province and in rural settings, while local power elites
were encouraged to support the provincial administration, as per traditional
The sanctuaries in the ruined
Roman colonial practice.[42]
Sarmizegetusa Regia, the capital of
ancient Dacia
Trajan established the Dacian capital, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, some 40
kilometers (25 mi) west of the ruined Sarmizegetusa Regia.[43] Initially
serving as a base for the legion IV Flavia,[44] it soon was settled by the retired
veterans who had served in the Dacian Wars, principally the Fifth (Macedonia), Ninth (Claudia), and Fourteenth (Gemina)
legions.[45]

It is generally assumed that Trajan's reign saw the creation of the Roman road network within imperial Dacia, with any pre-existing
natural communication lines quickly converted into paved Roman roads[46] which were soon extended into a more extensive road
network.[46] However, only two roads have been attested to have been created at Trajan's explicit command: one was an arterial road
that linked the military camps at Napoca and Potaissa.[46] Epigraphic evidence on the milliarium of Aiton indicates that this stretch
of road was finished sometime during 109–110 AD.[47] The second road was a major arterial road that passed through Apulum, and
stretched from the Black Sea in the east all the way toPannonia Inferior in the west and presumably beyond.[46]

Legati Augusti pro praetoreunder Trajan [48]

Name From To
Julius Sabinus 105 107/109
Decimus Terentius Scaurianus 109 110/111
Gaius Avidius Nigrinus 112 113
Quintus Baebius Macer 114 114
Gaius Julius Quadratus Bassus ? 117

First re-organizations (117–138)

Hadrian was at Antioch in Syria when word came through of the death of Trajan.[49] But he was in no position to return to Rome, as
he was advised that Quadratus Bassus, ordered by Trajan to protect the new Dacian territories north of the Danube, had died there
while on campaign.[50] As a result of taking several legions and numerous auxiliary regiments with him to Parthia, Trajan had left
Dacia and the remaining Danubian provinces below strength.[51][52] The Roxolani, angry over a Roman decision to cease the
payments to which Trajan had agreed, allied themselves with the Iazyges and both tribes revolted against Rome.[53] Therefore,
[52]
Hadrian dispatched the armies from the east ahead of him, and departed Syria as soon as he was able.

By this time, Hadrian had grown so frustrated with the continual problems in the territories north of the Danube that he contemplated
withdrawing from Dacia.[2] As an emergency measure, Hadrian dismantled Apollodorus's bridge across the Danube, concerned about
the threat posed by barbarian incursions across the Olt River and a southward push between a number of Trajan's colonia and the
 castrum at
Bersobis.[52]

Bronze coin of the Roman Emperor Hadrian

commemorating his visit to Dacia.Denomination: AE
As; Composition: Bronze; Date: 117-138 AD;
Obverse: HADRIANVS AVG COS III P P, Draped bust
of emperor Hadrian facing right; Reverse: Dacia
seated left on rock, holding vexillum and curved
sword; right foot rests on globe; SC in left and right
Emperor Hadrian (117–138)
fields; DACIA in exergue; Size: 27mm, 12.9g;
Reference: RIC 850, Cohen 531v, BMCRE 1741
By 118, Hadrian himself had taken to the field against the
Roxolani and the Iazyges, and although he defeated them, he
agreed to reinstate the subsidies to the Roxolani.[53][54] Hadrian then decided
to abandon certain portions of Trajan's Dacian conquests. The territories
annexed to Moesia Inferior (Southern Moldavia, the south-eastern edge of the
Carpathian Mountains and the plains of Muntenia and Oltenia) were returned
to the Roxolani.[55][54] As a result, Moesia Inferior reverted once again to the
original boundaries it possessed prior to the acquisition of Dacia.[33] The
portions of Moesia Inferior to the north of the Danube were split off and
refashioned into a new province called Dacia Inferior.[33] Trajan's original
province of Dacia was relabelled Dacia Superior.[33] It was at this time that
Hadrian moved the Legio IV Flavia Felix from its base at Ulpia Traiana
Sarmizegetusa, and ordered it stationed inMoesia Superior.[56]
Roman Dacia

By 124, an additional province called Dacia Porolissensis was created in the

northern portion of Dacia Superior,[57] roughly located in north-western
Transylvania.[33] Since it had become tradition since the time of Augustus that former consuls could only govern provinces as
imperial legates where more than one legion was present, Dacia Superior was administered by a senator of praetorian rank.[57] This
meant that the imperial legate ofDacia Superior only had one legion under his command, stationed atApulum.[32] Dacia Inferior and
Dacia Porolissensis were under the command ofpraesidial procurators of ducenary rank.[32]

Hadrian vigorously exploited the opportunities for mining in the new province.[58] The emperors monopolized the revenue generated
from mining by leasing the operations of the mines to members of the Equestrian order, who employed a large number of individuals
to manage the operations.[59] In 124, the emperor visitedNapoca and made the city a municipium.[60]

Consolidation (138–161)
The accession of Antoninus Pius saw the arrival of an emperor who took a cautious approach to the defense of the provinces.[61] The
large amount of milestones dated to his reign demonstrates that he was particularly concerned with ensuring that the roads were in a
constant state of repair.[62] Stamped tiles show that the amphitheater at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, which had been built during the
earliest years of the colonia, was repaired under his rule.[63] In addition, given the exposed position of the larger of the Roman
fortifications at Porolissum (near Moigrad, Romania), the camp was reconstructed using stone, and given sturdier walls for defensive
purposes.[64]
Following a revolt around 158, Antoninus Pius undertook another reorganization of the Dacian
provinces.[64] Dacia Porolissensis (in what is now northern Transylvania), with Porolissum as its
capital, remained as it was. Dacia Superior was renamed Dacia Apulensis (in Banat and southern
Transylvania), with Apulum as its capital,[64] while Dacia Inferior was transformed into Dacia
Malvensis (situated at Oltenia). Romula was its capital (modern Reşca Dobrosloveni, Romania).[65] As
per Hadrian's earlier reorganization, each zone was governed by equestrian procurators, and all were
[64]
responsible to the senatorial governor in Apulensis.

Marcomannic Wars and their effects (161–193) Emperor Antoninus

Soon after the accession of Marcus Aurelius in 161 AD, it Pius (138–161)
was clear that trouble was brewing along Rome's northern
frontiers, as local tribes began to be pressured by
migrating tribes to their north.[66][67] By 166 AD, Marcus had reorganized Dacia once
again, merging the three Dacian provinces into one called Tres Daciae,[68] a move that
was geared to consolidate an exposed province inhabited by numerous tribes in the face
.[69] As the province now contained two
of increasing threats along the Danubian frontier
legions (Legio XIII Gemina at Apulum was joined by Legio V Macedonica, stationed at
Potaissa), the imperial legate had to be of consular rank, with Marcus apparently
assigning Sextus Calpurnius Agricola.[68] The reorganization saw the existing praesidial
procurators of Dacia Porolissensis and Dacia Malvensis continue in office, and added to
their ranks was a third procurator for Dacia Apulensis, all operating under the direct
supervision of the consular legate,[70] who was stationed at the new provincial capital at
Emperor Marcus Aurelius (161– Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa.[71]
180)
Dacia, exposed as it was along its northern, eastern, and western frontiers, could not
easily be defended from attack. When barbarian incursions resumed during the reign of
Marcus Aurelius, the defences in Dacia were hard pressed to halt all of the raids, leaving exposed the provinces of Upper and Lower
Moesia.[72] Throughout 166 and 167 AD, barbarian tribes (the Quadi and Marcomanni)[73] began to pour across the Danube into
Pannonia, Noricum, Raetia, and drove through Dacia before bursting into Moesia.[74] Apparently, war reached northern Dacia after
167[75] when the Iazyges, having been thrust out of Pannonia, focused their energies on Dacia and took the gold mines at Alburnus
Maior (modern Roşia Montană, Romania).[76] The last date found on the wax tablets discovered in the mineshafts there (which had
been hidden when an enemy attack seemed imminent) is 29 May 167.[75] The suburban villas at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa were
burned, and the camp at Slăveni was destroyed by the Marcomanni.[54] By the time Marcus Aurelius reached Aquileia in 168 AD,
the Iazyges had taken over 100,000 Roman captives and destroyed a number of Roman castra, including the fort at Tibiscum
(modern Jupa in Romania).[77][78]

Fighting continued in Dacia over the next two years, and by 169 the governor of the province, Sextus Calpurnius Agricola, was
forced to give up his command – it is suspected that he either contracted the plague or died in battle.[79] The emperor decided to
temporarily split the province once again between the three sub-provinces, with the imperial legate of Moesia Superior, Marcus
Claudius Fronto, taking on the governorship of the central sub-province of Dacia Apulensis.[79] Dacia Malvenis was possibly
assigned to its procurator, Macrinius Avitus, the victor over the Langobardi and Obii. The future emperor Pertinax was also a
procurator in Dacia during this time, although his exact role is not known. Very unpopular in Dacia, Pertinax was eventually
dismissed.[79] By 170, Marcus Aurelius appointed Marcus Claudius Fronto as the governor of the entire Dacian province, now
labelled the "Three Dacias".[79] Later that year, Fronto's command was extended to include the governorship of Moesia Superior
once again.[80] He was not to enjoy it for long; by the end of 170, Fronto was defeated and killed in battle against the Iazyges.[80][81]
His replacement as governor of Dacia wasSextus Cornelius Clemens.[80]

That same year (170) the Costoboci (whose lands were to the north or northeast of Dacia)[82] swept through Dacia on their way
south.[83] Weakened as it was, the empire could not prevent the movement of tribespeople into an exposed Dacia during 171,[84] and
Marcus Aurelius was forced to enter into diplomatic negotiations in an attempt to break up some of the barbarian alliances.[84] In
171, the Astingi invaded Dacia; after initially defeating the Costoboci, they continued
their attacks on the province.[85] The Romans negotiated a settlement with the Astingi,
whereby they agreed to leave Dacia and settle in the lands of the Costoboci.[85] In the
meantime, plots of land were distributed to some 12,000 dispossessed and wandering
tribespeople, in an attempt to prevent them from becoming a threat to the province if
they continued to roam at the edges of Dacia.[86]

The Astingi, led by their chieftains Raüs and Raptus, came into Dacia
with their entire households, hoping to secure both money and land in
return for their alliance. But failing of their purpose, they left their wives
Emperor Pertinax (193) – Statue
and children under the protection of Clemens, until they should acquire
found at Apulum. In display at
the land of the Costoboci by their arms; but upon conquering that National Museum of the Union,
people, they proceeded to injure Dacia no less than before. The Lacringi, Alba Iulia, Romania
fearing that Clemens in his dread of them might lead these newcomers
into the land which they themselves were inhabiting, attacked them
while off their guard and won a decisive victory. As a result, the Astingi
committed no further acts of hostility against the Romans, but in
response to urgent supplications addressed to Marcus they received from
him both money and the privilege of asking for land in case they should
inflict some injury upon those who were then fighting against him.

