Editing Getae (section)

==== Same language, distinct people ====
Historian and archaeologist [[Alexandru Vulpe]] found a remarkable uniformity of the Geto-Dacian culture;<ref>{{cite book|editor1=Petrescu-Dîmbovița, Mircea |editor2=Vulpe, Alexandru |title=Istoria Românilor, vol. I| location=Bucharest|year=2001 |language=ro}}{{Page needed|date=January 2011}}</ref> however, he is one of the few Romanian archaeologists to make a clear distinction between the Getae and Dacians, arguing against the traditional position of the Romanian historiography that considered the two people the same.<ref name="AGN2">{{cite book|editor1-first=Philip|editor1-last=Kohl|editor2-first=Mara|editor2-last=Kozelsky|editor3-first=Nachman|editor3-last=Ben-Yehuda|chapter=Archaeology and Nationalism in The History of the Romanians|publisher=University of Chicago Press|year=2007|isbn=978-0-226-45059-9|first1=Gheorghe Alexandru|last1=Niculescu|title=Selective Remembrances: Archaeology in the Construction, Commemoration, and Consecration of National Pasts|pages=139–141}}</ref> Nevertheless, he chose to use the term "Geto-Dacians" as a conventional concept for the Thracian tribes inhabiting the future territory of Romania, not necessarily meaning an "absolute ethnic, linguistic or historical unity".<ref name="AGN2"/>

Crossland suggested the two designations may refer to two groups of a "linguistically homogeneous people" that had come to historical prominence at two distinct periods of time. He also compared the probable linguistic situation with the relation between modern [[Norwegian language|Norwegian]] and [[Danish language|Danish]] languages.<ref name="cah3a">{{cite book|title=The Cambridge Ancient History (Volume 3)|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1982|edition=2nd|isbn=1-108-00714-7}} In chapter "20c Linguistic problems of the Balkan area", at page 838, [[Ronald Crossland]] argues "it may be the distinction made by Greeks and Romans between the Getae and Daci, for example, reflected the importance of different sections of a linguistically homogenous people at different times". He furthermore recalls Strabo's testimony and Georgiev's hypothesis for a '[[Daco-Thracian|Thraco-Dacian]]' language.</ref> [[Paul Lachlan MacKendrick]] considered the two as "branches" of the same tribe, speaking two dialects of a common language.<ref name="mackendrick">{{cite book|title=The Dacian Stones Speak|author=Paul Lachlan MacKendrick|publisher=University of North Carolina Press|year=1975|isbn=0-8078-4939-1}} "The natives with whom we shall be concerned in this chapter are the Getae of Muntenia and Moldavia in the eastern steppes, and the Dacians of the Carpathian Mountains. Herodotus calls them 'the bravest and the justest of the Thracians,' and they were in fact two branches of the same tribe, speaking two dialects of the same Indo-European language." (p. 45)</ref>

The Romanian [[History of ideas|historian of ideas]] and [[Historiography|historiographer]] [[Lucian Boia]] stated: "At a certain point, the phrase Geto-Dacian was coined in the Romanian historiography to suggest a unity of Getae and Dacians".<ref name="boia">{{cite book|author=Boia, Lucian|title=Romania: Borderland of Europe|publisher=Reaktion Books|year=2004|isbn=1-86189-103-2|page=43}}</ref> Lucian Boia took a sceptical position, arguing the ancient writers distinguished among the two people, treating them as two distinct groups of the Thracian ethnos.<ref name="boia"/><ref name="boiamyth">{{cite book|author=Boia, Lucian|title=History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness|publisher=Central European University Press|year=2001|isbn=963-9116-97-1|page=14}}</ref> Boia contended that it would be naive to assume Strabo knew the [[Thracian]] dialects so well,<ref name="boia"/> alleging that Strabo had "no competence in the field of Thracian dialects".<ref name="boiamyth"/> The latter claim is contested, some studies attesting Strabo's reliability and sources.<ref name="homoglottoi">{{cite journal|author=Janakieva, Svetlana|title=La notion de ΟΜΟΓΛΩΤΤΟΙ chez Strabon et la situation ethno-linguistique sur les territoires thraces|language=fr|journal=Études Balkaniques|pages=75–79|issue=4|year=2002}} The author concluded Strabo's claim sums an experience following of many centuries of neighbourhood and cultural interferences between the Greeks and the Thracian tribes</ref> There is no reason to disregard Strabo's belief that the Daci and the Getae spoke the same language.<ref name="price"/> Boia also stressed that some Romanian authors cited Strabo indiscriminately.<ref name="boiamyth"/>

A similar position was adopted by Romanian historian and archaeologist [[Gheorghe Alexandru Niculescu|G. A. Niculescu]], who also criticized the Romanian historiography and the archaeological interpretation, particularly on the "Geto-Dacian" culture.<ref>{{cite journal|author=Niculescu, Gheorghe Alexandru|title=Archaeology, Nationalism and "The History of the Romanians" (2001)|journal=Dacia, Revue d'Archéologie et d'Histoire Ancienne|pages=99–124|issue=48–49|year=2004–2005}} He dedicates a large part of his assessment to the archaeology of "Geto-Dacians" and he concludes that with few exceptions "the archaeological interpretations [...] are following G. Kossinna’s concepts of culture, archaeology and ethnicity".</ref> In his opinion, Alexandru Vulpe saw ancient people as modern nations, leading the latter to interpret the common language as a sign of a common people, despite Strabo making a distinction between the two.<ref name="AGN2"/>