— Cassius Dio: Roman History – Epitome of Book

LXXII[87][88]

Throughout this period, the tribes bordering Dacia to the east, such as the Roxolani, did not participate in the mass invasions of the
empire.[81] Traditionally seen as a vindication of Trajan's decision to create the province of Dacia as a wedge between the western
and eastern Danubian tribes,[81][89] Dacia's exposed position meant that the Romans had a greater reliance on the use of "client-
states" to ensure its protection from invasion.[89] While this worked in the case of the Roxolani, the use of the Roman–client
relationships that allowed the Romans to pit one supported tribe against another facilitated the very conditions that created the larger
tribal federations that first emerged with the Quadi and the Marcomanni.[90]

By 173 AD, the Marcomanni had been defeated;[91] however, the war with the Iazyges and Quadi continued, as Roman strongholds
along the Tisa and Danube rivers were attacked by the Iazyges, followed by a battle in Pannonia in which the Iazyges were
defeated.[92] Consequently, Marcus Aurelius turned his full attention against the Iazyges and Quadi. He crushed the Quadi in 174
AD, defeating them in battle on the frozen Danube river, after which they sued for peace.[93] The emperor then turned his attention to
the Iazyges; after defeating them and throwing them out of Dacia, the Senate awarded him the title of Samarticus Maximus in 175
AD.[81] Conscious of the need to create a permanent solution to the problems on the empire's northern frontiers,[81] Marcus Aurelius
relaxed some of his restrictions on the Marcomanni and the Iazyges. In particular, he allowed the Iazyges to travel through imperial
Dacia to trade with theRoxolani, so long as they had the governor's approval.[94] At the same time he was determined to implement a
plan to annex the territories of the Marcomanni and the Iazyges as the empire's newest provinces, only to be derailed by the revolt of
Avidius Cassius.[81][95]

With the emperor urgently needed elsewhere, Rome once again re-established its system of alliances with the bordering tribes along
the empire's northern frontier.[96][97] However, pressure was soon exerted again with the advent of Germanic peoples who started to
settle on Dacia's northern borders, leading to the resumption of the northern war.[96][98] In 178 Marcus Aurelius probably appointed
Pertinax as governor of Dacia,[99] and by 179 AD, the emperor was once again north of the Danube, campaigning against the Quadi
and the Buri. Victorious, the emperor was on the verge of converting a large territory to the north-west of Dacia into Roman
provinces when he died in 180.[100][101] Marcus was succeeded by his son, Commodus, who had accompanied him. The young man
[96]
quickly concluded a peace with the warring tribes before returning to Rome.
 Commodus granted peace to the Buri when they sent envoys. Previously
he had declined to do so, in spite of their frequent requests, because they
were strong, and because it was not peace that they wanted, but the
securing of a respite to enable them to make further preparations; but
now that they were exhausted he made peace with them, receiving
hostages and getting back many captives from the Buri themselves as
well as 15,000 from the others, and he compelled the others to take an
oath that they would never dwell in nor use for pasturage a 5-mile strip
of their territory next to Dacia. The same Sabinianus also, when twelve
thousand of the neighboring Dacians had been driven out of their own
country and were on the point of aiding the others, dissuaded them from
their purpose, promising them that some land in our Dacia should be
given them.

— Cassius Dio: Roman History – Epitome of Book

LXXIII[102][103] Emperor Commodus (180–193)

Conflict and strife continued in Dacia during the reign of Commodus. The notoriously
unreliable Historia Augusta mentions a limited insurrection that erupted in Dacia approximately 185 AD.[96] The same source also
wrote of a defeat of the Dacian tribes who lived outside the province.[96] Commodus's legates devastated a territory some five miles
deep along the north of the castrum at modern day Gilău to establish a buffer in the hope of preventing further barbarian
incursions.[104]

The Moors and the Dacians were conquered during his reign, and peace was established in the Pannonias, but all by
his legates, since such was the manner of his life. The provincials in Britain, Dacia, and Germany attempted to cast
off his yoke, but all these attempts were put downby his generals.

— Historia Augusta – The Life of Commodus[105]

Revival under the Severans (193–235)

The reign of Septimius Severus saw a measure of peace descend upon the province, with
no foreign attacks recorded. Damage inflicted on the military camps during the
extensive period of warfare of the preceding reigns was repaired.[106] Severus extended
the province's eastern frontier some 14 kilometres east of the Olt River, and completed
the Limes Transalutanus. The work included the construction of 14 fortified camps
spread over a distance of approximately 225 kilometres, stretching from Flămânda
(situated near the Danube River) in the south to Cumidava (modern day Breţcu in
Romania).[107] His reign saw an increase in the number of Roman municipia across the
province,[108] while Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa and Apulum acquired the ius
Italicum.[109]

As part of his military reforms, Severus allowed Roman soldiers to live away from the
fortified camps, within the accompanying canabae, where they were allowed to tend
nearby plots of land.[110] He also permitted the soldiers to marry local women;
Emperor Septimius Severus
(193–211) consequently, if the soldier was a Roman citizen, his children inherited his citizenship.
For those soldiers who were not Roman citizens, both he and his children were granted
citizenship upon his discharge from the army.[110]
The next emperor, Caracalla, in order to increase tax revenue and boost his popularity
(at least to the historian Cassius Dio), extended the citizenship to all males throughout
the empire, with the exception of slaves.[111] In 213, on his way to the east to begin his
Parthian campaign, Caracalla passed through Dacia. While there, he undertook
diplomatic manoeuvrings to disturb the alliances between a number of tribes, in
particular the Marcomanni and the Quadi.[112][113] At Porolissum he had Gaiobomarus,
the king of the Quadi, killed under the pretext of conducting peace negotiations.[114]
[112][113]
There may have been military conflict with one or more of the Danubian tribes.
Although there are inscriptions that indicate that during Caracalla's visit there was some
repair or reconstruction work undertaken at Porolissum[115] and that the military unit
stationed there, Cohors V Lingonum, erected an equestrian statue of the emperor,[116]
certain modern authors, such as Philip Parker and Ion Grumeza, claim that Caracalla
continued to extend the Limes Transalutanus as well as add further territory to Dacia by
pushing the border around 50 kilometres east of the Olt river,[117][118] though it is
Emperor Caracalla (211–217)
unclear what evidence they are using to support these statements, and the timeframes
associated with Caracalla's movements do not support any extensive reorganization in
the province.[note 1][119] In 218, Caracalla's successor, Macrinus, returned a number of non-Romanized Dacian hostages whom
[120]
Caracalla had taken, possibly as a result of some unrest caused by the tribes after Caracalla's assassination.

And the Dacians, after ravaging portions of Dacia and showing an eagerness for further war, now desisted, when they
got back the hostages that Caracallus, under the name of an alliance, had taken from them.

— Cassius Dio: Roman History – Epitome of Book LXXIX[121][122]

There are few epigraphs extant in Dacia dating from the reign of Alexander Severus, the final Severan emperor.[106] Under his reign,
the Council of Three Dacias met at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, and the gates, towers, and praetorium of Ad Mediam (Mehadia,
Romania) camp were restored.[123]

Life in Roman Dacia

Native Dacians
Evidence concerning the continued existence of a native Dacian population within Roman Dacia is not as apparent as that of
Germans, Celts, Thracians, or Illyrians in other provinces.[124] There is relatively poor documentation surrounding the existence of
[125]
native or indigenous Dacians in the Roman towns that were established after Dacia's incorporation into the empire.

Although Eutropius,[126] supported by minor references in the works of Cassius Dio[127] and Julian the Apostate'[128][129] describes
the widespread depopulation of the province after the siege of Sarmizegetusa Regia and the suicide of king Decebalus,[33] there are
issues with this interpretation. The remaining manuscripts of Eutropius' Breviarium ab urbe condita, which is the principal source for
the depopulation of Roman Dacia after the conquest, are not consistent. Some versions describe the depletion of men after the war,
other variants describe the depletion of things, or possibly resources, after Trajan's conquest.[42] Archaeological evidence shows the
continuation of traditional Dacian burial practices; ceramic manufacturing continued throughout the Roman period, in both the
province as well as the periphery where Roman control was non-existent.[42] Differing interpretations can be made from the final
scene on Trajan's Column, which either depicts a Dacian emigration, accelerating the depopulation of Dacia,[130] or Dacians going
back to their settlements after yielding to Roman authority.[131]

While it is certain that colonists in large numbers were imported from all over the empire to settle in Roman Dacia,[42] this appears to
be true for the newly created Roman towns only. The lack of epigraphic evidence for native Dacian names in the towns suggests an
[42]
urban–rural split between Roman multi-ethnic urban centres and the native Dacian rural population.
On at least two occasions the Dacians rebelled against Roman authority: first in 117 AD,
which caused the return of Trajan from the east,[132] then in 158 AD when they were put
down by Marcus Statius Priscus.[133]

The archaeological evidence from various types of settlements, especially in the Oraștie
Mountains, demonstrates the deliberate destruction of hill forts during the annexation of
Dacia, but this does not rule out a continuity of occupation once the traumas of the
initial conquest had passed.[134] Hamlets containing traditional Dacian architecture,
such as Obreja and Noşlac, have been dated to the 2nd century AD, implying that they
[134]
arose at the same time as the Roman urban centres.

Some settlements do show a clear continuity of occupation from pre-Roman times into
the provincial period, such asCetea and Cicau.[135] Archaeological evidence taken from
pottery show a continued occupation of native Dacians in these and other areas.
Architectural forms native to pre-Roman Dacia, such as the traditional sunken house and
storage pits, remained during Roman times. Such housing continued to be erected well
into the Roman period, even in settlements which clearly show an establishment after
the Roman annexation, such as Obreja.[136] Altogether, approximately 46 sites have
been noted as existing on a spot in both theLa Tène and Roman periods.[136]

Where archaeology attests to a continuing Dacian presence, it also shows a simultaneous

process of Romanization.[131] Traditional Dacian pottery has been uncovered in Dacian
[131]
settlements, together with Roman-manufactured pottery incorporating local designs.
Captive Dacian
The increasing Romanization of Dacia meant that only a small number of earlier Dacian
pottery styles were retained unchanged, such as pots and the low thick-walled drinking
mug that has been termed the Dacian cup. These artifacts were usually handmade; the use of the pottery wheel was rare.[137] In the
case of homes, the use of old Dacian techniques persisted, as did the sorts of ornaments and tools used prior to the establishment of
Roman Dacia.[131] Archaeological evidence from burial sites has demonstrated that the native population of Dacia was far too large
to have been driven away or wiped out in any meaningful sense.[131] It was beyond the resources of the Romans to have eliminated
the great majority of the rural population in an area measuring some 300,000 square kilometres.[42] Silver jewellery uncovered in
graves show that some of the burial sites are not necessarily native Dacian in origin, but are equally likely to have belonged to the
[138]
Carpi or Free Dacians who are thought to have moved into Dacia sometime before 200 AD.

Some scholars have used the lack of civitates peregrinae in Roman Dacia, where indigenous peoples were organised into native
townships, as evidence for the Roman depopulation of Dacia.[139] Prior to its incorporation into the empire, Dacia was a kingdom
ruled by one king, and did not possess a regional tribal structure that could easily be turned into the Roman civitas system as used
successfully in other provinces of the empire.[140] Dacian tribes mentioned in Ptolemy's Geography may represent indigenous
administrative structures, similar to those fromMoesia, Pannonia, Dalmatia, or Noricum.[141]

Few local Dacians were interested in the use of epigraphs, which were a central part of Roman cultural expression. In Dacia this
causes a problem because the survival of epigraphs into modern times is one of the ways scholars develop an understanding of the
cultural and social situation within a Roman province.[142][143] Apart from members of the Dacian elite and those who wished to
attain improved social and economic positions, who largely adopted Roman names and manners, the majority of native Dacians
retained their names and their cultural distinctiveness even with the increasing embrace of Roman cultural norms which followed
their incorporation into the Roman empire.[144][145][146]

As per usual Roman practice, Dacian males were recruited intoauxiliary units[147] and dispatched across the empire, from the eastern
provinces to Britannia.[41] The Vexillation Dacorum Parthica accompanied the emperor Septimius Severus during his Parthian
expedition,[148] while the cohort I Ulpia Dacorum was posted to Cappadocia.[149] Others included the II Aurelia Dacorum in
Pannonia Superior, the cohort I Aelia Dacorum in Roman Britain, and the II Augusta Dacorum milliaria in Moesia Inferior.[149]
There are a number of preserved relics originating from cohort I Aelia Dacorum, with one inscription describing the sica, a
distinctive Dacian weapon.[150] In inscriptions the Dacian soldiers are described as natione Dacus. These could refer to individuals
who were native Dacians, Romanized Dacians, colonists who had moved to Dacia, or their descendants.[151] Numerous Roman
military diplomas issued for Dacian soldiers discovered after 1990 indicate that veterans preferred to return to their place of
origin;[152] per usual Roman practice, these veterans were given Roman citizenship upon their dischar
ge.[153]

Colonists
There were varying degrees of Romanization throughout Roman Dacia. The most Romanized segment was the region along the
Danube, which was predominately under imperial administration, albeit in a form that was partially barbarized. The population
beyond this zone, having lived with the Roman legions before their withdrawal, were substantially Romanized. The final zone,
consisting of the northern portions ofMaramures, Crisana, and Moldavia, stood at the edges of Roman Dacia. Although its people did
not have Roman legions stationed among them, they were still nominally under the control of Rome, politically, socially, and
economically. These were the areas in which resided theCarpi, often referred to as theFree Dacians.[154]

In an attempt to fill the cities, cultivate the fields, and mine the ore, a large-scale attempt at colonization took place with colonists
coming in "from all over the Roman world".[155] The colonists were a heterogeneous mix:[1] of the some 3,000 names preserved in
inscriptions found by the 1990s, 74% (c. 2,200) were Latin, 14% (c. 420) were Greek, 4% (c. 120) were Illyrian, 2.3% (c. 70) were
Celtic, 2% (c. 60) were Thraco-Dacian, and another 2% (c. 60) were Semites from Syria.[156] Regardless of their place of origin, the
settlers and colonists were a physical manifestation of Roman civilisation and imperial culture, bringing with them the most effective
Romanizing mechanism: the use ofLatin as the new lingua franca.[1]

The first settlement at Sarmizegethusa was made up of Roman citizens who had retired from the legions.[157] Based upon the
location of names scattered throughout the province, it has been argued that, although places of origin are hardly ever noted in
epigraphs, a large percentage of colonists originated from Noricum and western Pannonia.[158]

Specialist miners (the Pirusti tribesmen)[159] were brought in from Dalmatia.[59] These Dalmatian miners were kept in sheltered
communities (Vicus Pirustarum) and were under the jurisdiction of their own tribal leadership (with individual leaders referred to as
princeps).[159]

Roman army in Dacia

An estimated 50,000 troops were stationed
in Dacia at its height.[160][56]

At the close of Trajan's first campaign in

Dacia in 102, he stationed one legion at
Sarmizegetusa Regia.[56] With the Sestertius minted to celebrate
conclusion of Trajan's conquest of Dacia, Dacia province and its legions
he stationed at least two legions in the new
province – the Legio IV Flavia Felix
Roman walls in Dacia positioned at Berzobis, and the Legio XIII Gemina stationed at Apulum.[56] It has been
conjectured that there was a third legion stationed in Dacia at the same time, the Legio I
Adiutrix. However, there is no evidence to indicate when or where it was stationed, and
vexillationes who were stationed in the province.[56]
it is unclear whether the legion was fully present, or whether it was only the

Hadrian, the subsequent emperor, shifted the fourth legion (Legio IV Flavia Felix) from Berzobis to Singidunum in Moesia Superior,
suggesting that Hadrian believed the presence of one legion in Dacia would be sufficient to ensure the security of the province.[56]
The Marcomannic Wars that erupted north of the Danube forced Marcus Aurelius to reverse this policy, permanently transferring the
Legio V Macedonica from Troesmis (modern Iglița in Romania)[161] in Moesia Inferior to Potaissa in Dacia.[56]

Epigraphic evidence attests to large numbers of auxiliary units stationed throughout the Dacian provinces during the Roman period;
this has given the impression that Roman Dacia was a strongly militarized province.[56] Yet it seems to have been no more highly
militarized than any of the other frontier provinces, like the Moesias, the Pannonias, and
Syria, and the number of legions stationed in
Moesia and Pannonia were not diminished after the creation of Dacia.[162][163] However, once Dacia was incorporated into the
empire and the frontier was extended northward, the central portion of the Danube frontier between Novae and Durostorum was able
to release much-needed troops to bolster Dacia's defences.[164] Military documents report at least 58 auxiliary units, most transferred
into Dacia from the flanking Moesian and Pannonian provinces, with a wide variety of forms and functions, including numeri,
cohortes milliariae, quingenariae, and alae.[56] This does not imply that all were positioned in Dacia at the same time, nor that they
[56]
were in place throughout the existence of Roman Dacia.

Settlements
When considering provincial settlement patterns, the Romanized parts of Dacia were composed of urban satus settlements, made up
of coloniae, municipia, and rural settlements, principally villas with their associated latifundia and villages (vici).[165] The two
principal towns of Roman Dacia, Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa and Apulum, are on par with similar towns across the western empire
.[166]
in terms of socio-economic and architectural maturity

The province had about 10 Roman towns,[167][168] all originating from the military
camps that Trajan constructed during his campaigns.[169] There were two sorts of urban
settlements. Of principal importance were the coloniae, whose free-born inhabitants
were almost exclusively Roman citizens. Of secondary importance were the municipia,
[170]
which were allowed a measure of judicial and administrative independence.

Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusawas established by Trajan, was first to be

given colonia status, and was the province's onlycolonia deducta.[171] Its
pre-eminence was guaranteed by its foundation charter and by its role as
the administrative centre of the province, as well as its being grantedIus The amphitheatre at Ulpia
Italicum.[172] Traiana Sarmizegetusa
Apulum began as one of Trajan's legionary bases.[171] Almost immediately,
the associated canabae legionis was established nearby, while at some
point during the Trajanic period a civilian settlement sprang into existence along theMureş River, approximately four
kilometres from the military encampment.[172] The town evolved rapidly, transforming from a vicus of Ulpia Traiana
Sarmizegetusa into a municipium during Marcus Aurelius's reign, with the emperorCommodus elevating it to a
colonia.[173] Transformed into the capital of Dacia Apulensis, its importance lay in being the location of the military
high command for the tripartite province.[65] It began to rival Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa during the reign of
Septimius Severus, who allocated a part of Apulum'scanabae with municipal status.[173]
Drobeta was the most important town of Dacia Inferior . Springing up in the vicinity of a stone camp housing 500
soldiers and established by Trajan to guard the northern approaches toTrajan's Bridge, the town was elevated by
the emperor Hadrian to amunicipium, holding the same rights as an Italian town.[174] During the middle 190s,
Septimius Severus transformed the town into a full-fledgedcolonia.[175]
Romula was possibly the capital of Dacia Malvensis. It held the rank ofmunicipium, possibly under the reign of
Hadrian, before being elevated tocolonia status by Septimius Severus.[176]
[177] It was made a
Napoca was the possible location of the military high command in Dacia Porolissensis.
municipium by Hadrian, and Commodus transformed it into acolonia. [161]

Potaissa was the camp of the Legio V Macedonica during the Marcomannic Wars.[177] Potaissa saw a canabae
established at the gates of the camp.[161] Granted municipium status by Septimius Severus, it became acolonia
under Caracalla.[161]

Porolissum was situated between two camps, and laid alongside a walled frontier defending the main passageway
[178]
through the Carpathian mountains. It was transformed into a 'municipium' during Septimius Severus's reign.
Dierna (Orşova, Romania), Tibiscum (Jupa, Romania), and Ampelum (Zlatna, Romania) were important Roman
towns.[179] Although the biggest mining town in the region, Ampelum's legal status is unknown.
[180] Dierna was a

customs station which was grantedmunicipium status by Septimus Severus. [181]

Sucidava (modern Corabia, Romania) was a town located at the site of an earthwork camp. Erected byrajan,
T
Sucidava was neither large enough nor important enough to be granted municipium or colonia status. The town
remained a pagus or perhaps a vicus.[181]
It is often problematic to identify the dividing line between "Romanized" villages and those sites that can be defined as "small
towns".[182] Therefore, categorizing sites as small towns has largely focused on identifying sites that had some evidence of industry
and trade, and not simply a basic agricultural economic unit that would almost exclusively produce goods for its own existence.[183]
Additional settlements along the principal route within Roman Dacia are mentioned in
the Tabula Peutingeriana. These include Brucla, Blandiana, Germisara, Petris, and
Aquae.[184] Both Germisara and Aquae were sites where natural thermal springs were
accessible, and each are still functioning today.[185] The locations of Brucla, Blandiana,
and Petris are not known for certain.[185] In the case of Petris however, there is good
reason to suppose it was located at Uroi in Romania. If this were the case, it would have
been a crucial site for trade, as well as being a vital component in facilitating
.[186]
communication from one part of the province to another
The reconstructed gateway of the
It is assumed that Roman Dacia possessed a large number of military vici, settlements castrum in Porolissum
with connections to the entrenched military camps.[186] This hypothesis has not been
tested, as few such sites have been surveyed in any detail. However, in the mid-Mureș
valley, associated civilian communities have been uncovered next to the auxiliary camps at Orăștioara de Sus, Cigmău, Salinae
(modern Ocna Mureș), andMicia.[186] A small amphitheatre was discovered at Micia.[63]

During the period of Roman occupation, the pattern of settlement in the Mureș valley demonstrates a continual shift towards
nucleated settlements when compared to the pre-Roman Iron Age settlement pattern.[187] In central Dacia, somewhere between 10
and 28 villages have been identified as aggregated settlements whose primary function was agricultural.[188] The settlement layouts
broadly fall between two principal types.[188] The first are those constructed in a traditional fashion, such as Radeşti, Vinţu de Jos,
and Obreja. These show generally sunken houses in the Dacian manner, with some dwellings having evolved to becoming surface
[188]
timber buildings. The second settlement layout followed Roman settlement patterns.

The identification of villa sites within central Dacia is incomplete, as it is for the majority of the province.[189] There are about 30
[189]
sites identified throughout the province which appear on published heritage lists, but this is felt to be a gross underestimation.

Economy
With the Roman army ensuring the maintenance of the Pax Romana, Roman Dacia prospered until the Crisis of the Third Century.
Dacia evolved from a simple rural society and economy to one of material advancement comparable to other Roman provinces.[160]
[190]
There were more coins in circulation in Roman Dacia than in the adjacent provinces.

The region's natural resources generated considerable wealth for the empire, becoming one of the major producers of grain,
particularly wheat.[131] Linking into Rome's monetary economy, bronze Roman coinage was eventually produced in Ulpia Traiana
Sarmizegetusa[167] by about 250 AD (previously Dacia seems to have been supplied with coins from central mints).[190] The
[167]
establishment of Roman roads throughout the province facilitated economic growth.

Local gold mines provided another incentive for Dacia's incorporation into the empire.[107] Dalmatian miners were brought in to
operate the gold mines in the Bihor Mountains, adding to the imperial coffers.[131] At Alburnus Maior the gold mines flourished
between 131 and 167 AD, but over time they began to see diminishing returns as the local gold reserves were exploited.[59] Evidence
[181]
points to the closure of the gold mines around the year 215 AD.

Dacia also possessed salt, iron, silver, and copper mines dating back to the period of the Dacian kings.[131] The region also held large
quantities of building-stone materials, includingschist, sandstone, andesite, limestone, and marble.[59]

Towns became key centres of manufacturing.[191] Bronze casting foundries existed at Porolissum, Romula, and Dierna; there was a
[191] Glass manufacturing factories have
brooch workshop located in Napoca, while weapon smithies have been identified in Apulum.
been uncovered in Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa and Tibiscum.[191] Villages and rural settlements continued to specialise in
craftwork, including pottery, and sites such as Micăsasa could possess 26 kilns and hundreds of moulds for the manufacture of local
terra sigillata.[191]

Religion
Inscriptions and sculpture in Dacia reveal a wide variety in matters of religion. Deities of the official state religion of Rome appear
alongside those originating in Greece, Asia Minor, and Western Europe;[192] of these, 43.5% have Latin names.[1] The major gods of
the Roman pantheon are all represented in Dacia:[192] Jupiter, Juno, Minerva, Venus, Apollo, Liber, Libera, and others.[193] The
Roman god Silvanus was of unusual importance, second only to Jupiter.[194] He was frequently referred to in Dacia with the titles
silvester and domesticus, which were also used in Pannonia.[195]

About 20% of Dacian inscriptions refer to Eastern cults such as that of Cybele and Attis, along with more than 274 dedications to
Mithras, who was most popular among soldiers.[196] The cult of the Thracian Rider was imported from Thrace and Moesia.[196] The
Gallic horse goddess Epona is attested in Dacia, as are theMatronae.[196]

While the Dacians worshiped local divinities,[140] there is no evidence of any Dacian deity entering the Roman pantheon of
gods,[140] and there is no evidence of any Dacian deity worshipedunder a Roman name.[197] It is conjectured that the Dacians lacked
an anthropomorphic conception of deity,[192] and that the Thraco-Dacian religion and their art was characterized by aniconism.[198]
Dacian citadels dated to the reigns of Burebista and Decebalus have yielded no statues in their sanctuaries.[192] With the destruction
of the main Dacian sacred site during Trajan's wars of conquest, no other site took its place. However, there were other cult sites of
local spiritual significance, such as Germisara, which continued to be used during the Roman period, although religious practices at
[140]
these sites were somewhat altered by Romanization, including the application of Roman names to the local spirits.

Highly Romanized urban centres brought with them Roman funerary practices, which differed significantly from those pre-dating the
Roman conquest.[199] Archaeological excavations have uncovered funerary art principally attached to the urban centres. Such
excavations have shown thatstelae were the favoured style of funerary memorial. However, other more sophisticated memorials have
also been uncovered, including aediculae, tumuli, and mausoleums. The majority were highly decorated, with sculptured lions,
medallions, and columns adorning the structures.[200]

This appears to be an urban feature only – the minority of cemeteries excavated in rural areas display burial sites that have been
identified as Dacian, and some have been conjectured to be attached to villa settlements, such as Deva, Sălaşu de Sus, and
Cincis.[199]

Traditional Dacian funerary rites survived the Roman period and continued into the post-Roman era,[42] during which time the first
evidence of Christianity begins to appear.[192]

Last decades of Dacia Traiana (235–271/275)

The 230s saw the end of the final peaceful period experienced in Roman Dacia.[201] The discovery of a large stockpile of Roman
coins (around 8,000) at Romula, issued during the reigns ofCommodus and Elagabalus, who was killed in 222 AD, has been taken as
evidence that the province was experiencing problems before the mid-3rd century.[202] Traditionally, the accession of Maximinus
Thrax (235–238) marks the start of a 50-year period of disorder in the Roman Empire, during which the militarization of the
government inaugurated by Septimius Severus continued apace and the debasement of the currency brought the empire to
bankruptcy.[203] As the 3rd century progressed, it saw the continued migration of the Goths, whose movements had already been a
cause of the Marcomannic Wars,[204] and whose travels south towards the Danubian frontier continued to put pressure on the tribes
who were already occupying this territory.[205] Between 236 and 238, Maximinus Thrax campaigned in Dacia against the Carpi,[206]
only to rush back to Italy to deal with a civil war.[207] While Gordian III eventually emerged as Roman Emperor, the confusion in the
heart of the empire allowed the Goths, in alliance with the Carpi, to take Histria in 238 AD[208] before sacking the economically
important commercial centres along theDanube Delta.[209]

Unable to deal militarily with this incursion, the empire was forced to buy peace in Moesia, paying an annual tribute to the Goths;
this infuriated the Carpi who also demanded a payment subsidy.[208] Emperor Philip the Arab (244–249) ceased payment in 245
AD[210] and the Carpi invaded Dacia the following year, attacking the town of Romula in the process.[202] The Carpi probably
burned the castra of Răcari between 243 and 247.[107] Evidence suggests the defensive line of the Limes Transalutanus was probably
abandoned during Philip the Arab's reign, as a result of the incursion of the Carpi into Dacia.[107] Ongoing raids forced the emperor
to leave Rome and take charge of the situation.[211] The mother of the future emperor Galerius fled Dacia Malvensis at around this
time before settling in Moesia Inferior.[212]
 But the other Maximian (Galerius), chosen by Diocletian for his
son-in-law, was worse, not only than those two princes whom our
own times have experienced, but worse than all the bad princes of
former days. In this wild beast there dwelt a native barbarity and a
savageness foreign to Roman blood; and no wonder, for his mother
was born beyond the Danube, and it was an inroad of the Carpi that
obliged her to cross over and take refuge inNew Dacia.

— Lactantius: Of the Manner in which the

Persecutors Died – Chapter IX[213]
Emperor Philip the Arab (244–249)
At the end of 247 the Carpi were decisively beaten in open battle and sued for
peace;[214] Philip the Arab took the title of Carpicus Maximus.[215] Regardless of
these victories, Dacian towns began to take defensive measures. In Sucidava, the townspeople hurriedly erected a trapezoidal stone
wall and defensive ditch, most likely the result of a raid by the barbarian tribes around 246 or 247 AD. In 248 AD, Romula enhanced
the wall surrounding the settlement, again most likely as an additional defensive barrier against the Carpi.[202] An epigraph
uncovered in Apulum salutes the emperor Decius (reigned 249–251 AD) as restitutor Daciarum, the "restorer of Dacia".[216] On 1
July 251 Decius and his army were killed by the Goths during their defeat in the Battle of Abrittus (modern Razgard, Bulgaria).[217]
Firmly entrenched in the territories along the lower Danube and the Black Sea's western shore, their presence affected both the non-
Romanized Dacians (who fell into the Goth's sphere of influence)[218] and Imperial Dacia, as the client system that surrounded the
[219]
province and supported its existence began to break apart.

Decius appeared in the world, an accursed wild beast, to afflict the Church, – and who but a bad man would persecute
religion? It seems as if he had been raised to sovereign eminence, at once to rage against God, and at once to fall; for,
having undertaken an expedition against the Carpi, who had then possessed themselves of Dacia and Moesia, he was
suddenly surrounded by the barbarians, and slain, together with great part of his army; nor could he be honored with
the rites of sepulture, but, stripped and naked, he lay to be devoured by wild beasts and birds, – a fit end for the
enemy of God.

— Lactantius: Of the Manner in which the Persecutors Died – Chapter IV[220]

Continuing pressures during the reign of the emperor Gallienus (253–268 AD) and
the fracturing of the western half of the empire between himself and Postumus in
Gaul after 260 meant that Gallienus's attention was principally focused on the
Danubian frontier.[221] Repeated victories over the Carpi and associated Dacian
tribes enabled him to claim the title Dacicus Maximus.[222] However, literary
sources from antiquity (Eutropius,[223][224] Aurelius Victor,[225] and Festus[26] )
write that Dacia was lost under his reign.[226] He transferred from Dacia to Pannonia
a large percentage of the cohorts from the fifth Macedonica and thirteenth Gemina
legions.[205] The latest coins at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa and Porolissum bear
his effigy, [227] and the raising of inscribed monuments in the province virtually
ceased in 260 AD,[228] the year that marked the temporary breakup of the
Emperor Gallienus (260–268)
empire.[229]

Even the territories across the Danube, which Trajan had secured,
were lost.

— Aurelius Victor: De Caesaribus[225][230]

Coins were minted during the restoration of the empire c. 270 under Aurelian which
bear the inscription "DACIA FELIX" ("Happy Dacia").[231] The pressing need to
deal with the Palmyrene Empire meant Aurelian needed to settle the situation along
the Danube frontier.[232] Reluctantly, and possibly only as a temporary measure, he
decided to abandon the province.[232] The traditional date for Dacia's official
abandonment is 271;[233] another view is that Aurelian evacuated his troops and
civilian administration during 272–273,[234] possibly as late as 275.[235]

The province of Dacia, which Trajan had formed beyond the

Danube, he gave up, despairing, after all Illyricum and Moesia had
been depopulated, of being able to retain it. The Roman citizens,
Emperor Aurelian (270–275)
removed from the town and lands of Dacia, he settled in the interior
of Moesia, calling that Dacia which now divides the two Moesiae,
and which is on the right hand of the Danube as it runs to the sea,
whereas Dacia was previously on the left.

— Eutropius: Abridgement of Roman

History[223][224]

The end result was that Aurelian established a new province of Dacia[234] called Dacia Aureliana with its capital at Serdica,
previously belonging to Lower Moesia.[236][237] A portion of the Romanized population settled in the new province south of the
Danube.[238]

After the Roman withdrawal

Settlement of the Tervingi

The emperor Galerius once voiced a complaint which the Romans had long been aware
of: that the Danube was the most challenging of all the empire's frontiers.[239] Aside
from its enormous length, great portions of it did not suit the style of fighting which the
Roman legions preferred.[240] To protect the provinces south of the Danube, the Romans
retained military forts on the northern bank of the Danube long after the withdrawal
from Dacia Traiana.[123] Aurelian kept a foothold at Drobeta, while a segment of the
Thirteenth Legion (Legio XIII Gemina) was posted in Desa until at least 305 AD.[123]
Coins bearing the image of emperor Gratian (reign 375–383 AD) have been uncovered
at Dierna, possibly indicating that the town continued to function after the Roman
withdrawal.[241]

Emperor Diocletian (284–305) In the years immediately after the withdrawal, Roman towns survived, albeit on a
reduced level. [242] The previous tribes which had settled north of the Danube, such as
the Sarmatians, Bastarnae, Carpi, and Quadi were increasingly pressured by the arrival
of the Vandals in the north, while the Gepids and the Goths pressured them from the east and the northeast.[240] This forced the older
tribes to push into Roman territory, weakening the empire's already stretched defences further. To gain entry into the empire, the
tribes alternated between beseeching the Roman authorities to allow them in, and intimidating them with the threat of invasion if their
requests were denied.[240] Ultimately, the Bastarnae were permitted to settle in Thrace, while the Carpi which survived were
permitted to settle in the new province of Pannonia Valeria west of their homeland.[239] However, the Carpi were neither destroyed
by other barbarian tribes, nor fully integrated into the Roman imperium. Those who survived on the borders of the empire were
[243]
apparently called Carpodacae ("Carps from Dacia").
By 291 AD the Goths had recovered from their defeat at the hands of Aurelian, and began to move into what had been Roman
Dacia.[244] When the ancestors of the Tervingi migrated into north-eastern Dacia, they were opposed by the Carpi and the non-
Romanized Dacians. Defeating these tribes, they came into conflict with the Romans, who still attempted to maintain control along
the Danube. Some of the semi-Romanized population remained and managed to co-exist with the Goths.[154] By 295 AD, the Goths
had managed to defeat the Carpi and establish themselves in Dacia, now called Gothia;[245] the Romans recognised the Tervingi as a
Foederatus.[246] They occupied what was the eastern portion of the old province and beyond, from Bessarabia on the Dniester in the
east to Oltenia in the west.[247] Until the 320s the Goths kept the terms of the treaty and proceeded to settle down in the former
[246]
province of Dacia, and the Danube had a measure of peace for nearly a generation.

Around 295 AD, the emperor Diocletian reorganized the defences along the Danube, and established fortified camps on the far side
of the river, from Sirmium to Ratiaria and Durostorum.[248] These camps were meant to provide protection of the principal crossing
points across the river, to permit the movement of troops across the river, and to function as observation points and bases for
waterborne patrols.[249]

Late Roman incursions

During the reign of Constantine I, the Tervingi took advantage of the civil war between
him and Licinius to attack the empire in 323 AD from their settlements in Dacia.[250]
They supported Licinius until his defeat in 324; he was fleeing to their lands in Dacia
when he was apprehended.[250] As a result, Constantine focused on aggressively pre-
empting any barbarian activity on the frontier north of the Danube.[251] By 328 AD, he
had constructed at Sucidava a new bridge across the Danube,[252] and repaired the road
from Sucidava to Romula.[253] He also erected a military fort at Daphne S( pantov).[254]

In early 336, Constantine personally led his armies across the Danube and crushed the
Gothic tribes which had settled there, in the process recreating a Roman province north
of the Danube.[255] In honor of this achievement, the Senate granted him the title of Emperor Constantine I (306–337)
Dacicus Maximus, and celebrated it along with the 30th anniversary of his accession as
Roman Emperor in mid 336.[255] The granting of this title has been seen by scholars
such as Timothy Barnes as implying some level of reconquest of Roman Dacia.[256] However, the bridge at Sucidava lasted less than
40 years, as the emperor Valens discovered when he attempted to use it to cross the Danube during his campaign against the Goths in
367 AD.[252] Nevertheless, the castra at Sucidava remained in use until its destruction at the hands ofAttila the Hun in 447 AD.[252]

Driven off their lands in Oltenia, the Tervingi moved towards Transylvania and came into conflict with the Sarmatians.[257] In 334,
the Sarmatians asked Constantine for military help, after which he allowed the majority of them to settle peacefully south of the
Danube.[258] The Roman armies inflicted a crushing defeat on the Tervingi.[257] The Tervingi signed a treaty with the Romans,
giving a measure of peace until 367.[259]

The last major Roman incursion into the former province of Dacia occurred in 367 AD, when the emperor Valens used a diplomatic
incident to launch a major campaign against the Goths.[260] Hoping to regain the trans-Danubian beachhead which Constantine had
successfully established at Sucidava,[261] Valens launched a raid into Gothic territory after crossing the Danube near Daphne around
[262] He tried again in 368 AD, setting up his base camp at
30 May; they continued until September without any serious engagements.
Carsium, but was hampered by a flood on the Danube.[263] He therefore spent his time rebuilding Roman forts along the Danube. In
369, Valens crossed the river into Gothia, and this time managed to engage the Tervingi, defeating them, and granting them peace on
Roman terms.[264]

This was the final attempt by the Romans to maintain a presence in the former province. Soon after, the westward push by the Huns
put increased pressure on the Tervingi, who were forced to abandon the old Dacian province and seek refuge within the Roman
Empire.[265] Mismanagement of this request resulted in the death of Valens and the bulk of the eastern Roman army at the Battle of
Adrianople in 378 AD.
Controversy over the fate of the Daco-Romans
Based on the written accounts of ancient authors such as Eutropius, it had been assumed by Enlightenment historians such as Edward
Gibbon that the population of Dacia Traiana was moved south when Aurelian abandoned the province.[266][267] However, the fate of
the Romanized Dacians, and the subsequent origin of the Romanians became mired in controversy, stemming from political
considerations originating during the 18th and 19th centuries between Romanian nationalists and the Austro-Hungarian
Empire.[268][42]

One theory states that the process which formed the Romanian people began with the Romanization of Dacia and the existence of a
Daco-Roman populace which did not completely abandon the province after the Roman withdrawal in 275 AD.[269] Archaeological
evidence obtained from burial sites and settlements supports the contention that a portion of the native population continued to
inhabit what was Roman Dacia.[270] Pottery remains dated to the years after 271 AD in Potaissa,[161] and Roman coinage of Marcus
Claudius Tacitus and Crispus (son of Constantine I) uncovered in Napoca demonstrate the continued survival of these towns.[271] In
Porolissum, Roman coinage began to circulate again under Valentinian I (364–375); meanwhile, local Daco-Romans continued to
inhabit Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, fortifying the amphitheatre against barbarian raids.[227] According to this theory, the Romanian
people continued to develop under the influence of the Roman empire until the beginning of the 6th century, and as long as the
empire held territory on the southern bank of the Danube and in Dobrudja, it influenced the region to the river's north.[269] This
process was facilitated by the trading of goods and the movement of peoples across the river.[269] Roman towns endured in Dacia's
middle and southern regions, albeit reduced in size and wealth.

The competing theory states that the transfer of Dacia's diminished population overlapped with the requirement to repopulate the
depleted Balkans.[272] Although it is possible that some Daco-Romans remained behind, these were few in number.[273] Toponymic
changes tend to support a complete withdrawal from Roman Dacia, as the names for Roman towns, forts, and settlements fell
completely out of use.[274] Repeated archaeological investigations from the 19th century onwards have failed to uncover definitive
proof that a large proportion of the Daco-Romans remained in Dacia after the evacuation;[275] for example, traffic in Roman coins in
the former province after 271 show similarities to modern Slovakia and the steppe in what is today Ukraine.[276] On the other hand,
linguistic data and place names[277] attest to the beginnings of the Romanian language in Lower Moesia, or other provinces south of
the Danube of the Roman Empire.[278] Toponymic analysis of place-names in the former Roman Dacia north of the Danube suggests
that, on top of names which have a Thracian, Scytho-Iranian, Celtic, Roman and Slavonic origin, there are some un-Romanized
Dacian place-names which were adopted by the Slavs (possibly via the Hungarians) and transmitted to the Romanians, in the same
Olt).[279]
way that some Latin place-names were transmitted to the Romanians via the Slavs (such as

According to those who posit the continued existence of a Romanized Dacian population after the Roman withdrawal, Aurelian's
decision to abandon the province was solely a military decision with respect to moving the legions and auxiliary units to protect the
Danubian frontier.[280] The civilian population of Roman Dacia did not treat this as a prelude to a coming disaster; there was no mass
emigration from the province, no evidence of a sudden withdrawal of the civilian population, and no widespread damage to property
in the aftermath of the military withdrawal.[280]

See also
List of Roman governors of Dacia Traiana
Dacia
Dacia Mediterranea
Dacia Ripensis
Roman provinces
List of ancient cities in Thrace and Dacia
History of Romania
Romanization (cultural)

Footnotes
1. Caracalla's activities in Dacia need to be placed within the verified dates on his progress to the east. On 11 August
 213, Caracalla crossed the frontier at Raetia into Barbaricum. On 8 October 213, his victories over the Germanic
tribes was announced at Rome, and sometime between 17 December 213 and 17 January 214, he was at
Nicomedia – see Opreanu (2015), pp. 18—19

References
1. Georgescu 1991, p. 6.
2. Bury 1893, p. 493.
3. Treptow & Bolovan 1996, p. 34.
4. Cottrell, Notarás & Casares 2007, p. 20.
5. Oltean 2007, p. 50.
6. Pop 1999, p. 14.
7. Georgescu 1991, p. 4.
8. Mócsy 1974, pp. 17–18.
9. Oltean 2007, p. 43.
10. Burns 2003, p. 195.
11. Oltean 2007, p. 48.
12. Schmitz 2005, p. 10.
13. Bunson 2002, p. 165.
14. Pârvan 1928, pp. 157–158.
15. Oltean 2007, p. 52.
16. Burns 2003, p. 183.
17. Jones 1992, p. 138.
18. Jones 1992, p. 192.
19. Oltean 2007, p. 54.
20. Pop 1999, p. 16.
21. MacKendrick 2000, p. 74.
22. Bennett 1997, p. 102.
23. Pop 1999, p. 17.
24. Bennett 1997, p. 103.
25. Pliny the Younger & 109 AD, Book VIII, Letter 4.
26. Festus & 379 AD, VIII.2.
27. Gibbon 1816, p. 6.
28. Bennett 1997, p. 104.
29. Bennett 1997, p. 98.
30. Bennett 1997, p. 105.
31. Georgescu 1991, p. 5.
32. Oltean 2007, p. 57.
33. Oltean 2007, p. 55.
34. Bury 1893, pp. 409–410.
35. Waldman & Mason 2006, p. 400.
36. Waldman & Mason 2006, p. 61.
37. Waldman & Mason 2006, p. 657.
38. Waldman & Mason 2006, p. 129.
39. Waldman & Mason 2006, p. 184.
40. Burns 2003, p. 103.
41. Köpeczi 1994, p. 102.
42. Ellis 1998, pp. 220–237.
43. Parker 2010, p. 266.
44. Wilkes 2000, p. 591.
45. Köpeczi 1994, p. 92.
46. Bennett 1997, p. 169.
47. Köpeczi 1994, p. 63.
48. Petolescu 2010, p. 170.
49. Bury 1893, p. 490.
50. Opper 2008, pp. 55&67.
51. Webster 1998, p. 65.
52. Opper 2008, p. 67.
53. Bury 1893, p. 499.
54. MacKendrick 2000, p. 139.
55. Bennett 1997, p. 167.
56. Oltean 2007, p. 56.
57. Köpeczi 1994, p. 68.
58. Bury 1893, p. 500.
59. MacKendrick 2000, p. 206.
60. MacKendrick 2000, p. 127.
61. Bunson 2002, p. 24.
62. MacKendrick 2000, p. 152.
63. MacKendrick 2000, p. 112.
64. Grant 1996, p. 20.
65. MacKendrick 2000, p. 114.
66. Birley 2000, p. 132.
67. Bury 1893, pp. 542–543.
68. Birley 2000, p. 145.
69. McLynn 2011, p. 324.
70. Potter 1998, p. 274.
71. Chapot 1997, p. 275.
72. Köpeczi 1994, p. 87.
73. Grant 1996, p. 35.
74. Bury 1893, p. 543.
75. Köpeczi 1994, p. 86.
76. Oliva 1962, p. 275.
77. Bury 1893, p. 544.
78. Nemeth 2005, pp. 52—54.
79. Birley 2000, p. 161.
80. Birley 2000, p. 164.
81. Bury 1893, p. 545.
82. Birley 2000, p. 165.
83. Birley 2000, p. 168.
84. Birley 2000, p. 169.
85. Birley 2000, p. 170.
86. Grant 1996, p. 65.
87. Cassius Dio & AD 200, LXXII.
88. Cary & Cassius Dio 1927, p. 17.
 89. Birley 2000, p. 21.
90. McLynn 2011, pp. 331—332.
91. Birley 2000, p. 175.
92. McLynn 2011, p. 360.
93. Birley 2000, p. 177.
94. Thompson 2002, p. 13.
95. Birley 2000, p. 183.
96. Köpeczi 1994, p. 89.
97. Mommsen 1999, p. 275.
98. Birley 2000, pp. 206–207.
99. Birley 2000, p. 206.
100. Birley 2000, pp. 208–209.
101. Bury 1893, pp. 548–549.
102. Cassius Dio & AD 200, LXXIII.
103. Cary & Cassius Dio 1927, p. 77.
104. MacKendrick 2000, p. 135.
105. Historia Augusta & 395 AD, Commodus 13,5.
106. Köpeczi 1994, p. 91.
107. MacKendrick 2000, p. 142.
108. Oltean 2007, p. 222.
109. Oltean 2007, p. 221.
110. MacKendrick 2000, p. 153.
111. Bunson 2002, p. 95.
112. Campbell 2005, p. 18.
113. Scott 2008, p. 26.
114. Mócsy 1974, p. 199.
115. Opreanu 2015, p. 17.
116. Opreanu 2015, p. 18.
117. Parker 2010, p. 223.
118. Grumeza 2009, pp. 210—211.
119. Opreanu 2015, pp. 18—19.
120. Scott 2008, pp. 114–115.
121. Cassius Dio & 200 AD, LXXIX.
122. Cary & Cassius Dio 1927, p. 405.
123. MacKendrick 2000, p. 133.
124. Opreanu 2006, p. 74.
125. Opreanu 2006, p. 78.
126. Eutropius & 364 AD, VIII, 6,2.
127. Cassius Dio & 200 AD, LXVIII, 14,4.
128. Julian & 362 AD, XXVIII, 327.
129. Vékony 2000, pp. 103–104.
130. Vékony 2000, p. 106.
131. Georgescu 1991, p. 7.
132. Pop 1999, p. 22.
133. Parker 1958, pp. 12–19.
134. Oltean 2007, pp. 211–212.
135. Oltean 2007, p. 212.
136. Oltean 2007, p. 213.
137. Köpeczi 1994, p. 113.
138. Köpeczi 1994, p. 112.
139. Vékony 2000, p. 110.
140. Oltean 2007, p. 227.
141. Nemeti 2006, pp. 93–95.
142. Oltean 2009, p. 95.
143. Dana & Matei-Popescu 2009, p. 244.
144. Bunson 2002, p. 167.
145. Stoicescu 1983, pp. 108—109.
146. Giurescu 1983, p. 25.
147. Goldsworthy 2003, p. 76.
148. Vékony 2000, p. 109.
149. Găzdac 2010, p. 59.
150. Vékony 2000, p. 108.
151. Andea 2006, p. 74.
152. Dana & Matei-Popescu 2009, pp. 234–235.
153. Erdkamp 2010, p. 442.
154. Burns 1991, pp. 110–111.
155. Pop 1999, p. 23.
156. Köpeczi 1994, p. 106.
157. Köpeczi 1994, p. 103.
158. Köpeczi 1994, p. 104.
159. Köpeczi 1994, p. 79.
160. MacKendrick 2000, p. 107.
161. MacKendrick 2000, p. 126.
162. Katsari 2011, p. 69.
163. Bury 1893, p. 429.
164. Parker 2010, p. 238.
165. Oltean 2007, p. 119.
166. Oltean 2007, p. 174.
167. Georgescu 1991, p. 8.
168. Găzdac 2010, p. 30.
169. MacKendrick 2000, p. 108.
170. Pop 1999, p. 25.
171. Oltean 2007, p. 165.
172. Oltean 2007, p. 164.
173. Oltean 2007, p. 170.
174. MacKendrick 2000, p. 116.
175. MacKendrick 2000, p. 245.
176. MacKendrick 2000, p. 121.
177. Oltean 2007, p. 58.
178. MacKendrick 2000, p. 130.
179. MacKendrick 2000, pp. 131–132.
180. Köpeczi 1994, p. 94.
181. MacKendrick 2000, p. 132.
182. Oltean 2007, p. 150.
183. Oltean 2007, p. 151.
184. Oltean 2007, p. 152.
185. Oltean 2007, p. 153.
186. Oltean 2007, p. 155.
187. Oltean 2007, p. 71.
188. Oltean 2007, p. 144.
189. Oltean 2007, p. 122.
190. Opreanu 2006, p. 85.
191. Opreanu 2006, p. 84.
192. MacKendrick 2000, p. 187.
193. Pop 1999, p. 26.
194. Dorcey 1992, p. 1.
195. Dorcey 1992, p. 78.
196. MacKendrick 2000, p. 190.
197. Köpeczi 1994, p. 115.
198. Pârvan 1928, pp. 140–142.
199. Oltean 2007, p. 193.
200. Oltean 2007, p. 190.
201. Köpeczi 1994, p. 116.
202. MacKendrick 2000, p. 122.
203. Parker 1958, p. 141.
204. Mócsy 1974, p. 185.
205. Mócsy 1974, p. 209.
206. Southern & Dixon 1996, p. 11.
207. Le Bohec 2000, p. 196.
208. Heather 2010, p. 127.
209. Köpeczi 1994, p. 44.
210. Burns 1991, p. 26.
211. Odahl 2004, p. 19.
212. Vékony 2000, p. 120.
213. Lactantius & 320 AD, Chapter IX.
214. Oțetea 1970, p. 116.
215. Wilkes 2005, p. 224.
216. Köpeczi 1994, p. 118.
217. Southern 2001, p. 75.
218. Muşat & Ardeleanu 1985, p. 59.
219. Burns 1991, p. 29.
220. Lactantius & 320 AD, Chapter IV.
221. de Blois 1976, pp. 33–34.
222. Mócsy 1974, p. 205.
223. Eutropius & 364 AD, IX, 15.
224. Watson 1853, p. 521.
225. Aurelius Victor & 361 AD, 33.3.
226. Vékony 2000, p. 121.
227. MacKendrick 2000, p. 115.
228. Köpeczi 1994, p. 119.
229. Southern 2001, p. 6.
230. Bird 1994, p. 33.
231. Webb 1927, p. 253.
232. Southern 2001, pp. 225–226.
233. MacKendrick 2000, p. 117.
234. Southern 2001, pp. 120–121.
235. Watson 2004, p. 156.
236. Wilkes 2005, p. 239.
237. Watson 2004, p. 157.
238. Watson 2004, pp. 156–157.
239. Williams 2000, p. 77.
240. Williams 2000, p. 51.
241. Moisil 2002, pp. 79–120.
242. Burns 1991, p. 111.
243. Nixon & Saylor Rodgers 1994, p. 116.
244. Wolfram & Dunlap 1990, p. 57.
245. Lenski 2002, p. 122.
246. Wolfram & Dunlap 1990, p. 59.
247. Lenski 2002, p. 120.
248. Williams 2000, pp. 72–77.
249. Williams 2000, pp. 76–77.
250. Wolfram & Dunlap 1990, p. 60.
251. Southern 2001, p. 276.
252. MacKendrick 2000, p. 165.
253. Găzdac 2010, p. 66.
254. Lenski 2002, p. 121.
255. Odahl 2004, p. 233.
256. Barnes 1981, p. 250.
257. Wolfram & Dunlap 1990, p. 61.
258. Odahl 2004, pp. 228–229.
259. Lenski 2002, p. 125.
260. Lenski 2002, p. 127.
261. Lenski 2002, p. 145.
262. Lenski 2002, pp. 127–128.
263. Lenski 2002, p. 129.
264. Lenski 2002, p. 132.
265. Wolfram & Dunlap 1990, p. 72.
266. Gibbon 1816, p. 331.
267. Niebuhr 1849, p. 300.
268. Georgescu 1991, p. 115.
269. Georgescu 1991, p. 10.
270. MacKendrick 2000, p. 163.
271. MacKendrick 2000, p. 128.
272. Köpeczi 1994, p. 125.
273. Köpeczi 1994, p. 127.
274. Köpeczi 1994, p. 144.
275. Köpeczi 1994, p. 147.
276. Vékony 2000, p. 144.
277. Price 2000, pp. 120–121.
278. Price 2000, p. 120.
279. Pares et al. 1939, p. 149.
280. Southern 2001, p. 325.

Sources

Ancient
Anonymous (c. 395). Historia Augusta [Augustan History] (in Latin).
Aurelius Victor (c. 361). De Caesaribus [Book of the Caesars] (in Latin).
Cassius Dio (c. 220). Historia Romana [Roman History] (in Ancient Greek).
Eutropius (c. 364). Breviarium ab urbe condita[Abridgement of Roman History] (in Latin).
Festus (c. 379). Breviarium rerum gestarum populi Romani[Breviarium of the Accomplishments of the Roman
People] (in Latin).
Julian (c. 362). The Caesars (in Ancient Greek).
Lactantius (c. 320). De Mortibus Persecutorum[Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died] (in Latin).
Pliny the Younger (c. 109). Epistulae [Letters] (in Latin).

Modern
Andea, Susan (2006).History of Romania: compendium. Romanian Cultural Institute.ISBN 978-973-7784-12-4.
Barnes, Timothy David (1981). Constantine and Eusebius. Harvard University Press.ISBN 978-0-674-16531-1.
Bennett, Julian (1997). Trajan: optimus princeps. Roman imperial biographies. London and New Y
ork: Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-16524-2.
Bird, Harry W.; Aurelius Victor (1994). Liber de Caesaribus. Translated texts for historians. trans. Harry W
. Bird.
Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-0-85323-218-6.
Birley, Anthony (2000). Marcus Aurelius. Roman imperial biographies. London and New Y
ork: Routledge. ISBN 978-
0-415-17125-0.
de Blois, Lukas (1976).The Policy of the Emperor Gallienus. Studies of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical
Society. Leiden: Brill Publishers. ISBN 978-0-415-22812-1.
Bunson, Matthew (2002). Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire. Facts on File library of world history. New York: Facts
On File. ISBN 978-0-8160-4562-4.
Burns, Thomas S. (1991).A History of the Ostrogoths. Midland Book. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-
20600-8.
Burns, Thomas S. (2003).Rome and the Barbarians: 100 B.C.-A.D. 400. Ancient society and history. Baltimore,
Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-7306-5.
Bury, John Bagnell (1893). A history of the Roman Empire: from its foundation to the death of Marcus Aurelius (27
B.C.-180 A.D.). Student's Series. New York: Harper.
Campbell, Brian (2005). "The Severan Dynasty".In Bowman, Alan K.; Garnsey, Peter; Cameron, Averil. The
Cambridge ancient history: The crisis of empire, A.D. 193–337
. The Cambridge ancient history. 12. Cambridge
University Press. pp. 1–27.ISBN 978-0-521-30199-2.
Cary, Earnest; Cassius Dio (1927). Roman History, Vol. 9. Loeb Classical Library. London: Harvard University Press.
Chapot, Victor (1997). Roman World. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-15583-0.
Cottrell, P. L.; Notarás, Gerásimos; Casares, Gabriel T
ortella (2007). From the Athenian tetradrachm to the euro:
studies in European monetary integration. Studies in banking and financial history
. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
ISBN 978-0-7546-5389-9.
Dana, Dan; Matei-Popescu, Florian (2009)."Soldats d'origine dace dans les diplômes militaires"[Soldiers of Dacian
origin in the military diplomas].Chiron (in French). Berlin: German Archaeological Institute/Walter de Gruyter. 39.
ISSN 0069-3715. Archived from the original on 1 July 2013.
Dorcey, Peter F. (1992). The cult of Silvanus: A Study in Roman Folk Religion
. Columbia studies in the classical
tradition. Leiden: E.J. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-09601-1.
Ellis, Linda (October 1998).Shennan, Stephen, ed. " 'Terra deserta': population, politics, and the [de]colonization of
Dacia". World Archaeology. Routledge. 30 (2): 220–237. doi:10.1080/00438243.1998.9980408. ISBN 978-0-415-
19809-7. ISSN 0043-8243.
Erdkamp, Paul (2010).A Companion to the Roman Army. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. London:
John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 978-1-4443-3921-5.
Găzdac, Cristian (2010).Monetary circulation in Dacia and the provinces from the Middle and Lower Danube from
Trajan to Constantine I: (AD 106 – 337). Volume 7 of Coins from Roman sites and collections of Roman coins from
Romania. ISBN 978-606-543-040-2.
Georgescu, Vlad (1991). Călinescu, Matei, ed. The Romanians: a history. Romanian literature and thought in
translation series. Columbus, Ohio, USA: Ohio State University Press. ISBN 978-0-8142-0511-2.
Gibbon, Edward (1816). The history of the decline and fall of the Roman empire, o
Vlume 1. New York: Abraham
Small and M. Carey.
Giurescu, Constantin C. (1971).The Making of the Romanian Unitary State. Meridane.
Goldsworthy, Adrian (2003). The Complete Roman Army. Complete Series. London: Thames & Hudson. ISBN 978-
0-500-05124-5.
Grant, Michael (1996). The Antonines: The Roman Empire in T
ransition. London and New York: Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-13814-7.
Grumeza, Ion (2009). Dacia: Land of Transylvania, Cornerstone ofAncient Eastern Europe. G — Reference,
Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series.Hamilton Books. ISBN 978-0-7618-4465-5.
Heather, Peter (2010). Empires and barbarians: the fall of Rome and the birth of Europe
. Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0-19-973560-0.
Jones, Brian W. (1992). The Emperor Domitian. Roman Imperial Biographies Series. London and New o
Yrk:
Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-04229-1.
Katsari, Constantina (2011).The Roman Monetary System: The Eastern Provinces from the First to the Third
Century AD. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-76946-4.
Köpeczi, Béla; Makkai, László; Mócsy, András; Szász, Zoltán; Barta, Gábor, eds. (1994). History of Transylvania —
From the Beginnings to 1606. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.ISBN 978-963-05-6703-9.
Le Bohec, Yann (2000). The imperial Roman army. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-22295-2.
Lenski, Noel Emmanuel (2002).Failure of empire: Valens and the Roman state in the fourth century A.D.University
of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-23332-4.
MacKendrick, Paul Lachlan(2000). The Dacian Stones Speak. The University of North Carolina Press. ISBN 978-0-
8078-4939-2.
McLynn, Frank (2011). Marcus Aurelius: Warrior, Philosopher, Emperor. Randon House. ISBN 978-1-4464-4933-2.
Mócsy, András (1974). Pannonia and Upper Moesia. History of the provinces of the Roman Empire.4. Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-7100-7714-1.
Moisil, Delia (2002). "The Danube Limes and the Barbaricum (294–498 A.D.) – A Study In Coin Circulation"
. Histoire
et Mesure. Paris: École des hautes études en sciences sociales
. 17 (3). ISSN 0982-1783.
Mommsen, Theodor (1999). Demandt, Barbara; Demandt, Alexander, eds. A History of Rome under Emperors.
Routledge.
Muşat, Mircea; Ardeleanu, Ion (1985).From ancient Dacia to modern Romania. Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică.
Nemeth, Eduard (2005).Armata in sud-vestul Daciei Romane. Mirton. ISBN 973-661-691-6.
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg (1849).Schmitz, Leonhard, ed.Lectures on the history of Rome: from the earliest times to
the fall of the Western empire, Volume 3. Taylor, Walton, and Maberly.
Nemeti, Sorin (2006). "Scenarios on the Dacians: The Indigenous Districts"
. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai —
Historia. Cluj-Napoca: Babeș-Bolyai University. 51 (1). ISSN 1220-0492.
Nixon, C. E. V.; Saylor Rodgers, Barbara (1994). In Praise of Later Roman Emperors: The Panegyrici Latini .
Transformation of the Classical Heritage.21. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-
08326-4.
Odahl, Charles Matson (2004).Constantine and the Christian Empire. Roman imperial biographies. New Y
ork and
Oxon: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-17485-5.
Oliva, Pavel (1962). Pannonia and the onset of crisis in the Roman Empire
. London and New York: Nakl.
Československé akademie věd.OCLC 2673975.
Oltean, Ioana Adina (2007).Dacia: landscape, colonisation and romanization
. Routledge monographs in classical
studies. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-41252-0.
Oltean, Ioana Adina (2009).Hanson, W. S., ed. "Dacian ethnic identity and the Roman Army". Journal of Roman
Archaeology. Portsmouth, Rhode Island: Journal of Roman Archaeology. 74 (The army and frontiers of Rome).
ISBN 978-1-887829-74-8. ISSN 1047-7594.
Opper, Thorsten (2008). Hadrian: empire and conflict. London and New York: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-
674-03095-4.
Opreanu, Coriolan Horațiu (2006)."The North Danube Regions from the Roman Province of Dacia to the
Emergence of the Romanian Language (2nd–8th Centuries A. D.)". In Pop, Ioan Aurel; Bolovan, Ioan; Andea,
Susana. History of Romania: Compendium. Cluj-Napoca: Romanian Cultural Institute(Center for Transylvanian
Studies). ISBN 978-973-7784-12-4.
Opreanu, Coriolan Horațiu (2015)."Caracalla and Dacia: Imperial Visit, A Reality or Only Rumour?". Journal of
Ancient History and Archaeology. Cluj-Napoca, Romania: Institute of Archaeology and Art History. 2 (2015) (2).
Oțetea, Andrei (1970).The History of the Romanian people. Scientific Pub. Hoose.
Pares, Bernard; Seton-Watson, Robert William; Williams, Harold; Jopson, Norman Brooke (1939). "The Slavonic and
East European Review: a survey of the peoples of eastern Europe, their history
, economics, philology and
literature,". The Slavonic and East European Review. London: W.S. Maney & Son Ltd. 18 (52). ISSN 0037-6795.
JSTOR i391955.
Parker, Henry Michael Denne (1958).A history of the Roman world from A.D. 138 to 337
. Methuen Publishing.
Parker, Philip (2010). The Empire Stops Here: A Journey Along the Frontiers of the Roman World
. New York:
Random House. ISBN 978-1-4090-1632-8.
Pârvan, Vasile (1928). Dacia: An Outline of the Early Civilization of the Carpatho-Danubian Countries
. The University
Press.
Petolescu, Constantin C. (2010).Dacia – Un mileniu de istorie. Editura Academiei Române.ISBN 978-973-27-1999-
2.
Pop, Ioan Aurel (1999).Romanians and Romania: A Brief History. East European monographs. East European
Monographs. ISBN 978-0-88033-440-2.
Potter, David (1998). Procurators in Asia and Dacia under Marcus Aurelius: A Case Study of Imperial Initiative in
Government (PDF). Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik. University of Michigan: Habelt. pp. 270–274.
Price, Glanville (2000).Encyclopedia of the languages of Europe. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-631-22039-8.
Schmitz, Michael (2005).The Dacian Threat 101–106 AD. Enemies of Rome Monograph Series.Armidale, New
South Wales: Caeros Pty, Limited. ISBN 978-0-9758445-0-2.
Scott, Andrew G. (2008).Change and discontinuity within the Severan dynasty: The case of Macrinus
. ProQuest.
ISBN 978-0-549-89041-6.
Southern, Pat (2001). The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine
. London and New York: Routledge.
ISBN 978-0-415-23943-1.
Southern, Pat; Dixon, Karen R. (1996).The late Roman army. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-7134-7047-5.
Stoicescu, Nicolae (1983).The Continuity of the Romanian People, Volume 2. Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică.
Thompson, E. A. (2002).Romans and barbarians: the decline of the W
estern Empire. University of Wisconsin Press.
ISBN 978-0-299-08704-3.
Treptow, Kurt W.; Bolovan, Ioan (1996).Treptow, Kurt W.; Bolovan, Ioan, eds. A History of Romania. East European
Monographs. ISBN 978-0-88033-345-0.
Vékony, Gábor (2000). Dacians, Romans, Romanians. Toronto and Buffalo: Matthias Corvinus Publishing.
ISBN 978-1-882785-13-1.
Waldman, Carl; Mason, Catherine (2006).Encyclopedia of European peoples, Volume 1. Infobase Publishing.
ISBN 978-0-8160-4964-6.
Watson, Alaric (2004). Aurelian and the Third Century. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-30187-9.
 Watson, John Selby; Justin; Cornelius Nepos; Eutropius (1853). Justin, Cornelius Nepos, and Eutropius: literally
translated, with notes and a general index. Bohn's Classical Library. trans. Rev. John Selby Watson. London: Henry
G. Bohn.
Webb, Percy Henry (1927).Mattingly, Harold; Sydenham, Edward Allen,eds. The Roman Imperial Coinage:
Valerian — Florian. The Roman Imperial Coinage. 5, Part 1. Spink & Son.
Webster, Graham (1998). The Roman Imperial Army of the first and second centuries A.D.University of Oklahoma
Press. ISBN 978-0-8061-3000-2.
Wilkes, John (2000). "The Danube Provinces".In Bowman, Alan K.; Garnsey, Peter; Rathbone, Dominic. The
Cambridge ancient history: The High Empire, A.D. 70–192
. The Cambridge ancient history. 11. Cambridge
University Press. pp. 577–603.ISBN 978-0-521-26335-1.
Wilkes, John (2005). "Provinces and Frontiers".In Bowman, Alan K.; Garnsey, Peter; Cameron, Averil. The
Cambridge ancient history: The crisis of empire, A.D. 193–337
. The Cambridge ancient history. 12. Cambridge
University Press. pp. 212–268.ISBN 978-0-521-30199-2.
Williams, Stephen (2000).Diocletian and the Roman Recovery. London and New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-
91827-5.
Wolfram, Herwig; Dunlap, Thomas J. (1990).History of the Goths. University of California Press.ISBN 978-0-520-
06983-1.

External links
Dacia – The historic region in East-Central Europe (includes Roman Castra)
Media related to Dacia and Dacians at Wikimedia Commons

Succeeded by
Preceded by
History of Romania Early Middle
Dacia
Ages

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Roman_Dacia&oldid=854458295

"

This page was last edited on 11 August 2018, at 14:21(UTC).

Text is available under theCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.